The Reality of Roleplay and Schizo-Policies

Subtle · Post by **Subtle** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 3:59 pm #25760

Now right off the bat I can promise this thread won't do much other than provoke a massive argument. That said, it does need to be mentioned.

How can we call ourselves a roleplaying server when our rules explicitly forbid meta/powergaming only to go on and allow certain forms of them? There's a balance we need to strike, true, but that balance is reached simply by allowing people to run goofy gimmicks or understand how to work every job regardless of their signup-slot. Metagaming antagonist items/practices/biological processes and the complete disregard for having antagonists at least attempt roleplay does nothing but harm to our community. I'll be frank; if you're logging onto the station to murderbone and ayy lmao you're a cancer I'd like to see cut out with prejudice.

Based on the document SoS provided as a potential reworking of security policy I'd like to say he's extremely frustrated with the "gamist" direction we as a group are allowing this server to take. This is, or was, at its core a roleplaying game. His rewrite depended heavily on security toning down their validhunting and, I quote, "thwarting antagonists while and through roleplaying." I first brought up my concerns about this discrepancy in a thread related to that rewrite. It's absolutely absurd that we can suggest that the crew in general needs to suffer in silence while antagonists are essentially CoD-players in a DnD game.

I affirm that without change to server policy and genuine administrative leadership regarding the enforcement of at least halfassed roleplaying we're already no better than NoX was. Don't know about the rest of you but that thought makes me sick. It's very common among other servers to suggest the crew in general be ignorant of antagonist practices and to force antagonists to create conflict in the round while roleplaying instead of spawning two eswords and going to town. I believe an attempt at emulating these practices will create a better environment for everyone involved.

Those whose experience wouldn't be improved by such changes are, again quite frankly, not the kind of people who create fun for anyone but themselves anyway. I'm tired of greytiders, I'm tired of sarcastic halfass roleplay that only crops up when I ping people for OOC/IC, and I'm especially tired of tolerating the griefers/line-toers who unashamedly mock and drive away good players so they can claim /tg/ as their deathmatch cesspool.

It won't be easy. The current policies are so set in stone that I won't be the least bit surprised if this is met with nothing but a chorus of dissent from those of you who enjoy robust combat. Personally I feel you're wrong. I have no shame in saying that and no desire to continue standing by while the very concept of being in-character goes extinct.

That rant having been completed my questions to everyone are as follows...
1) What do we lose from enforcing stricter roleplaying standards? What do we gain?
2) Is there any communal benefit from "CoD" playstyles? From murderboning?
3) Would the community like to see security and/or antagonists held to a higher standard when it comes to IC-reasoning?
4) Would the community like to see greater punishments for breaking character or meta/powergaming?

Cut off the limb to save the body, folks. That's all I can really say. If not then let's quit pretending roleplay matters at all here if it in fact doesn't.

Scott · Post by **Scott** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:36 pm #25770

Subtle wrote: How can we call ourselves a roleplaying server

We do?

Subtle · Post by **Subtle** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:42 pm #25773

"3. This is a roleplaying game. The purpose of the game is to have fun roleplaying. Being an asshole, who ruins other player’s roleplay experience, just to win, is considered a ‘play-to-win’ style of playing. You can and will be banned for this playstyle. Be considerate of other players’ experience."

That impression is exactly the kind of gradual shift I'm talking about, a shame that it's almost true. Thank you for saying it actually.

Scott · Post by **Scott** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:46 pm #25791

It's not serious RP. Bay is RP.

I agree that some antagonist play styles are boring, and I agree that some people are too focused on winning to help make the round enjoyable.

1)Strive for better quality play styles, but keep the RP light.
2)They're usually random killing sprees that add nothing to the round, but I wouldn't say they're all bad. I am sure it can be made fun or purposeful (I would argue that a subverted AI killing everybody is okay, because it involves assaulting the AI and it's not just some random sith lord)
3)Yes
4)I don't think anybody is punished/warned for this except for bad names. And to give some credit to the player base, people generally react IC to shitspeak (

lol xD) as if there's something wrong with the person breaking character.

Lovecraft · Post by **Lovecraft** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 6:32 pm #25803

Let's lean toward actual roleplay.

Are we playing avatars, or playing real characters?
I think actually creating characters would be a hit for a lot of players. Add the employment records, add the Medical and Security records, give people the tools to roleplay but don't force them to.
The only thing that should be forced is the stopping of play-to-win strategies.

Limit people's IC knowledge and start smacking people for going outside of it. We have to determine how strict we're going to get with what people do and don't know.
Is the Syndicate a known organization? If so, how much does the public know?
Should the Cut of the Elder Gods be known or unknown?
Should the Wizard Federation be just a weird thing everyone knows about, or an obsure faction only the Captain and Head of Security vaguely know about?
Granted, you'll never remove all traces of meta/power gaming from the game, no server can, but the administration stepping up and stopping it when it goes on goes a long way.

The biggest issue is we've given slack to line-toers and general shitty players. Why? Take the steps needed to adjust the rules and breed good players instead of keeping us stuck with the fuckheads.
We should encourage roleplay and disallow the play-to-win style. Make people get creative, make people actually try, make people create scenarios and stories instead of letting them satisfy the basic need of winning.

I'm really, really exhausted. This post was written and rewritten several times, and everything was flipflopped around, twice. It's more of a fragment of ideas than anything.

bandit · Post by **bandit** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 6:57 pm #25818

Subtle wrote:How can we call ourselves a roleplaying server when our rules explicitly forbid meta/powergaming only to go on and allow certain forms of them? There's a balance we need to strike, true, but that balance is reached simply by allowing people to run goofy gimmicks or understand how to work every job regardless of their signup-slot. Metagaming antagonist items/practices/biological processes and the complete disregard for having antagonists at least attempt roleplay does nothing but harm to our community. I'll be frank; if you're logging onto the station to murderbone and ayy lmao you're a cancer I'd like to see cut out with prejudice.

This is my biggest problem, honestly. "Metagaming," "powergaming" and "validhunting" are all completely worthless terms now, because everyone uses them to mean whatever the fuck they don't like. Probably as a related consequence, some are OK and some are not, and the only distinction between the two are often-unwritten rules. For instance:

- Calling "NUKE OPS!" because you see an assistant with SWAT gloves: A-OK!
- Calling "NUKE OPS!" because you fucked off to space and hit the nuke op shuttle completely by mistake: METAGAMING, BAN HE!

- Asimov AI bolting the upload and secure tech at roundstart: A-OK!
- Asimov AI bolting a department in which a murder is literally taking place before its eyes: POWERGAMING, BAN HE!

- Force-feeding antags (pre-nerf) valid salad to see if they're healed: METAGAMING, BAN HE!
- Force-feeding suspected cultists holy water to see if they're affected: A-OK!

- Trusting the chaplain during cult because the chaplain can't be antag: METAGAMING, BAN HE!
- HoPs giving security players (and assistants, if certain people get their way) any access they want up to captain-level because they know they can't be antags, while refusing to deputize anyone because they can be antags, even if loyalty implanted: A-OK!

- Suiting up in hardsuit, goliath plates, security jumpsuit and pre-nerf Roman gear to fight the blob invincibly: A-OK!
- Reconfiguring atmos to be less susceptible to sabotage: POWERGAMING, BAN HE!

- [Basically anything that gets an antag rekt]: VALIDHUNTING, BAN HE!
- [That same thing, except the player does it]: A-OK!

Personally I would love to see the server move in a more roleplay-oriented direction. I think we all would. The problem is sort of a game theory problem -- there's no incentive to RP as an antag, because the minute you do you get rekt for it, and there's no incentive to RP as security, for the same reasons. (At this point I think this goes double for security. The only way to be an effective security player right now, with the amount of graytide and murderboning antags, is to follow suit. I don't think it is a useful fix to nerf or hamstring security further. This sort of ties into my thoughts on security antag protection, as this is one of the most entrenched forms of acceptable meta in the game right now.) The only way to fix this is a massive shift in server playstyle and attitude that would probably require major, controversial changes to policy.

Lo6a4evskiy · Post by **Lo6a4evskiy** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 7:09 pm #25822

I think the problem is that currently many people consider this game to be about antagonists. It shouldn't be about antagonists.

Alex Crimson · Post by **Alex Crimson** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:00 pm #25830

I think the current state it fine. Its a good balance between RP and the more meta style of play. I like /tg/ because of its not-so-serious RP rules.

and fuck off is /tg/ anything like NoX. Ive played on NoX way more than ive played on /tg/, and i can honestly say this server is nowhere near as "bad".

1) What do we lose from enforcing stricter roleplaying standards? What do we gain?

You lose players who do not want strict RP rules. Now this doesnt mean they are the kind of player that valid hunter and metagames. There are many players on /tg/ that like the less strict RP rules, but still are perfectly civil players and follow the rules. I doubt you would gain that much either. If a terrible player who likes to valid hunter and break RP is on the server, i doubt they would care about your stricter rules considering they are already breaking the current ones.

2) Is there any communal benefit from "CoD" playstyles? From murderboning?

Fear? Freedom for antags to do what they want without feeling restricted? Personally i think it adds to the atmosphere knowing that you can be killed. Knowing that you do not have protection from antags just because of some rules the admins thought up. Antags are like game masters, they spice things up. Everyone has their own way of playing antag, but i i still feel like it should be completely their choice on how they play, not the admins.

3) Would the community like to see security and/or antagonists held to a higher standard when it comes to IC-reasoning?

Sec is already held to a higher standard than most other roles, other than Heads i guess. There are three things that id like to see changed for Sec. The first is the punishment of valid hunting. This should be more severe. Patrolling is fine, but arresting and searching assistants for running around in maint, or performing random searches for no reason is just silly.

Secondly id like the HoP to stop playing as a Sec officer. No idea if this has been changed since i last played, but the HoP was a little too quick to act like a Sec officer imo. Because he can get access to Sec and a gun he feels the need to arrest people and have a say in Sec-related matter. He shouldnt.

Lastly the Warden. He should not be outside of the brig playing Sec officer. His main role is to keep the brig in order, as well as the Sec records. Yet it feels like most Wardens spend most of their time outside of it.

Antags are fine. Like i said, i like that antags have freedom to play how they want. Some murderbone, some play passively. I do not think there is anything wrong with either playstyles. It all spices up the rounds and adds some variety. Adding strict RP rules to stop certain playstyles would ruin the fun.

4) Would the community like to see greater punishments for breaking character or meta/powergaming?

Are there not already rules for this? I think the current punishments are fine. This isnt Bay. Id say this server has a nice balance of RP/metagaming that allows people to play without fear of getting banned for the slightest out-of-character action. Wanting stricter rules is not a bad thing, but it just isnt in the spirit of this server.

tolstovskiy · Post by **tolstovskiy** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 9:16 pm #25840

People saying that there's balance between RP and meta is fine are terribly wrong. RP is actually getting punished by players and sometimes even admins can punish it.
Examples from my own experience or at least from rounds i played:
1. Nobody takes me seriously when i refuse to get injected with virus which is beneficial but has some bad symptoms such as sneezing and any other text based stuff that doesn't change gameplay. When i get randomly injected with this shit by some autistic virologist that didn't even bother to ask me I can't even punch him for that(I got even banned for one of these encounters). God forbid if you're playing security in this situation, HoS will let that virologist out of cell, rub on you until he gets this virus himself and demote you for shitcurity.
2. Every single person knows what can syndicate agents buy with their crystals. These fun RP roles involving Fake ID and Chameleon Jumpsuit won't work even if you actually encountered Rping HoP/Captain that validates your cover with Announcement or something, that just make you easier target for security cause now they know whose jumpsuit should get right-clicked during "random" search.
3. Antagonist are not welcome to "roll for charisma". Peaceful wizard won't get that stupid hypospray by say granting three wishes to whoever gets him it, nope he's getting valid-killed by mob of assistants covering their actions with remarks like " U can't trust wiz yo!". Some of you even admitted that you would do anything in your power to kill peaceful wizard.
I don't actually remember the last time traitor tried to make IC story for why he was found with ebow in backpack ("Well, officer i arrived to station with muh "Ebowelina" from south of Space America") most likely because they think i won't believe it cause of meta and they're right! Cause the moment i let him go with warning of getting his " Legit licence to carry weapon" properly stamped by captain i'm getting demoted by HoS for not being powergamer.
4. I can't willingly not know how to do stuff! Once as sec officer i got dragged by hos in surgery to perform Appendectomy because we don't need these useless doctors.I warned him about my non-existent skill is the field but he ignored it. So i "tried" to do it which caused me to cut his dick of by mistake(gender swap and appendectomy both are groin surgeries so i figured it's valid IC mistake to do ), you know shaky hands, "where the fuck do i cut?" question etc. I actually almost finished my second attempt with right surgery when i got stunned by fellow officer or something. Problem here was that HoS ignored my comments such as " OH FUCK, YOUR DICK FALL OFF!I DIDN'T MEAN IT! I JUST CUT TOO DEEP!I CAN FIX IT I SWEAR" and was yelling all over sec channel of me being retard that was gender-swapping him for no reason. At least admin considered it as IC problem and not grief mainly because ahelp was from me(don't remember why i did this, death/demotion/whatever).

At least these moment make rounds where you get clown to play along your split personality of HoP and Captain so much precious. Seriously, the guy ran between two offices with "All Access request form" about 4 times and spoke to both Captain-ME and HoP-anotherME. Praised Professionalism of HoP to Captain etc. This is only clown i can think of that actually deserved to get that All access Id from my virtual hands.

Alex Crimson · Wed Aug 27, 2014 10:07 pm

Then go play on a more RP-focused server. I do not see why the rules, which have worked just fine for us, need to be changed because some people feel that they are not getting their serious roleplay experience. /tg/ has never been serious with its RP, and yet has always punished excessive metagaming. Its a good middle ground server.

Konork · Post by **Konork** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 10:37 pm #25856

Alex Crimson wrote:Then go play on a more RP-focused server. I do not see why the rules, which have worked just fine for us, need to be changed because some people feel that they are not getting their serious roleplay experience. /tg/ has never been serious with its RP, and yet has always punished excessive metagaming. Its a good middle ground server.

I think the point is that currently, on this server, "light RP" pretty much means "don't acknowledge that you are in a game", which honestly is barely RP.

Post by **oranges** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 10:53 pm #25861

Alex Crimson wrote:Then go play on a more RP-focused server. I do not see why the rules, which have worked just fine for us, need to be changed

Because according to the OP scaredofshadows himself is frustrated with the current state of affairs.
We don't get to direct the policy of these servers, that decisions rests in the hands of SOS, so either he out and says it, or he nudges the admin team behind the scenes.

edit: this came out harsher than I meant it, what I was trying to say is that if you don't like the way SOS moves the policy then your only alternative is to leave, not that you should leave
If you don't like it then you can leave.

Alex Crimson · Wed Aug 27, 2014 11:03 pm

What more do you want?

Ignoring traitor weapons?

Excuse me sir can you please stop running in the hallway?

Im a Doctor so i do not know how to set up the singularity?

You are not going to get any of that unless you make the rules far more hardcore RP oriented. Which is what im against, because its just not the kind of thing i started playing on this server for. The RP experience you get out of /tg/ is very much dependent on the effort you put in. Nobody is stopping you from roleplaying, but you cannot expect people to play along on a server that does not enforce strict roleplay.

Like i said, go play on a different server if you want a different experience. If you really want it on /tg/, then it would need a polling of the playerbase to see what the majority wants. Along with what rules you specifically want changed and how serious you want the roleplaying to be.

@Orange

If SoS wants to change the rules then he is well within his authority to do so. If i feel the server is too serious in its roleplay then ill leave and not make a big deal out of it. Its his server after all. I see no post on the forums made by him nor do i know where to find this "document" of the policy changes he is making. But from the opening post, i assumed SoS just wanted to enforce stricter rules for Sec, not stricter RP rules in general.

Cipher3 · Post by **Cipher3** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 11:39 pm #25866

Subtle isn't asking for Bay here Crimson. He's asking for us to live up to our original standard, which WAS roleplay - but never so heavy and so strict as Bay. There is a point between the extremes - and it's a point I'd really love to see.

Alex Crimson · Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:13 am

But Bay is what most RPers seem to want. Whenever ive played on /tg/ i have been satisfied with the level of RP i experience. Yes you get the occasional player who acts like an idiot, griefs and eventually gets banned, but that is to be expected. New players join all the time.

Maybe my standards for "hardcore roleplay" are low, but removing the freedom for antags to play how they want, and forcing the crew to be ignorant of their obvious actions sure sounds like hardcore roleplay to me.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:51 am #25876

Alex Crimson wrote:But Bay is what most RPers seem to want. Whenever ive played on /tg/ i have been satisfied with the level of RP i experience. Yes you get the occasional player who acts like an idiot, griefs and eventually gets banned, but that is to be expected. New players join all the time.

Maybe my standards for "hardcore roleplay" are low, but removing the freedom for antags to play how they want, and forcing the crew to be ignorant of their obvious actions sure sounds like hardcore roleplay to me.

Stop boogiemanning. You can want "RP" to mean something without being Bay. At our current rate, we may as well call it RDM instead of "light RP" and get it over with.

bandit · Post by **bandit** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:43 am #25891

tolstovskiy wrote:People saying that there's balance between RP and meta is fine are terribly wrong. RP is actually getting punished by players and sometimes even admins can punish it.
Examples from my own experience or at least from rounds i played:
1. Nobody takes me seriously when i refuse to get injected with virus which is beneficial but has some bad symptoms such as sneezing and any other text based stuff that doesn't change gameplay. When i get randomly injected with this shit by some autistic virologist that didn't even bother to ask me I can't even punch him for that(I got even banned for one of these encounters). God forbid if you're playing security in this situation, HoS will let that virologist out of cell, rub on you until he gets this virus himself and demote you for shitcurity.

Not to derail but this is bullshit. I was the HoS in this round, I got the virus a long time ago, I announced like 10 times over radio what the virologist was doing, and you decided not to pay attention. I demoted you for not following the chain of command, so it's a little rich that you're trying to make this about "punishing RP" because you sure didn't care about RP then. And you don't get banned for punching people who are shit otherwise I'd be perma'd by now.

Steelpoint · Post by **Steelpoint** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:00 am #25894

I would be interested in seeing this potential Security Policy Rewrite, would let us see to the extent SoS wants to shake things up, and that I have a vested interest in Security matters.

When it comes to better roleplay, there needs to be some give and take. What this means is that Antags would need to lose their "free to do anything" license, or at the very least mandated to not go straight to the duel Eswords asap.

Asking the regular crew or security to roleplay when the antags have no such restrictions will only frustrate the non-antags.

Cheridan · Post by **Cheridan** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:00 am #25896

Well I'm glad someone brought it up. I've felt like we've been slipping for a while. Everyone used to say that we were a 'middle ground' between goonstation and baystation, but as a server we've abandoned that in favor of pure gamism, yet we still call ourselves 'light roleplay' out of tradition.

It's just pretty messed up when Bryce Pax and J.R. Bob Dobbs are among my favorite roleplayers, because they're people who just don't care about "winning". They fool around and have fun, and use their antag roles as an opportunity to make things ACTUALLY interesting.
SPOILER: BEING THE 9001TH PERSON TO NOSLIP ESWORD A DOZEN PEOPLE IS NOT 'SPICING UP A ROUND'.

cedarbridge wrote:At our current rate, we may as well call it RDM instead of "light RP" and get it over with.

Which /vg/station often does in their threads. After all, NoX and DS2k are now gone. The title of 'worst branch' is up for grabs again, and increasingly I worry that it's going to be us, if it's not already.

Incomptinence · Thu Aug 28, 2014 5:49 am

cedarbridge wrote: Stop boogiemanning. You can want "RP" to mean something without being Bay. At our current rate, we may as well call it RDM instead of "light RP" and get it over with.

The initial post of the thread is ripe with boogie men like the underside of a bed, stop this mad CoD/NoX brute! The baymongering argument against RP regulation is a pretty poor one anyway but it is fair to use here. On the bay model I will say admins as dms thing is hardly just when you have multiple dms at once pulling you toward several poorly stated rp standards.

I am against stricter RP not because I would mind it itself but because it would encourage more "realism" changes to the game. Yes I am still mad about bloody screen so real.

Helios127 · Post by **Helios127** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 9:52 am #25910

From what I recall, part of SoS's attitude towards gaming Sec is due to CDB

Just sayin.

ColonicAcid · Post by **ColonicAcid** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 9:52 am #25911

That has nothing to do with the discussion at hand and is just shit flinging.
Even if it is CDB that ain't cool.

Post by **oranges** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:29 am #25919

Cheridan wrote: Which /vg/station often does in their threads. After all, NoX and DS2k are now gone. The title of 'worst branch' is up for grabs again, and increasingly I worry that it's going to be us, if it's not already.

I don't think we can stretch quite this far

Kangaraptor · Post by **Kangaraptor** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 1:05 pm #25924

I think we just need to come down harder on excessive powergaming and validhunting for the sake of validhunting. There's a lot of meta that people let slide because it's convenient to them, which is totally bullshit and shouldn't be okay at all.

imblyings · Post by **imblyings** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:06 pm #25930

Metagaming antagonist items/practices/biological processes and the complete disregard for having antagonists at least attempt roleplay does nothing but harm to our community.

Right, you're on the right track because this involves both antags and non-antags.

"thwarting antagonists while and through roleplaying."

It's nice that SoS wants this but what he forgot to say is that, 'oh I want sec to roleplay more naive, trusting and dumber characters who know a bit less about antags'. He also forgets to say, 'oh but in return, I want antags to be a lot nicer and look for non-lethal options where possible so people are more relaxed about the game' or even, 'oh, I wish the volunteer overworked coderbus/nanobus would make some more game content so players would have less of a reason to seek entertainment through PvP conflict.' Like you suggested above, what SoS wants simply will not happen unless both parties (and content creators if they want) simultaneously do something about it.

I affirm that without change to server policy and genuine administrative leadership regarding the enforcement of at least halfassed roleplaying

to suggest the crew in general be ignorant of antagonist practices and to force antagonists to create conflict in the round while roleplaying instead of spawning two eswords and going to town.

Absolutely, server policy at the very least will need to change with non-antags and antags being affected.

To answer your questions,

1) What do we lose from enforcing stricter roleplaying standards? What do we gain?

Standards held to what official canon? Roleplaying happens within the context of a backstory. There is no official backstory so there is no point and in fact it would be harmful to this server to enforce stricter roleplaying standards without creating some sort of official canon first. What do we gain? Different fun.

2) Is there any communal benefit from "CoD" playstyles? From murderboning?

CoD playstyles? You mean wordless conflict/violence between antags/non-antags? The answer the question seems to be fishing for is obviously no.

What I assume the question then wants to suggest is an unspoken agreement between antags/non-antags to go easy on each other and also not care that much about dying should it happen. It's worth noting here that the SS13 game simply isn't forgiving nor encouraging of any sort of player interaction other than violence in a conflict. The interface is clunky. You can't talk (and emote) while doing things. People don't like dying.

3) Would the community like to see security and/or antagonists held to a higher standard when it comes to IC-reasoning?

Again, there is no official backstory or canon so there is no standard when it comes to IC-reasoning, apart from rule 1. You could go either way here. It would be perfectly appropriate roleplaying for security to require any scientist making a bomb to get written permission from the RD and the HoS, submit to a tracking implant, only be allowed to make one bomb at a time and have all remaining bombs be confiscated after testing so that only the HoP, HoS or RD can distribute them to mining. There is nothing wrong with the IC-reasoning here, in fact, RL IC-reasoning is a tad harsher when it comes to the handling of explosives.

Parapen-C4 or really, any of the current play to win strategies for antags would also be perfectly reasonable IC. Revs, cultists and the like are presumably playing characters who have very strong reasons to achieve their goals and what most people do, is to do the most efficient and effective thing to achieve their goals. This has the unfortunate effect of forcing non-antags to do the most efficient and effective thing to stay alive.

See, there's an unfortunate disconnect between wanting better roleplay and wanting less powergaming/metagaming. You cannot have both. The two are, apart from individual player character preferences, mutually exclusive.

4) Would the community like to see greater punishments for breaking character or meta/powergaming?

Again, where would we find the official backstory/canon supporting decisions on what is breaking character or meta/powergaming? Are Centcom mindwipes canon? Selective mindwipes? Enforced naivety or stupidity? What is an acceptable character to play? Meta/powergaming? Is there a distinction between player competency and powergaming? Preparations without cause. Is that powergaming? I'm not going to even touch metagaming because apart from a few examples that are actually metagaming, there are other instances where people get mistaken a lot on what is metagaming and what isn't and even then, the line is kind of blurry without any official backstory/canon.

>If not then let's quit pretending roleplay matters at all here if it in fact doesn't.

What is roleplay? Because an engineering team building an autist fort together could be roleplay, Oldman Robustin killing the antag after everyone else is dead could be roleplay, Reed Glover's unnatural dedication to his job could be roleplay, a security officer pretending not to know what a cult talisman is could be roleplay and a security officer cursing off in the sec channel and brutally killing any revolutionary in his path could be roleplay.

The word 'roleplay' means nothing by itself and adminbus needs to understand this.

Clearly define what backstory/official canon you want when you say or ask for more 'roleplay'. Clearly state whether you want players, non-antags and antags to have a silent agreement on perhaps avoiding actions that result in death so more people can live longer while enjoying talking and emoting. Clearly ask for players and antags to be a bit more dumb in their actions or something, instead of roleplaying competent characters. None of these are bad things but if this thread wants to be anything else other than rant-containment, actually say out loud as to what you actually want instead of whining, 'oh, we need more roleplay'.

but lets be honest, this thread will most likely accomplish nothing

imblyings · Post by **imblyings** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:30 pm #25933

For example,

All characters, non-antags and antags are expected to be average or perhaps a bit below average in terms of mental resilience, physical capability and competency, with slight allowances for certain roles such as security or nuclear operative. All characters undergo stringent selective mindwiping at Centcom, leaving employees with their personality and most of their skills and education. Their memories, particularly any memories involving (antags), are completely removed.

Information security is highly valued with Nanotrasen and things are done on a need-to-know basis. Only the captain will ever have anything approaching a decent idea of what is going on in an emergency and even then, players playing captain do not need to roleplay their character as knowing anything at all about antags. Security at most receive briefings on certain Syndicate threats- many are not told of revolutions or cults- and are simply told to report odd non-Syndicate behaviour to their superiors. However, antags are not expected to and are certainly encouraged to explore more interesting methods of using/exploring their gear.

Antagonists are not psychopathic killing machines. Many are normal people forced into a deal with the devil, sometimes literally, in the case of cultists. That they have a criminal objective or horrid goal to carry out does not mean they are suddenly emotionless machines efficiently doing their job. A cultist for example, may struggle to kill a downed officer or even go into shock after witnessing a body explode. A traitor operative sent to kill someone may constantly abort just before they stab someone with a parapen, being unable to kill their target after they've formed an emotional connection with them. A revolution may end in the heads of staff and security being peacefully sent to the mining asteroid, instead of being looted and used to paint the station red.

All players are expected to choose the less violent option if possible. The server prioritizes non-violent player/player interaction, 'roleplay', if you will. Interacting with each other, in a manner which makes IC sense and is consistent with current official canon is what is valued. Not killing other players, not achieving greentext, not denying greentext.

now do something like suggest changes to that or write your own backstory/canon for consideration by adminbus to enforce or something else which is actually productive

remember

>no official backstory/canon or suggestions for one
>literally L I T E R A L L Y no point to this thread

Steelpoint · Post by **Steelpoint** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:47 pm #25935

I like that idea, it might promote a interesting alternative play style. I would be interested in seeing this idea implemented.

To expand on imblyings point

Knowledge of antagonists: The general crew know that the syndicate are a hostile organization, however they have no knowledge on its inner working, or equipment they employ.

Security Officers are vaguely briefed on syndicate operations, to the extent that they occasionally send covert operatives, usually black mailed employees, to execute a goal. Security personnel would know what all overt syndicate equipment does once presented with it (Guns, Grenades, Bombs, Swords).

Heads of Staff know slightly more about the Syndicate, they know that their operatives can employ deadly and covet equipment, a special detachment of elite soldiers is on rare occasions employed by them, and anything relating to the syndicate is inherently dangerous.

The Captain and Head of Security have the most in-depth knowledge on the Syndicate, and have been considered to have been briefed personally by Central Command. They know the syndicate employ a team of Nuclear Operatives to attack NT stations, and have better knowledge on their overt equipment. It is up to the Captain and/or HoS to lay the charge of someone collaborating with the Syndicate

The Wizards Federation is a known organization, but is usually seen as a dumb joke by most NT employees, however they know that Wizards are extremely powerful if ever confronted with one. Only the Captain, the Head of Security and Security in general know they are real and powerful.

Changelings are a known creature, but no one knows anything about them as no changeling has ever been captured. The only information know is that Changelings can alter their appearance. CentCom would be very ecstatic if a live Changeling was captured for transport.

The cult of Nar-Sie is a known organization to the Captain, Security and the Chaplain. To the general crew it is considered a fantastical concept. (Might be better to make it a known organization for the crew)

AIs do not malfunction, it would take either overt action on the part of the AI, or a confirmation of the AI hacking into the stations systems, to prove the AI is broken

If we do go this way, these concepts would need to be expanded on.

looping · Post by **looping** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:58 pm #25936

Incomptinence wrote:I am against stricter RP not because I would mind it itself but because it would encourage more "realism" changes to the game. Yes I am still mad about bloody screen so real.

No mention of masks/full helmets preventing you from eating?
I'm not sure how i'd feel about stricter RP, but if you're trying to force security to be naive fuckwits or generally ignorant of antagonists then something has to change with antagonists and the mindset of the players, considering that generally even the security officers that run gimmicks enter powergaming/validhunting mode once the round type has been revealed as cult or revolutionary.
I don't see a big impact coming out of this unless the majority of the players suddenly desire greater RP and most of the people on sybil don't even go on the forums anyway apparently and forcing something like this will always result in a drop of players.

Subtle wrote:I affirm that without change to server policy and genuine administrative leadership regarding the enforcement of at least halfassed roleplaying we're already no better than NoX was.

Dunno about you but last time I checked the server didn't allow or encourage rape, I mean, I haven't seen any clowns raping a person's dead corpse and then gibbing it so he could rape the meat chunks, have you?

Post by **MisterPerson** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:01 pm #25937

Here's a proposal I think would solve some of the problems without being "too bay", whatever that means without changing too much around

You cannot kill, permabrig, detain, or steal from an antagonist without a solid IC reason to do so besides "they're an antag". For example, if a wizard show up in the Bar and starts drinking and talking about what a fine day it is without attacking anyone, security would not be allowed to laser him to death. However if that wizard starts EI NATHing people, then yes security would be allowed to laser them to death.

I think this would start getting us back on track that the game is not about "winning" via defeating the antagonists. Except in Rev/Cult, which will need some serious special casing. Or a redo of the game modes, whatever.

Lo6a4evskiy · Post by **Lo6a4evskiy** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:43 pm #25941

MisterPerson wrote:Here's a proposal I think would solve some of the problems without being "too bay", whatever that means without changing too much around

You cannot kill, permabrig, detain, or steal from an antagonist without a solid IC reason to do so besides "they're an antag". For example, if a wizard show up in the Bar and starts drinking and talking about what a fine day it is without attacking anyone, security would not be allowed to laser him to death. However if that wizard starts EI NATHing people, then yes security would be allowed to laser them to death.

I think this would start getting us back on track that the game is not about "winning" via defeating the antagonists. Except in Rev/Cult, which will need some serious special casing. Or a redo of the game modes, whatever.

Well what if you find an antagonist item in their backpack? What if they have a revolver that wasn't yet fired? What if they have emag? What if changeling starts randomly transforming into other people for lolz? What if it grows armor? What if it grows arm blade, but doesn't use it? Quite a lot of variables here, you know.

Steelpoint · Post by **Steelpoint** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:49 pm #25942

If you find a "traitor" with a covert item, such as a parapen, emag or camera bugger, then as far as you know thats just a pen, a wierd looking ID card and a flash.

If you find a traitor with a overt item, such as a revolver, esword or a bomb, then you can safely assume they are a bad guy.

imblyings · Post by **imblyings** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:08 pm #25944

MisterPerson wrote:Here's a proposal I think would solve some of the problems without being "too bay"

Your proposal works solely for peaceful wizards and peaceful traitors and even then, probably on how loudly a 'peaceful' antag whines after being killed.

- There is no IC reason nor OOC reason to not kill/permabrig/detain/steal from nuclear operatives. There may be IC reason for characters to avoid rather than confront nuke ops but then nuke ops would be similarly obliged to avoid confrontation to quickly steal the disk instead of wantonly kill. If you want this to happen, you need official canon/backstory.

- Rev is deathmatch with the caveat that if there are implants, you implant instead. There is no other way to approach this gamemode, unless you implement official canon that everyone, including revs, are actually averse to killing and squeamish towards death or injury.

- With the lack of official canon, there is no reason for sec not to immediately detain or if needed, kill cultists. Characters are currently allowed to know and act on the knowledge that cults messily and brutally murder or even enslave the souls of their victims. Therefore, it is entirely appropriate for anyone really to kill/perma/detain/steal from a cultist just because they are a cultist.

- Since station crew are entirely allowed to know just what lings eat, it is entirely reasonable to kill a changeling just because they are a changeling. It's a predatory species that preys on humans. No more justification is needed for anyone to kill/perma/detain/steal from a ling unless you implement official canon/backstory on how nobody really knows what lings are.

All characters currently live on a flimsy fragile space station with very little security. Characters are not expected to be pacifists that have not lost their faith in humanity. They know about what traitors can do. They also have very little to do sometimes. What you currently ask without actually stating it, which only contributes to the problem, is for a hug-box for antags at the expense of non-antags. You mention that the game isn't about winning via defeating the antagonists. The game isn't about hoping you aren't picked to be a brainless NPC populating a sand(hug)box for the special few players who get antag either. Like Subtle pointed out, either antags and non-antags do something or both don't.

And again, literally none of your suggestions make any IC sense without official IC canon and backstory.

There is a way to get this 'roleplay' that everyone wants.

It starts with getting a consistent backstory/canon for the roleplay to happen in.

If you want to argue against 'roleplay' needing a backstory or canon then do so, make your case.

Until then, this thread is completely pointless until that happens. All posts in this thread that do not contribute to the establishment of a backstory or official canon in some way or form will not help in getting more 'roleplay' or getting less 'powergaming/validhunting/metagaming'.

bockman22 · Post by **bockman22** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:59 pm #25949

Bay rules are not that bad besides some of them, And we also have admins that are not on your shit and day ban you for suicide.

Scott · Post by **Scott** » Thu Aug 28, 2014 5:10 pm #25951

Cheridan wrote:Well I'm glad someone brought it up. I've felt like we've been slipping for a while. Everyone used to say that we were a 'middle ground' between goonstation and baystation, but as a server we've abandoned that in favor of pure gamism, yet we still call ourselves 'light roleplay' out of tradition.

It's just pretty messed up when Bryce Pax and J.R. Bob Dobbs are among my favorite roleplayers, because they're people who just don't care about "winning". They fool around and have fun, and use their antag roles as an opportunity to make things ACTUALLY interesting.
SPOILER: BEING THE 9001TH PERSON TO NOSLIP ESWORD A DOZEN PEOPLE IS NOT 'SPICING UP A ROUND'.

cedarbridge wrote:At our current rate, we may as well call it RDM instead of "light RP" and get it over with.
Which /vg/station often does in their threads. After all, NoX and DS2k are now gone. The title of 'worst branch' is up for grabs again, and increasingly I worry that it's going to be us, if it's not already.

It's funny you say that because Bob Dobbs is the typical murderboner. Is that your standard for good and fun RP?

MedicInDisquise · Thu Aug 28, 2014 9:38 pm

I'm getting tired of people shitting all over bay.

Fuck, sure we don't want to go too far in that direction as a light-medium RP server. I get that. But how the hell will changing a few polices so friendly wizards and antags that bought soap won't get lazered as soon as they are spotted turn us into the second bay? I'd like to SEE a few bay rules and things ported in. The optional employment records and shit. A few of the roleplay policies. There's a goddamn reason why Bay is the basis of most server codes nowadays. Look at fucking Paradise; now THAT is light-medium roleplay. TG is basically URSIT MCCLOWN PRICKED ME, FUCKEN LINGS!!!!! I'm going to dig up a few bay policies that might fit with us, stay tuned.

EDIT: Some bay policies.

Knowledge of the antagonists and Syndicate Items is restricted. We expect players to allow traitors some leeway and as such have a list here (Identifying Antagonists) of who and what can be recognised and by who. We expect players to not powergame and give the antagonists a little leeway to get away with things.
Getting lynched because you have noslip or syndicate soap fall under this. Also, the second one can help ease the powergaming attitude with basically everyone.

Calling random restart votes is not allowed. Restart votes should only be done when the round is physically unplayable due to lag/glitches, or with admin consent. Calling an random restart vote is a bannable offence. The crew transfer shuttle should otherwise be called, in a transfer vote, which will bring an IC end to the round.
End of round shuttle grief is not allowed. This rules is different to most other servers, but the reveal message is not IC knowledge, and RP continues until the round reboots. That means no random killing or attacking each other at round end. Generally, any attacking whatsoever after round end will earn a ban. This is an automatic ban without warning. ALL ACTIONS UNTIL THE SERVER REBOOTS ARE IN-CHARACTER, EVEN AFTER THE SHUTTLE DOCKS WITH CENTRAL COMMAND.

I ded pls restart and SHUTTLE DOCKED, and ROUND IS OVER, LETS SPAWN A MILLION NAR-SIES AND BOMB CENTCOMM! fall under this. The second one may have to be reworded, but shuttle grief is basically shit. If you really want to shuttle grief, maybe map in a little arena for the bored assistants in the shuttles? Antags are of course exempt from this rule.

Intent of the rules is more important than the letter. Line-toeing or generally trying to rules lawyer your way out of a situation will usually net you a ban anyway. It is the spirit and intent behind the rules that is followed, not necessarily their exact wording. This also includes situations not explicitly mentioned in the rules.

Linetoers and rule lawyers are usually shitheads anyways. This gives admins the power to actually ban them, and has a catch em all at the end. The catch em all might have to be removed, but it gives admins another power to ban for things like, say, crowbarring up all of the floortiles and flinging them at people. Sure, it's just annoying. But if ti gets out of hand e.g crowbarring all of arrivals hallway and making a million iron doors everywhere (which actually happened once >.>), they have the power to reprimend him.

Don't take mechs on the emergency shuttle or crew transfer shuttle. The exception here is Odysseus (medical) mechs that are carrying patients. The reason for this is because they block up the shuttle and make movement and everything else difficult. No mechs on pods, either.

I see no reason not to have this currently. Why the fuck do we not have this?

Subtle · Post by **Subtle** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:52 am #26008

There's some excellent discussion on both sides. My opening post was obviously too alarmist in all respects.
I'll accept the accusation that it's full of "boogiemen."

To clarify, the impressions I get from SoS' document are purely my own interpretation of it; they came off dangerously close to putting words in his mouth. What I'm suggesting we implement isn't anything similar to a canon backstory or forcing people to further develop their characters to a specific standard. The problems we have stem mostly from players who treat the roleplaying rules as an obstacle they intend to overcome in pursuit of "winning," whether antagonist or not.

In that same vein I don't understand this preoccupation with creating a universe people need to adhere to. We've always promoted a goofy, light-hearted sort of roleplay. The cavemen and asshole clowns, mafiosos and even the greyshirt culture have a lot of entertainment value. Just because we're, at least in metaphor, running a DnD game doesn't mean it has to be super-serious grimdark StarTrek. The people at the table (GMs and players alike) just need to make an effort keeping in character and the fun going for everyone. Perhaps "roleplay standards" gives the wrong impression.

Mainly I'd like to address metagaming in respect to the most obvious form. OOC knowledge about rounds, items, etc. being used as IC-reasoning. Many people here have beaten me to the punch in pointing out the solid idea behind the policies of stations like Urist, Bay, and others such as Paradise. They have an excellent idea of where to draw the line on antagonist gear. A gun is a gun, but a multitool flashing red? (An example I use because this has been accepted as a reason to permabrig someone. Can't complain, it's an antagonist item after all!) As for Cult/Revolution/Nuclear Operatives? It really doesn't hurt you to pretend they don't exist until you have reason to believe it. Nobody is ever going to ask you to stare down a construct and emote how terrified you are until it bashes your face in, and at the same time I think it's reasonable to ask people not to shout "VIVA" at roundstart.

For those interested I'll try and dig up the proposed Security Policy document assuming there's no objection to my making it available publicly.

EDIT: Here's the policy-draft, stripped of all the fun comments on the google-doc. (http://pastebin.com/GaJQGt78)
Keep in mind that this thing is a few months old and some of the concepts were heavily criticized. There's literally no point in debating the specifics therein.

Pandarsenic · Post by **Pandarsenic** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:55 am #26010

Post-round griff is funny and fun. It's a good place for people to unwind after a round.
Powergaming and metaknowledge down is good.
I already do short bans for people who do stupid restart votes too much.
Technically the line-toeing and rules lawyering is under Rule 1 maybe?
Mechs on the shuttle are usually nbd.

Alex Crimson · Post by **Alex Crimson** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:17 am #26012

If there is a problem with the whole metagaming via calling out Traitors items, rather than changing policies to stop it, why dont you just ask coders to disguise the items? I feel like there would be less resistance to the idea if it were done via changing game mechanics rather than through policies.

As for Nuke Op, Cult and such. I think its reasonable to expect players to continue with their jobs until they actually see an antag, or get orders from command staff to do something. Seeing a Chemist running around the station looking for Nuke Ops so he can use his acid grenade is rather shitty behavior.

Steelpoint · Post by **Steelpoint** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 2:38 am #26016

A few things I noted from that policy.

1: The Quartermaster is a full Head of Staff.
2: The Head of Personal has the same authority as the Captain, but answers to the Captain.
3: The Head of Security loses all rights to order an execution even if following protocol.
4: Security Officers are not actually Officers.

I'll give better feedback when I get a chance.

Subtle · Post by **Subtle** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 2:41 am #26017

It's outdated and rather off-topic for the thread, only supplied it for reference of the general tone.

mrpain · Post by **mrpain** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 3:43 am #26020

Look I've always thought that murderboning is a dull, uncreative, and sometimes frustrating thing for an antag to do, but please don't make this Baystation levels of hug-boxiness and take that ability away. Sometimes it's needed to keep a round from dragging out into a boring, stale snooze fest.

Post by **MisterPerson** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 3:58 am #26025

Alex Crimson wrote:If there is a problem with the whole metagaming via calling out Traitors items, rather than changing policies to stop it, why dont you just ask coders to disguise the items? I feel like there would be less resistance to the idea if it were done via changing game mechanics rather than through policies.

As for Nuke Op, Cult and such. I think its reasonable to expect players to continue with their jobs until they actually see an antag, or get orders from command staff to do something. Seeing a Chemist running around the station looking for Nuke Ops so he can use his acid grenade is rather shitty behavior.

They are disguised. What more do you want?

Raven776 · Post by **Raven776** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 4:10 am #26028

The general tone of that gives me cancer.

I enjoy RPing as much as the next guy, but that is just awful. It basically does nothing but shit on security. You can hold security to a higher standard as far as not ruining people's rounds go, but you can't just piss in their face and tell them they need to RP better because shitcurity in the past. I haven't even played security in over a year because of my shitty internet connection and I still feel bad for every admin bwoink they get because some greyshirt decided he needs to make life as impossible as he can for security and he gets thrown out an airlock by someone pushed to the ends of their wits.

Using that as any form of reference for how things should be is just gross.

The game isn't fine as is, but it's about as fine as we can make it and when we're running on the best shitty platform possible with the best shitty community possible, I think 'Kinda okay in the worst way possible' is exactly what makes SS13 the best thing ever. You get shit rounds, you get good rounds, and neither of them are the end of the world. For RP, you get what you give and you just need to learn to RP with the people who'll do it back. If you're security and you don't like what the HoS is doing, write up your little formal complaint and put it in a filing cabinet in the HoP's office with your roleplay and let it end there.

Roleplay is about endless possibilities, and SS13 facilitates that pretty well. Putting rules in about it is just wrecking what little freedom we have in the matter. You can't force people to RP, and saying you don't want the people who don't like your specific set of rules is pretty horrendous, especially when you're referencing some piece of shitcurity bashing strawman document like that as your intended tone for what you want the game to be.

UNLESS I've completely misunderstood everything said here because it's late where I am, in which case apologies for the large non-sequitor rant.

imblyings · Post by **imblyings** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 7:17 am #26036

What I'm suggesting we implement isn't anything similar to a canon backstory or forcing people to further develop their characters to a specific standard. The problems we have stem mostly from players who treat the roleplaying rules as an obstacle they intend to overcome in pursuit of "winning," whether antagonist or not.

doesn't mean it has to be super-serious grimdark StarTrek.

just need to make an effort keeping in character

Do you understand half the things you post or ask for. What do you mean by keeping in character? What if my character is a seventeen year old female med doctor with a floor-length braid and a PhD in killing antags? You need some sort of context in order to judge what is acceptable. Our standard may be that all characters get educated on how to do everything but unfortunately, get Centcom mindwiped on a lotta antag knowledge and furthermore, aren't psychopathic murderers who don't go after other psychopathic murderers wordlessly. This isn't a super-serious grimdark backstory. It works to limit power/meta/valid. But until you have some sort of standard, there is no clearly defined limit for powergaming or metagaming or validhunting or whatever.

OOC knowledge about rounds, items, etc. being used as IC-reasoning.

But since we have no official canon or backstory, it is completely wrong to call that knowledge OOC. My character happens to have witnessed or heard of pretty much everything in regards to antags. He knows that a multi-tool that flashes red is definitely not standard or anything that can be made on station and in fact is traitor gear because he has seen confirmed traitors carry that gear around. Since we have no canon stating that Centcom selectively mindwipes memories on antag knowledge, all of my characters knowledge is in fact IC. It does not matter if my character decides to just confiscate it and give it to RD or throw the owner of it into space, both actions are completely justified.

Are you starting to see why we need some sort of official canon or backstory.

and the fun going for everyone.

As for Cult/Revolution/Nuclear Operatives? It really doesn't hurt you to pretend they don't exist until you have reason to believe it.

Have fun telling security players they should pretend that revs or cults don't exist. Have fun wondering why sec players drop to a new minimum in record time. Cult, and rev in particular, powergame their hardest to kill security. Security naturally powergame back. Nuke ops? Nuke ops are geared to defend themselves from the entire crew- the majority of the crew has to help in the defence of the disk otherwise it is usually stolen. The crew can't afford to pretend nuke ops don't exist unless you want each nuke op round to consist of, 'oh hey Bob is engineering testing out a new red RIG sui-'.

You restrict both antags and non-antags or you do neither.

Again.

Nothing useful will be done and SoS will continue to cry until we have some sort of official canon or backstory in which to judge what is acceptable or not. But let's be honest, no one will come up with one, this thread will die off, a few months later someone will complain about 'a lack of roleplay' without explaining what they mean by that and the cycle starts again.

Steelpoint · Post by **Steelpoint** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:35 am #26040

A proper backstory is the correct way to go, we can't have any form of meaningful role play with nothing to use as a baseline to compare to any action a character does.

In that case, here's a mock example of some lore I wrote up in my spare time. If nothing this would help show us the direction we should try and go.

Spoiler:

Mat13295 · Post by **Mat13295** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:39 am #26042

>Implying /tg/ will ever react to "Add more RP" without starting a hugeass debate about what the base meaning of playing the role of a fake person and effectively railraod the discussion into philosophy instead

Best you guys are going to get is to add in stuff to encourage more character development and background, E.g Baystation's medical/security/employment records and that jazz.

Post by **lumipharon** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:50 am #26043

More RP is better, but you're not going to be able to get significant changes done all of a sudden. We need to make changes progressively, and see how the playbase accept and reacts to the changes, not just suddenly change all policy, then people will just leave/get banned.

Also jesus christ, stop shitting on security so much. Actually shitty sec is often an IC issue, and playing a role where you're expected to be the one going into danger, with your hands tied and the threat of ahelps down your neck is really awful. Security shouldn't be 'held to a higher standard', everyone should be held to a higher standard (compared to now), treat people equally, it's better for everyone in the end (non antags, sec, antags)
And things like allowing antags to shit on you because they're antags, but you can't in return is also really frustrating. Today I got into this big ahelp issue where I spaced a confirmed traitor, who had escaped perma, because the HoS was calling for help, and I had no time to drag this guy into the station and secure him, without the HoS quite possibly being killed by another traitor. Essentially I was told that trying to save lives at the expensive of an attempted murder, escaped convict is no ok as sec, I mean, what the hell? Why shouldn't I leave a antag to die to try save another officer, when an antag is full allowed to strip me naked and cuff me in a room in maint with no method of communication or escape?

But anyway, make changes in measured steps, otherwise it's just going to create awful drama and stir shit.But don't ever try enforce people having knowledge of jobs/being robust, or knowledge between scanning in a cloner and actually dying; it's way to hard to enforce and doesn't make things terribly more enjoyable, focus on RP which will make the game more enjoyable, and most really get the optional stuff in, literally because why not?

callanrockslol · Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:54 am

How about this, encourage roleplay until it gets into the way of being a bunch of psychopathic space hero's, then be psychopathic space hero's

Subtle · Post by **Subtle** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:30 pm #26069

I can't help but feel that the point is being overshadowed.

You simply don't need a set universe to prevent metagaming specifically. Other servers also address the "problem" of people using their character backgrounds to justify having extra knowledge about antagonists, etc. by just saying "you can't do that." I completely agree that baby steps are necessary to get anything other than wishful thinking out of this thread so let's focus on the problems we can solve rather than the more abstract issue of having well developed characters or an official canon. Also forgive me for the allcaps but...

YES, WE KNOW THE SEC-DOCUMENT IS EXTREMELY HARSH! IT'S NOT A CURRENT PROPOSAL!

When it was brought to the administrators we said the exact same things most of you are saying. It's highly restrictive of security practices, but it underlines an obvious desire to push policy in a more roleplay-oriented direction. There's some good that can come of it if we take the positive parts and rethink how they're applied, but that's neither here or now.

What I mean by "keeping in character" is simply not acknowledging you're in a game, or performing actions that would clearly be completely pointless/insane for a real human being when it comes to even antagonist actions. We're not asking you to curtail your IC knowledge beyond the (very reasonable) suggestion that your character as a nonantagonist doesn't know about antagonist practices. I'd like to be able to ask why someone was permabrigged, or why that antagonist just killed half the station and unleashed the singulo at 10m and have them give a better answer than "I'm an antagonist" or "he had noslips." Now most people consider that the baseline we're already meeting. I'd disagree.

This is something that's handled by policy, not backstory. As for a cult or revolution I again think you're overestimating the breadth of what would change. Pretending they don't exist basically only extends to metagaming the processes by which they work. That is to say slips of paper or runes (at first) being indicative of cult and people being flashed indicative of revolution. Please note what I said about constructs in the earlier post. Nobody is asking you to play ignorant to the extent that it gets you martyred for the sake of someone else's fun. A violent riot is a violent riot and people shouting about unearthly monsters doesn't need to be met with forced skepticism.

If I'm asking the nonantagonist players to roleplay during a revolution I'd expect the same of revolutionary players. Their powergaming to kill security isn't a reason why security can powergame, it's a problem with revolutionaries we need to fix. God knows that'll be a chore but revolution can be restrained from murderboning just like any other mode. In a perfect world you'd need a half decent reason to rip someone's face off regardless of your antagonist status, even if that reason just has to be something like "he witnessed my crimes" I feel we'll be making a huge step in the right direction.

Even Nuke OPs. It's okay to assume that someone in a strange spacesuit with guns, military gear and a cyborg labelled SYNDICATE isn't here to wire the solars.

You're very clearly missing my point if you think I wouldn't like this to apply to both antagonists and nonantagonists.

bandit · Post by **bandit** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 2:42 pm #26074

Honestly, I think we're going about it the same way. Hamstringing security is not the answer. Nor is hamstringing antags, really. What we need is for the IC roleplaying structures that are already built into the game to actually be used, and enforced if necessary. This means:

- Crew members are expected to follow the chain of command unless the order is blatantly outrageous or they are clearly being an insane comdom. If your departmental head orders you to do something, you do it. If you don't do it, you get warned and/or demoted. This is critical to RP, and if you don't have it, you basically don't have RP at all. It also means that antags with authority can actually be frightening in a way that is not simply the gamist "they have access and more toys."

- RP roles should actually carry weight. If security is being shitcurity, crew members need to be able to talk to the lawyer and the lawyer needs to actually be able to accomplish something. The detective should actually be a detective and talk to people and gather clues, not an on-call forensic scanner button that can be replaced with the HoS's ID card. The HoP should handle personnel matters, conflicts and general shit an HR department would handle, not be HoPcurity and/or Rorschach at a desk (and all the graytides and clowns will cry "GIVE ME ACCESS" etc.)

- Remove antag protection for all roles that currently have it, and with this remove the accompanying metagaming. I believe the current view of security as Validhunting Antagslaughtering Department 2555 is a direct consequence of security being unable to be antagonists. (Certainly it holds more weight than the hypothesis that graytiding was a response to security antag, as graytiding has not only failed to go away but increase.)

- There should be more encouragement for crew to work together during a round. If this takes crew objectives, so be it; at least that gets people into the habit of actually interacting.