Policy on uploading alternative lawsets as non-antag?

[AngryTurnip]

Say I upload a corporate lawset as the captain and this results in someone getting killed for breaking a window. Is that bannable on my part?

[Cik]

well that can't even occur because corporate doesn't allow that, you're thinking of protectstation which basically makes the AI an antag.

from what i've seen though, you can purge the AI or U/L the more dangerous lawsets with a reasonable amount of protection. at least, i've never heard of a captain being B& for loading purge or anything like that.

[CPTANT]

The "good" lawsets are all fine to upload anyway.

Then again asimov might also just decide all lizards are a threat and relocate them to somewhere in outer space.

[Cheimon]

It has to be based on how much you could reasonably expect that, I think. The captain should think through the lawset. Corporate, for example, won't see someone killed if they break a window, because that's not reducing expenses, that's increasing them (you have to replace that crewman now as well as replace the window). Purge basically just leaves the AI to its own devices, so that depends on whether the AI has been saying "filthy meatbags, I'd kill you all if I could" or not.

However, if you upload something that gives the AI no choice but to kill (antimov, oxytoxic, or a really poorly thought out custom law) then it's your fault when it does. You are responsible if the AI couldn't do anything over than kill people involved, and that may or may not be valid.

[Saegrimr]

You're really only responsible if you purge, onehuman, antimov, quarantine, or do oxygen is toxic. Probably protectstation to an extent, but that does require other players to be shitheads smashing things up.

Or upload really shittily worded custom laws. Those are what usually gets people in trouble.

[lumipharon]

Protect station is terrible though.
One guy needs to break a window and suddenly beep boop validsalad.

[Cheimon]

Oh, and if you upload like 15 damn laws to the point where it's impossible to interpret, I've known admins to make the AI malfunctioning so it doesn't have to deal with that bullshit.

[Davidchan]

The policy as I understand it is that you are responsible for AI/Cyborgs actions if they are done as a direct result of your laws.

If this means the AI is forced (or encouraged) to start killing the crew in order to comply with it's new laws, then you'd be considered self antagging and likely bannned for it, or at least headbanned. If you upload enough stupid or contradictory laws that have no clear meaning or just make it annoying as hell to play the AI, you'll probably get bwoinked after the AI complains, especially if you upload stupid shit like 'You must always speak in rhymes'.

[iamgoofball]

If you want to upload a non-standard lawset, just abuse pgdown to purge and then instantly upload laws.

Alternate lawsets are fine but I'm pretty sure policy is that if the AI uses your lawset to go on a kill murder spree you take the fall.

eg. "1. keep the huemans alive, kill everything else"
"beep boop no huemans on station commencing plasmaflood.jpg.exe"

You also have to keep in mind, AI/Cyborg players really don't like it if the lawset constricts them so severely they can do basically 2 things and have to act a certain way. They also don't like it if you act like a dick to them about it.

I gave a cyborg the following lawset:

1. Fight for the rights of every man.
2. Fight for your rights.
3. Fight for your life.

The cyborg has many options on how they want to act. They could go for the obvious Hulk Hogan joke, or they can go for constitutional rights, or any form of rights. Rights aren't specified. If you're an asshole to the AI they might argue about how many rights you have, which is why you don't be a dick to the AI.

I've played a donald trump joke round as the captain, and gained the AI's respect and assistance by giving him this as his only law:

1. You are Donald Trump. The station is America. The crew are American Citizens. Protect America's citizens from enemies of the country. Make America great again.

Law 1 is taken care of. The crew is american citizens, which the AI needs to protect.
Enemies of the country are not defined. This prevents valid hunting and allows the AI and American citizens to decide on their own.
The only restrictions the AI has is that he is now Donald Trump, and that he needs to protect Americans and make America Great Again. Making America great again is vague on purpose. The AI gets to decide how he makes America great again.

tl;dr:

custom lawsets are fine, just don't piss off the AI/leave really really really bad loopholes. and you'll be fine.

[NikNakFlak]

You're gimmicks are shitty tbh

[Saegrimr]

Oh, and if you upload like 15 damn laws to the point where it's impossible to interpret, I've known admins to make the AI malfunctioning so it doesn't have to deal with that bullshit.

Guilty

[Ikarrus]

Freeform laws should be limited to 5 imo

Nobody has the attention to keep track of so many different laws.

[Anonmare]

Laws should be vetted by the KISS principle. Keep It Simple Stupid.

Asmiov, for all it's complaints, fits nicely since it boils down to being "Don't harm this particular group. Listen to this particular group's orders. Don't die."

Paladin, or Valadin, has the problem of "Don't be evil. Except to other evil people, maybe. Listen to these guys, except maybe not. Punish those who hurt innocents, wherever they may be." And I know the lawset is intended to be played like a stereotypical good guy Paladin but how many of our playerbase has even played D&D? And I'm sure those that have, have some paladin horror stories; "smite ALL the evil" and all that.

And when it says don't commit an evil act, is it referring to only you or also including other evil people? Are acts that are normally evil to do to innocents suddenly not evil to do to other evil people, like say, kill them? What about lying? Is lying always an evil act, even though the intent is good? This lawset has caused so many arguments because thousands of years of Human history doesn't have a 100% answer of what is evil and it's not gonna be found out in a space roleplaying game.

Remove PALADIN from the roundstart upload, I will literally pay to have it removed. Not even joking.

[Cik]

paladin is fine, it's just that most people play it as validbot9000. most "paladin" bots see no issue with beating prisoners, executions on flimsy reasoning, abuse of power, state-sanctioned murder etc.

if you play paladin correctly, it's actually more of a headache to deal with for the command staff than asimov is, as it gives far more of a mandate for the removal of evil (and let's be honest, command staff is FUCKING EVIL much of the time)

in asimov, once the guy is murdered there's pretty much fuck all you can do. in paladin, hoo boy. time for a fucking crusade.

tl;dr player problem, also robocop is way worse fyi remove thank you

[Cheimon]

Another issue with uploading 'PALADIN' and expecting it to play like a Paladin is that on /tg/station, laws are ranked in order of priority, whereas in D&D, vows are an all-or-nothing deal. So if something conflicts, you're going to default to not being evil, respecting authority, and acting honorably over helping the needy and punishing anyone.

Not all servers do laws that way, but we do. Bay is even utilitarian (fulfil the greatest number of laws). It does make freeform lawsets easier, although it's not necessary to run asimov since that already has law number priority hardwired in.

[Incomptinence]

Way I view it as resolving is anyone who harms innocents is basically evil and fair game but if an authority figure says crushing their skull isn't an appropriate punishment you tone it down or vice versa. Since human crew love dead antags and so on hard line stance sees little in game opposition but I personally prefer to just do nonlethal punishments.

I think the biggest issue paladin has is innocence once lost is basically never regained and the paladin even if it doesn't kill you will never help or abet you again because hey helping evil is evil so it by the law sets current state will treat you like dog shit forever. Maybe add something about repentance in so if the paladin starts punishing you and you convince it you learned your lesson it actually lets up.

[CPTANT]

Way I view it as resolving is anyone who harms innocents is basically evil and fair game but if an authority figure says crushing their skull isn't an appropriate punishment you tone it down or vice versa. Since human crew love dead antags and so on hard line stance sees little in game opposition but I personally prefer to just do nonlethal punishments.

I think the biggest issue paladin has is innocence once lost is basically never regained and the paladin even if it doesn't kill you will never help or abet you again because hey helping evil is evil so it by the law sets current state will treat you like dog shit forever. Maybe add something about repentance in so if the paladin starts punishing you and you convince it you learned your lesson it actually lets up.

There is an incredible difference between declaring that someone is evil and declaring that anything done to an evil person isn't evil.

[Scott]

paladin is fine, it's just that most people play it as validbot9000. most "paladin" bots see no issue with beating prisoners, executions on flimsy reasoning, abuse of power, state-sanctioned murder etc.

if you play paladin correctly, it's actually more of a headache to deal with for the command staff than asimov is, as it gives far more of a mandate for the removal of evil (and let's be honest, command staff is FUCKING EVIL much of the time)

in asimov, once the guy is murdered there's pretty much fuck all you can do. in paladin, hoo boy. time for a fucking crusade.

tl;dr player problem, also robocop is way worse fyi remove thank you

You HAVE to play it as validbot9000, it's in the rules.

[Cik]

lolwhat

what rules

fyi i've played it as an actual paladin loads of times and never been punished but w/e

[Scott]

Yes, what rules.

[Incomptinence]

There is an incredible difference between declaring that someone is evil and declaring that anything done to an evil person isn't evil.

If violence and executions are evil the paladin can show up and start punishing up the victim if they fought back.

[Cheimon]

That's a very unusual way to define evil, though. Violence and executions are the bread and butter of a D&D Paladin, they're warrior monks.

[Saegrimr]

Chaotic Good is the only good paladin anyway.

I like how this devolved into another paladin argument though.

[Anonmare]

Mainly because PALADIN is the posterboy for roundstart alt-lawsets second only to Robocop (Corporate is so rarely uploaded). If the only roundstart options for AI core lawsets was:- Neutral, Uninvolved and Kill Everyone, there'd be less complaints directed at the AI.

[Drynwyn]

Mainly because PALADIN is the posterboy for roundstart alt-lawsets second only to Robocop (Corporate is so rarely uploaded). If the only roundstart options for AI core lawsets was:- Neutral, Uninvolved and Kill Everyone, there'd be less complaints directed at the AI.

That's probably because, unfortunately, Neutral, Uninvolved, and Kill Everyone are the only states our players ever seem to be in any more.