Out-of-Character Action

In Model United Nations, an out-of-character action (often shortened to "OOC") is any communication or behavior in which a delegate temporarily drops the persona of their assigned country, historical figure, or fictional role to speak as themselves. It is the conventional counterpart to in-character debate, where everything a delegate says is attributed to the represented government or actor.

Out-of-character actions are most common in crisis committees, ad hoc bodies, and specialized historical or fantasy committees, where the line between role-play and procedure needs to be clearly marked. Typical OOC uses include:

• Asking the chair a procedural question (e.g., clarifying voting order or directive format).
• Flagging a personal issue (illness, leaving the room, technical problems in online committees).
• Raising a concern about delegate conduct or committee safety.
• Coordinating logistics between sessions or with the crisis backroom.

By contrast, in-character actions include speeches, directives, communiqués, press releases, and notes to other delegations — all of which are judged on substantive merit and role accuracy. Most rubrics published by major conferences (such as those run by Harvard, NMUN, and WorldMUN) reward consistent in-character performance, so experienced delegates tend to minimize OOC interventions during formal debate.

Conventions for signaling an OOC moment vary by circuit. In written notes to the dais, delegates often prefix the message with "OOC:" or place the content in brackets. Verbally, a delegate may raise a point of personal privilege and explicitly state that they are speaking out of character before continuing.

Misuse of OOC — for instance, using it to slip in substantive arguments that the represented country would not make, or to negotiate deals that bypass crisis mechanics — is generally discouraged and can affect awards. Chairs typically remind committees that OOC time should be brief, respectful, and limited to genuinely non-substantive matters.