Bears Armed wrote:Erastide wrote:I personally think that since a badge is awarded to a nation, the proposal should be written for a nation. Having them be for the actions of a character in a story in that nation. Like.... "character brought an end to world hunger" or "character argued forcefully for x argument"seems a bit odd when it's a nation writing that character's actions.
But it's a player writing the character's actions, not a "nation" doing so, i.e. the same player who writes the relevant nation's collective actions...
Yeah, but it's pretty ingrained now to refer to people by their NS names. To most gameplayers at least, if I say "Nai said this" or "Kandarin said that" they'll know it was the person behind the nation. So cutting player references works out.
Jey wrote:Erastide wrote:And if the "IC and OOC aspects" part was just cut? How would that go over?
That, and "NationStates roleplay" would probably be okay. Referring to Kandarin as "their" is potentially troubling, but I suppose it's ambiguous enough to be acceptable ICly. The reference to the abilities of ejecting or banning a nation in a region, as delegate, is also probably OOC, but it's crafted in a way that could be interpreted ICly. I realize my line of thinking would also remove any references to "NationStates," as a game, which would be OOC, but even I think that's probably a little too extreme.
See... I wouldn't want NS roleplay removed. There has to be a way to talk about actions other than roleplay. The SC is going to be looking at actions in the game. I realize to the GA world so far that has been taboo, but C&C's have to recognize actions that have essentially no IC nature, like governing a region.