Forums » Suggestions & Development Discussion » Rules regarding "real life people" characters

Playing as someone who realistically exists or had existed but passed away I find a bit unsettling.

A 'look alike' would be fine (Some of my characters share images/looks with real people but that's just it...)

I understand the idea of the point system and why it's being set up and I have to say that with my adversity to Rping with someone who is portraying an actual person as their character (unless it is themselves, which I've encountered a few times) I think this is a good idea.

...

Regardless, each situation is different and with the point system for this specific issue it should be a bit easier to manage for the moderators.

Great questions and concerns! I've done some tallies of scenarios people have put out to illustrate how this shakes out in use.

10 is the point at which something is considered no longer viable as a concept, so this is almost always the case unless that person is of major historical significance and has been dead a good long while. Even if the person is of major historical significance, if they were used in "objectionable" content, it would still shake out that this was not okay.

Your example above would be tallied as follow:

• Real name and image used on character +5
• sexual RP not a focus but still possible, rare +3
• Representation of a person, not of a character portrayed by an actor +3
• Disclaimer has no impact because the real name and image are used. 0 points.
• Saying the character is over 100 years dead would have no impact either. The rule only applies to if the RL person has been dead for over 100 years IRL and is thus a historical figure. 0 points here.

So we'd shake out at a +11, over the 10 point threshold.

As a mod: the difference tends to be dramatically obvious. The way profiles are written for sex-only characters, the requests they put out into the world, are not subtle. Your point total would almost always shake out as above.

A tally:

• Person requests they not be RPed as +10
• Disclaimer has no impact if either real name or image are used on the character. 0 points.
• Representation of a person, not of a character portrayed by an actor +3

So we arrive again at a +13 and disqualification.

Absolutely.
No, that would be impossible. It would be applied based on sightings and reports. We already get a fair number of reports about these types of characters, and have a bunch stored until we get a usable rule in place for dealing with them.

Yes, this has happened.
Awareness and consent are two different things. Why April?

That was kind of the point! I was illustrating how the rule "Is the figure sacred in some religion, or otherwise a major hero to a lot of people (Gandhi, MLK Jr., etc.)? +5" comes into play and quickly knocks stuff like that out of the running.

---

Based on the feedback so far, I think a few more clarifications of the list phrasing is in order, and possibly a higher point score for "possible" sexual RP (even though it usually shakes out to a 10 or above anyway, it clearly has a ton of emotional weight, and I think that's valid.)

EDIT: Points in main post adjusted.

i 100% support this, but i feel like roleplaying as anyone that's deceased (no matter how long) should be an automatic +10. it just seems disrespectful to me because they're no longer able to defend themselves if they're not comfortable with it. but that's also just my opinion.

i'm also on board with people who think this whole system should be stricter. i personally find roleplaying as real people (like, not using their appearance as a faceclaim, i mean actually roleplaying As Them) really really creepy.

speaking of faceclaims, i know this question has been answered but i just wanted to make sure, faceclaims are okay, right? i have faceclaims for pretty much all of my characters and i never really thought it was an issue because i'm not actually roleplaying as that person and they're entirely separate from the character, they're just a visual reference for myself and others.
felt like this was necessary to add: some of the faceclaims i use are models, not actors. i'm like 99.99% sure they're not instagram models so they have a wider audience, but would this still be okay?

We are not currently taking action on faceclaims, although the following guidelines still apply:

• You must ensure that you have permission to use all images that you upload to the RP Repository.
• 99.9% of images you find online - including those from a general Google Image search, things posted to Facebook and Instagram, etc. - are copyrighted and not technically okay for use here.
• This means that largely only people of whom "open license" images specifically exist of can have face claims made of them.
• Also keep in mind that many people would be squicked to discover that someone was encouraging people to picture a carbon-copy of them, only with a different personality, doing things they maybe would never do, and try to be sensitive to that concern.

Some rambling thoughts:

RPing as real person going about their day to day life, with no weird additions? Almost the only time we've ever seen this has been with the very young. 13-14 year olds, and quite probably even younger kids claiming to be 13 so they can be on the site. We saw once "You play a moderator and I'll play Kim" from some very young individuals; they RPed about telling people to not break the rules and about planning Epic Week. It was basically like playing house or teacher or any other pretend-play that helps young people to learn about the world and feel out their place in it. I didn't really want to target this type of thing unless someone had asked that people not attempt to do thought experiments about what their real day to day is like; it's much less likely to be super creepy, as most of us will recognize it as what kids do and a healthy part of growing up.

When adults and older teens start to RP as real people as their main characters, we almost never see straight forward play like the above. It's super rare. Weird sex stuff almost always turns up; it becomes wish fulfillment rather than literal "role play." Probably because adults are not nearly so in need of practicing what it feels like to be a normal adult. The current point system was built to reflect that reality as I've experienced it as a site admin so far.

Given the popularity, I'm discussing the potential of a stricter ruleset with the moderators. We'll see how this discussion continues over the course of the week.

April because I will be face to face with some of these actors that are having their likeness used.

Do you want people scrambling to edit their character profiles right now?

To remove all images that are of a person who represents their character on a visual level? Or is the use of a visual reference allowed until art is obtained as a disclaimer still good?

None of these rules are in force yet. This is a discussion to refine the guidelines before they go into effect.

Please see https://www.rprepository.com/community/forumthread.php?t=51584&p=2#4038502 and https://www.rprepository.com/community/forumthread.php?t=51584&p=1#4038080 for clarifications about face claims and the rules that currently apply to them.

I've ran every uncomfortable scenario I've personally witnessed through this rubric and it seems like it'll be a really solid tool for the moderation team. That ten point threshold was crossed each time and this system absolutely reflects the reality of most examples being wish fulfillment, but in some cases just barely - like a roleplay community I once came across revolving around the founding fathers. It was uh, interesting. We'll go with that.

I think I'd have to agree that the -10 for a long deceased individual is perhaps too lenient, especially given the fact they can't even give their opinion on the matter. A little stricter at least on that note would be nice, but otherwise this is really impressive and appreciated!

( Also, 'cause worries about 'face claims' (truly awful terminology) seem to be on the rise: I personally don't think there is much of a problem with using 'lookalike' references until art is obtained - these sort of images are really useful for some people during the creative process, especially visual artists. Generally speaking, the motivations behind their use is different from those straight up roleplaying real people.

However, I would argue claiming photographs as anything more than a 'rough trait reference' should be reconsidered - on like, a personal ethical level, not by any rules - for the base reasons these guidelines are being laid down. It certainly can make people uncomfortable when images are used in excess and/or the appearance of a given model seems to go beyond trait suggestion. I honestly rarely see this though, usually they really are just placeholders and the characters don't look identical / the players are seeking art to replace their references. I think most folk here use 'face claims' for artists who need them and/or to find fitting gif to place in guestbooks. )

I noticed that you took out the public figure number in the rubric, and that kind of worries me a bit because of the historical RPs I see every so often. Disregarding recent politicians (because I don't know what exactly to feel about that Mitt Romney example, even if you place another politician there instead), what if someone wanted to RP one of the founding fathers or another central historical figure in a general RP?

For example: A steampunk style RP involving the founding fathers as they journey to solve a crisis that's disturbed the timeline?

And what about RPs involving currently existing media that uses historical figures? For example, the Fate series?

Yes, I understand that since they're all dead, they can't speak for themselves, but I still think this should be okay seeing as if we stick to what we know of them historically (or in terms of recent media, going by their established canon), we wouldn't be toeing a deep line here, would we?

I guess I'm worried about historical RPs being less historically accurate because of the possibility that we can't use or mention real historical figures, which can be very educational and insightful in the right hands. Maybe I'm missing something?

Otherwise, the rest of the rubric is perfect and I see no problem with it at all. Everything seems fit for any real life person. Personally, even though I'm okay with random people shipping my own characters with each other (they are part of a series I'm trying to make popular after all), I'm seriously not okay with the possibility of other people shipping me with other people. It's weird, and in some veins judgemental of my chosen relationships, wish fulfillment notwithstanding.

I feel for all the YouTubers and real life people who witness themselves shipped with others or otherwise fictionalized every day, because it's basically saying "Your relationships/life decisions are wrong, and this is how it should go." It's insulting to me, even if you are a fan.

I don't believe anything has been removed, at least, not on purpose. I rephrased one item to clarify its meaning. There continues to be a -10 for any person 100 years dead, which means all of the founding fathers could easily appear or be played in a time travel RP.

I've never seen Fate but I just quickly googled up a list of the historical figures that appear in it, and the first two dozen also looked like they would be easily used for respectful RP under this ruleset. I stopped reading the list after the first 24

The mod team generally views historical domain as being very valid for fiction, and the desire to make that possible while still remaining respectful of the feelings of private and living/recently living individuals was what motivated the creation of this potential standard rather than just a black and white no or yes rule.

All right, that worried me for five minutes. So if I did want to toe into a historical RP vein, it's okay to use real historical figures. Thanks for the clarification!

And the only reason I mentioned something being missing is because I think I saw you mention a +3 for if the person is a public figure who represents themselves last night, and when I looked over it now, it was gone. Was that the phrase you had to clarify?

Are you referring to the "+3 for public figure representing themself" in the examples list? I think that's descriptive of the 'Is the person NOT an actor playing a character? +3' guideline.

Don't forget those who rp Assassin's Creed. They have historical figures in the game. It's been said that everything is accurate, just that you do the killing by being the Assassin in the game. Granted the rp's don't have to have actual historical figures in an rp, in order to make it good. But I know for like one AC game/book, don't remember the name, but it did have George Washington in it. He was not a main character, but he did play an important part in it at some point.

@rat: Yes, that's the one! I liked the whole specific thing with the public figures and YouTubers/Instagram models because it gives more clarification on what we're talking about. Reading over the current rubric bullet you mentioned felt a bit too vague and confusing to me. (That, and it doesn't match up to the examples that Kim gives when mentioning a public figure.) Yes, it's a catch-all to make things easier, but it still leaves room for improvement because some people might misconstrue it or take it out of context by accident. (I know I did when I first read it, that's for sure.)

But that's just me, of course! I could be wrong and it takes some getting used to in terms of word meaning. I just preferred the cleaner, more specific style because it touched more on every typical infraction to me.

@Winters_Fury: Yes, that's another good example! And I agree, sometimes real life historical figures don't have to be used for a RP to be good, but it's also nice as a sort of lore option or something to play off of.

This might be a really dumb question. But here goes. Say the RP has the famous person's name and a piece of fanart. How does fanart/illustrations of the real person or whatnot factor into this? Do these count as the images you are talking about? Or is that also a case by case basis depending on how detailed and true to life the graphic is?

I know this is for Kim to answer, but my first reaction as a casual bystander is for sure some discomfort - at least to the suggestion that fanart of a real person should make any sort of difference in this situation. In this question there seems to be a vague suggestion that maybe the real individual presented is somehow 'less real' and more open to being 'borrowed' if drawn, which does not make much sense to me (unless of course we're only talking about an appearance being used as inspiration). I'd like to think there should be absolutely no difference, that using the distinct likeness of a person clearly intended to be that person is exactly the same as using an actual photograph (save legalities). It's a matter of pointing towards a given real life appearance and/or identity.

I have seen people on other sites such as Facebook and the defunct hellhole known as AniVid use RL people as RP accounts. The sad thing with the later site that the adims didn't take action. Even when someone made an account on a Youtuber who committed suicide and used it as an RP account.

Alright. So what about relatives of living people?

Say, for example, you have a sort of future rp where you play the child of Prince Harry? However, other than your character being descended from a real life person whose currently still alive, there’s little to no other mentions of them?

Okay I'm super not knowledgeable about royalty affairs. Does Prince Harry actually have a child yet? If not, and you are playing the child of Prince Harry and the parents are mainly just side characters/NPCs, then I think that wouldn't bring up enough points since the character you are focusing on is your own imaginative making?
However, if you are focusing mostly on Prince Harry then that would be different and might rack up differently depending.

I think that would have to be on a case-by-case basis. I have to wonder why it's important that this particular character be the child of Prince Harry rather than just the child of an English prince -- however, the example does take us back into the realm of fictional characters who happen to reference real people.