problem with ranks in game

hi all powerful narrators
i have a little question
after 5 years playing star trek in the well known killer whale campaign i decided it was time to my character to change profession
he was security and tactic officer with the rank of commander and he decided to join the command way .

but the problem is that : with other players of the group we always played with a kind of balance and as no one of us was in command (even if i'm of the higher rank) there was no problem with giving orders or rank respect

but now since i decided my department change i think there will be problems of authority (one player discussed one of my orders
in the last session)

so as i know that plenty of you play campaigns with co and xo i'd like to know how rank and authority are respected in your groups

players take that well or not ???

One way to look at it is considering Star Fleet isn't a military organization. More to the point, though there is a chain of command, how many times in the shows have you seen someone completely disobey their superior officer? How many times have those individuals been court martialled for it?

Give an order, it's not followed, work around it. In the end, everyone will laugh during the epilogue anyway, and then it's on to the next episode with no hurt feelings.

I don't know that I'll be able to give you much advice. In all my Trek games, the players always understood that the PCs in positions of command give orders. Maybe it's a maturity thing, I don't know. It's a game, for goodness' sake. Command officers give commands, and in Starfleet, orders are rarely questioned. :)

As long as the command players are making stupid out-of-genre orders, like "Clean my quarters" or "Order my food" the non-command players should understand that giving and following orders are just part of the game.

This method has always worked for me:

When a problem arises discuss it with the rest of the PC's, everyone points out their view and you come to the consensus. If you have diverging views then you must pick the best solution in your eyes. If someone disagrees then that's ok, if you screw up he was right and you'll be disciplined- that's the bonus of being in command.;)

A group consenus on a problem IMO is the best method, then your character gives his orders based on the consensus.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by loryk
hi all powerful narrators

so as i know that plenty of you play campaigns with co and xo i'd like to know how rank and authority are respected in your groups
players take that well or not ???

---

In my previous game, I had an Xo, whose player, should not have been in a command capacity. The other players were happy to let a story spin out of control.. cause it was fun to watch... after enough episodes, the Ship was decommisioned in shame, KahLess was assassinated, and the Captain/Xo Resigned.

Anyway, I'd suggest making it a roleplaying point, like being union and transferring to management.

But, honestly, if you've been working with these people for 5 years, they're not going to treat you differently just because you're wearing a different color shirt. :)

thank you all for the answers

I completely agree the fact in the group all decisions are taken together and that's what happens in the general case.

But my error was to not precise that our problem is for (rare) situations where we are in hurry and the decisions must be taken quickly.

Before we was on duty as departments chiefs under the command of npcs CO and XO, we made suggestions and they decided.

Now we 've got "our " ship with reduced chain of command (see Killer whale's ascendant concept ) and I'm the most ranked so I've got the responsability of the ship but if others players was used to take well orders (quick decisions in fact) taken by NPC I fear they don't respect mine because during 5 years we were balanced and not now.

so what can I do ??

However the situation is valid as a role-playing point...

After all as a Senior officer in a paramilitary organisation does give you seniority. This means that you are in charge and can give orders, but it also means that the buck stops with you.

So while you can go with a consensus order (either in or out of character), there is nothing wrong with you making the decisions and giving the orders on your own initiative... Lets look at some command styles (off the top of my head).

Consensus - The character knows that they dont know everything and works with the group to find the best direction using all the resources at their disposal (including crewmates knowledge and experience) to its best. Very democratic, and popular, but might mean that the 'unpopular choice is overlooked, it might also mean that decisions are slower to come by (amide all the discussion and considerations) and the critical moment passes with no action.

Decisive - The Character take charge. Gives orders, and expects them to be followed. If not there had better be a damn good reason or disciplinary action will be forthcoming. This does not mean you do not listen to your colleagues, but it does mean that you might decide they are wrong. The downside is that it may make the leader unpopular, it also means that if the wrong decision is made it is your fault at the end of the day.

Sneaky - Like the decisive leader, you make your own decisions based on the best possible outcome for you. Whether it be ordering your colleagues to their deaths or simply to get rich. And if things go wrong you sneakily pass the blame. The downside is that EVERYONE will hate you, you mayt end up promoted to Admiral, and if you dont dispose of the other characters quickly enough they may dispose of you.

Just a couple of ideas. But the most important thing is to ensure that the orders are 'in character' and nothing seeps into OOC problems. Then if a character back-chats your order you pull rank, remind them and pray that you are right! :D

But the important thing to remember that whatever the outcome, most GM's like a take charge leader, they will help move the pace of the plot forward at speed and will likely cause some internal group dynamics beyond the group mentality normally associated with a group of roleplayers. In my experience I have noticed that the group leader always tends to fall to the same group of players with the rest following or bucking the leadership (depending on the game system and how much the leadership benefits the other characters)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Moriarti

But, honestly, if you've been working with these people for 5 years, they're not going to treat you differently just because you're wearing a different color shirt. :) [/B]

---

I agree you but the problem is for one of them that is very special
and I think he considers he should be the most ranked and he can't stand receiving orders coming from me

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dan Gurden
[
But the important thing to remember that whatever the outcome, most GM's like a take charge leader, they will help move the pace of the plot forward at speed and will likely cause some internal group dynamics beyond the group mentality normally associated with a group of roleplayers. In my experience I have noticed that the group leader always tends to fall to the same group of players with the rest following or bucking the leadership (depending on the game system and how much the leadership benefits the other characters) [/B]

---

Thanks a lot for your answer Dan but the problem is probably here in group dynamics i'm not the "charismatic leader" and of course this is this one that have got problems of respecting my rank and orders.

I will take an exemple
The ascendant was pursuing the ship of the "great enemy of the season" at warp speed
then suddenly our dear science officer warns us that an unidentified object was on our course and we 'll crash on it.

The only way to avoid it is to go out of warp (and loose time), as security officer (it's a reduced chain of command I'm security officer and in charge of the ship ...see ascendant concept by killer whale ) I suggest to shoot on it without getting out of warp and the helm officer agreed. But I remembered the object was unidentified and I said it's not really allowed in starfleet to shoot on unidentified objects so I said the helm to go out of warp and avoid the object, he refused, so I ordered him to, he refused , I remembered him my rank and finally , angry, he accepted but with all the time passed in this discussion when he went out of warp he could'nt avoid the object (of course a photon-torpedoe).

that's this kind of situation that leads me thinking my future in command department will be difficult...

Well, from the example, it sounds like a disiplinary case.

In Character meet with him. Reprimand him. For failing to obey a direct order, and delaying to the point of endangering the crew and ship. And remind him that as a member of Starfleet there is a chain of command, and that he swore an oath to uphold this.

His opinion is important, and as CO you would prefer he continued to state alternate options. But remind him that at the end of the day. When he receives a direct order, he will obey it.

And then, once the dust clears (and if the poistion is available) promote him to XO so that he does exactly that, offers options, and enforces your command decisions for the rest of the crew. Trust me, if the player feels that they should be in charge, the very best you can do is let them take some of it. Let this players willingness to be in command and give the orders work for you.

Hmmm... Promoting him to XO, that's shrewd, Dan :)

I just wanted to add to Loryk's explanation that the ship they were pursuing was already heavily damaged (it was an old Orion frigate, they had taken the Big Bad by surprise), and there was no way to know if the unidentified object was actually an escape pod or a torp...

So, in my GM view, Loryk acted completely Starfleet. It could really have been an escape pod.

Well, you could have scanned it, then either blasted it or beamed it into the ship, or whatever, but the helmsman is supposed to follow orders from the CO or OIC, not doing that is grounds for disciplinary action. For us, Starfleet is a little more like a military (post Dominion War) so these sort of situations are dealt with swiftly and harshly, maybe a lot like Hornblower's Royal Navy.
The other point is the nature of command, once an order is given in a combat situation, it is followed, not discussed in a committee. To discuss every order when it is given leads to dangerous levels of combat readiness. So the CO gives an order and it is followed, and the CO gets the glory or the blame, depending on the situation and the rules of engagement.

Thanks for bringing this up. I just got promoted to Captain of the ship in the campaign we're in (had been doing the XO job under an NPC captain, and the GM decided that since I'd offered to co-GM and he thought the group was mature enough to deal, he just promoted me, out of the blue, more or less) -- and while I haven't had much trouble with orders being disobeyed, I have one guy (and he's my husband, darnit!) who likes to jump in and play cowboy (a la Kirk at his worst), so I ended up making him the XO. It keeps him busy, and I don't have to worry so much that he'll second guess me.

anderyn

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Antonsb214
For us, Starfleet is a little more like a military (post Dominion War) so these sort of situations are dealt with swiftly and harshly, maybe a lot like Hornblower's Royal Navy.

---

Really? If I recall my Articles of War, refusing to follow a lawful order was Mutiny, and the punishment was Death. No "or such lesser punishment" for that offence. Of course it does give your CO the opportunity to yell, "I'll see you swing from the highest yardarm in Titan Shipyard!"

On the original situation, I'd say this is a case where disciplinary action is necessary. It's all well and good to offer suggestions and advice to a superior in Starfleet, or even to call attention to things he/she may be forgetting (like Starfleet frowns on blowing up unidentified objects which might possibly be lifepods), but to deliberately disobey a direct order in a crisis situation, thus making the situation worse, is a serious offence. Now, Starfleet seems to be rather scattershot in their discipline (Ed Jellico should have had most of the Enterprise's senior staff up on charges in that one NG episode), but at the very least a stern talking to is in order.

-Chris Landmark

I agree. My original thoughts were based around the casual disobedience.

"Smithers and Jenkins, you're coming with me down to the surface," sayeth the captain.

Smithers replies, "Ummm, I have to stay here and help someone do something."

"Alright," the captain waffles, "Wilson and Jenkins, you're coming with me to the surface."

That sort of thing was what I imagined.

In the real example given, it would have went something like this:

"Helm, drop us out of warp and evade the object at impulse speed."

"No sir, I don't think so," says the helmsman.

"Someone, take over the helm and drop us out of warp!" says the captain. "Security, please escort the helmsman to his quarters."

It might be a little severe, but I think one time like that might get the guy's attention, even if there is no more official punishment than the embarassment of being placed under arrest.

The problem is the same as in real life. I've been a manager hired from the outside, and the people are unsure of you, but if you assert yourself, they'll respond in most cases. But when I was just one of the guys who got promoted, it's hard because the people you're supervising now were your pals yesterday. And while they're still your pals, there are two options. The first is you assert yourself, let them know in no uncertain terms that you are their boss and that they need to treat you as such. You'll get their cooperation, but the friendliness decreases. The second option is to still be their friends, but then when you say, "Hey, I need this," they just laugh and say, "Yeah, right."

So those are the choices, either be an ineffectual captain and allow everyone to do their own thing, or else pull rank once in a while and make the characters cease to like you as a pal. As long as the players know the difference between real life and the game, there shouldn't be a problem.

This is why many people, who when promoted up from the ranks, secretly or openly wish they had just remained where they were. The better pay is nice, of course, but the added aggravation and the occasional loss of friendships can take an emotional toll.

That's why they made the phrase, "It's lonely at the top."