Roundstart AI Lawsets

Nervere · Post by **Nervere** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:43 am #482365

https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/ ... s.txt#L343
Someone brought to my attention recently that we don't use random AI starting lawsets in our config.
I am not opposed to enabling such a config option, but I want to hear what the community and other headmins think about this topic.

Things to keep in mind:
1 - This may have been enabled in the past and had gone horribly. I don't recall anything like that though.
2 - Some lawsets are cancer. We'll have to discuss which lawsets are included, and what the weighting for the laws are.
3 - Our silicon policy is centered around Asimov. When I rework Silicon Policy, we'll have to account for non-Asimov lawsets being the norm, should this be enabled.

What do you all think?

Nervere · Post by **Nervere** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:49 am #482367

When I say, "cancer lawsets", yes, I mean P.A.L.A.D.I.N.

Post by **gum disease** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:39 am #482376

Sounds cool. Constantly being Asimov unless the AI is malf kinda gets dry, so I think having alternative lawsets would help make rounds a little more interesting. If push comes to shove and an AI is being obstinate or interpreting laws in a way that really toes rule 1, it's not hard to reset its laws, so it wouldn't be an arduous task for the crew to regain control of how they want silicons to behave. Hell, if it's being that much of a dick - card it/kill it.

There are really nice lawsets, like the reporter one that rarely seem to get used and I'd love to get that roundstart. I mean it still encourages Asimov-like behaviour, (I think?), but it's not boring. It's nice to go around the station and ask people what they're up to/make announcements or news stories about anything interesting that's going on. I think it has a positive effect on the round because it encourages a bit more RP/people to go and see things they might've otherwise missed.

It would also make some round-types a bit more bearable like revs/cult (when none of the heads/non-heretics or revs/cultists take it upon themselves to change the AI's laws) where being Asimov all round long honestly makes you want to suicide because ultimately, you're pissing off both sides of the conflict by trying to universally stop harm (which is damn near impossible or suicide if it's cult and a cultist has EMP prepared). Obviously this wouldn't stop some rounds being that way, but any kind of variety would be nice.

Post by **Ordo** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:50 am #482378

I strongly support enabling this for a number of reasons; this post isn't going to be as much about the individual weightings of this and that so much as the overarching reasoning for why I brought it up in the first place and think it's a good idea.

In part I support this because I play AI a lot and have found that the most engaging and fun interactions between the crew and AI center around laws being changed or the laws not being exactly what the crew expect, and in part because I don't think "AI DOOR" and its accoutrements make for particularly interesting interactions. Certainly one can have a fun stalemate about being let in to an area, and seeing the clown frantically try to gain entry to the upload or the captain's office before security turns him into a honking pulp can bring some chuckles to the crew and start to drive conflict, but it's very static. Past one's first week in SS13, interaction with the AI in normal conditions becomes rote and formulaic; the AI will ask people to not harm humans or break in to secure areas, these requests will be denied, the AI will lock doors, and the crew will Law 2 them open again. (Some of) the crew is also experienced in ferreting out changes to an Asimov lawset, and so when laws are changed, the effects tend to be noticed immediately; there usually isn't the tension-building slow realization that something isn't quite right with the AI, leading to interrogation and discovery. As it stands, we have "LAW 2 STATE LAW 4" and usually a purge/reset shortly thereafter, because the crew knows that resetting it is the 'safe' and normal path because it will get them back to Asimov. This obviously doesn't always work, due to Ion/hacked etc. but it is a better bet than I think it should be. Possibly the answer is to add in a percentage chance of an Ion law with each lawchange, but that is for another thread. By taking away that option we give the AI player more roles to act out, which is fun and challenging, and it keeps the crew excited and wondering what the next change will be.

There's also a particular issue with starting on Asimov, as opposed to another lawset, which I'm not convinced is great for driving the round: Asimov necessarily resists change, because if you can upload a law to it, you could cause some serious human harm. I think if the crew wants to create a 'safe' or predictable AI, they should have to at least sometimes work for it; this will generate conflict, and conflict is entertaining, especially because the crew will have to choose what kind of AI they want, and the AI may very well disagree with them and attempt, within its laws, to resist. Security will probably want corporate or paladin. The clown wants whatever will let him in to the upload to force station-wide honking announcements. The tiders want as many protections and accesses as they can squeeze out of the sillycons. And all of these outcomes can be fun and interesting for the crew to interact with.

Another reason I think this would be a good change is that the AI is one of the few entities on the station that can and usually does talk to everyone; so a change in the AI means a change everyone can see and interact with. As an example of a more localized change, bombing medbay annoys the fuck out of the injured and medical, but an engineer might not care so much until the SM begins displaying signs of discontent; so now you have players at different states of being out of the round in a way that doesn't create fun friction. This asymmetric round-engagement level is frustrating and doesn't use the players in the server to their maximum efficiency; ideally, I think, each player should be doing something to either progress the round, or be in a position where they can observe something exciting happening. I don't have the statbus to back me up on this, but I would be inclined to guess that playercount tends to drop sharply over these types of drawn-out rounds, simply because many players don't have anything to do nor any realistic hope of doing anything meaningful that round. Shuttlefights not born of tatortot activity can be really dull and drag on for a long time. You see this a lot in cult/rev rounds (FIND THAT HEAD), although there the problem is that while some players are out of the round, others are very deeply engaged in it. AIs can be a great way to prevent some of that asymmetry, by giving the entire crew a 'problem' to chew on, even if their own departments aren't functional or exciting.

An additional benefit of multiple laws in starting configuration is the ability to generate multiple different 'normal' states for the crew. Currently, anything other than asimov is an oddity, and will be reacted to with heightened interest and suspicion. But if there are normal rounds with corporate, normal rounds with reporter, normal round with, Paladin, new possibilities for subtle variations on those normal gamestates crop up. Consider the following scenario:
An AI has just had its lawset changed to corporate by a sneaky erstwhile quartermaster, recently free of the brig and demoted, in retaliation for wrongs done to cargonia and the pursuit of credits; no doubt security had offended by ordering such frivolities as 'mindshields' and 'riot suits'. This is a large departure from the norm; changing to corporate actively strips away protections that the crew formerly had, and as such, any change in the state of the AI from Asimov can be seen as a hostile act. The once-QM probably ends up arrested again and has his organs sold for ironic justice. This isn't a bad story to be a part of, but it's limited.

However if instead of being a massive sea-change from Asimov to corporate, the AI subtly changes from a regular corporate lawset, into a machine that thinks all profit comes from selling organs (and security officers are healthier and thus have better organs of course), you have a type of interaction that can slowly build conflict and entangle more of the crew in the story. The crew is already used to corporate, in this case; rather than being harmed (or at least having protection from harm removed), they can join in as accomplices. Another element of that example is that currently WHENEVER there's a new lawset, it's a notable event, usually followed by frantic shouts of STATE FLAWS and similar. By creating situations where corporate or crewsimov or reporter are the 'normal' for the station, you can have rounds evolve in a very different way even without direct crew-AI interaction. Knowing that there is an AI on reporter may inspire an attention-hungry greyshirt to take up vigilantism and don the mantle of the Owl, because now they know that their actions will be communicated to the rest of the crew. People rarely get to interact with these different lawsets for long, and as such many gimmicks and RP avenues go unexplored.

This isn't at all to say that we should have the AI be the sole or even primary round-driving force; that role is obviously reserved for the clown and clown alone. But I do think we have a fundamentally underutilized resource in the variety of lawsets out there, and that if silicon policy is going to be overhauled, that as much information as is practical should be gathered about different states of interaction between the crew and silicon before embarking on serious alterations to our (currently byzantine) silicon policy.

wesoda25 · Post by **wesoda25** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 2:12 am #482382

Absolutely fucking not. This is the piece of cancer feature which makes other servers so trash. Asimov is the ideal lawset for multiple reasons. First of all, it puts silicons at their ideal role of being mild, nonharmful subservients of man. This is the reason they were added, and while law changes exist, they are not intended to be exchangeable aside from actual IC intervention and reasoning.

Also, if other lawsets could be chosen, such as PALADIN, the absolute cancer which is validhunting AIs will be encouraged and seen far more commonly. Imagine trying to so something roundstart as a traitor and getting your ass blasted because you didn’t know the AIs laws.

And most important of all, if this were to be merged, you better either give humans a massive buff, massive nerfs to nonhumans, or straight up remove nonhumans. After all, you’re stripping humans of their single advantage over all other species: asimov protection.

Ayy Lemoh · Post by **Ayy Lemoh** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 3:18 am #482388

wesoda25 wrote:And most important of all, if this were to be merged, you better either give humans a massive buff, massive nerfs to nonhumans, or straight up remove nonhumans. After all, you’re stripping humans of their single advantage over all other species: asimov protection.

Lizards have an advantage that isn't .001% protection and weakness against specific temperatures? This isn't the old days so lizard metafriend gang networks don't really exist anymore so that is not an advantage right now.

wesoda25 · Post by **wesoda25** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 3:28 am #482394

Jerry I honestly have no clue what you’re saying, why the fuck are you talking about lizard metagroups?

If your argument is that “those days are past us, nonhumans are well integrated and deserve rights and asimov protection” I disagree. Nonhumans were added with the idea of humans always being on top, to make asimov not roundstart would be to make nonhumans equal with humans. If you don’t see whats wrong with going against the entire reason these species exist, read animal farm or some shit.

Or who knows maybe thats not your argument and you’re just memeing.

Post by **zxaber** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:14 am #482402

wesoda25 wrote:And most important of all, if this were to be merged, you better either give humans a massive buff, massive nerfs to nonhumans, or straight up remove nonhumans. After all, you’re stripping humans of their single advantage over all other species: asimov protection.

I don't know how much we really care about making sure each race has its positive traits, but that is the one Humans get.
Of course, Cats don't have any buff at all, that I'm aware of anyway. Is that fine because they're now semi-locked? Maybe, but they weren't locked for a long time and still never had a bonus.

--

I'm not really sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, I like Asimov and how it affects AI/Borg interaction with the crew. It does help give some extra meaning for people playing as non-human races, and having to harp on Sec to keep them behaving (and the fact that they have a "transfer room" not covered on AI cameras) is neat. I don't have the most hours as AI, but for the time I've spent as one, I do enjoy the Asimov lawset. On the other hand, it would be neat if sometimes AI's wouldn't be required to obey law 2 orders at round start, and could be a neat way to add some variety to the silicons' rounds. I will say that, should this get enabled, it might (and emphasis on 'might') be necessary to have an automatic law statement at round-start if the AI isn't on Asimov.

subject217 · Post by **subject217** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:16 am #482406

ordom isn't really wrong about law changes being the interesting part of ai but all alternative lawsets to asimov basically fall into 3 categories: Validhunt, murder everyone, and do what I want (which is to validhunt or murder everyone)

the interesting law changes are pretty much always custom laws. it's not really a bad idea to encourage that more but this is a bad way to go about it imo. might be a good idea if someone came up with more lawsets that didn't suck so we could trash all the others. currently, this just means that 75% of the time the AI starts with a more obnoxious (to everyone else) lawset than asimov.

Shadowflame909 · Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:19 am

Nervere wrote:https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/ ... s.txt#L343
Someone brought to my attention recently that we don't use random AI starting lawsets in our config.
I am not opposed to enabling such a config option, but I want to hear what the community and other headmins think about this topic.

Things to keep in mind:
1 - This may have been enabled in the past and had gone horribly. I don't recall anything like that though.
2 - Some lawsets are cancer. We'll have to discuss which lawsets are included, and what the weighting for the laws are.
3 - Our silicon policy is centered around Asimov. When I rework Silicon Policy, we'll have to account for non-Asimov lawsets being the norm, should this be enabled.

What do you all think?

I don't want to be that non human race hating shitter here yet

Isn't one of the whole cons of Non-Human races not having any authority over the Ai?

if that goes away, I would hope there'd be a replacement. Codewise or Ruleswise.

These non humans are already more robust then me, what happens when the rules start backing them!1!

Skillywatt · Post by **Skillywatt** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:15 am #482422

I have a lot of reservations about this. Silicons influence every aspect of the game and you can argue that the game is pseudo balanced around it. Random roundstart lawsets would fuck with a lot of shit.

Further, if you're just going to remove "cancer" lawsets, then I don't really see the point in this.

Also, if you have "cancer" lawsets you wouldn't want being rolled, why are they even available for installation?

I understand this crosses into the realm of coding rather than policy, per se, but it seems a better solution is to tweak Asimov and the other lawsets.

Also, it would be kinda neat for the AI to spawn lawless and the captain or whoever has to install laws for the AI to be able to act.. although, I'm not sure how this would really work. Maybe if they spawn with a single law that says you can't physically interact with the crew until laws are installed, and if no laws are installed within 2 minutes, Asimov is automatically uploaded. May help with greyshits "ai open" tech storage and shit at round start. That's pretty shit though, I realize. Just dunno how to make that work.

Malkraz · Post by **Malkraz** » Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:19 am #482495

Ultimately this would depend on who is playing the AI. It'd be easy to land yourself in rounds where you're immediately getting fucked around by a tider with the ability to shock doors anywhere on the station in 2 clicks.
I have no real problems with how Asimov is currently handled and I think other lawsets should be kept as an occasional "let's try something different" event. There's still plenty of leniency you can exercise with Asimov, it's just a matter of finding those boundaries.

WarbossLincoln · Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:08 pm

gum disease wrote:It would also make some round-types a bit more bearable like revs/cult (when none of the heads/non-heretics or revs/cultists take it upon themselves to change the AI's laws) where being Asimov all round long honestly makes you want to suicide because ultimately, you're pissing off both sides of the conflict by trying to universally stop harm (which is damn near impossible or suicide if it's cult and a cultist has EMP prepared). Obviously this wouldn't stop some rounds being that way, but any kind of variety would be nice.

That would remove the fun of messing with dumbass captains though. So many captains announce over command or sec channel "It's revs, I'm going to go change the AI's laws" and then get mad when I refuse to let them in. All you have to do is not say that you want to change laws because it's a revolution and I'll let you in. It's not hard but so many people screw it up.

Post by **Arianya** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:56 pm #482981

Realistically this is the kind of fundamental change that would need to be put to player vote. Both whether it should be on and which lawsets should be in rotation (IRV) with a cutoff at 3 or less.

terranaut · Post by **terranaut** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:18 pm #483000

I'm not gonna make a really long post but I think Asimov and Corporate should both be 50/50

Post by **zxaber** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:58 pm #483017

If this feature was put in place, I'd prefer if Asimov still had a higher weight by far. That way it's an occasional departure from Asimov rather than being a constant grab bag of laws.

Post by **oranges** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:59 pm #483126

we left it as a config so if anyone ever decided to fuck up the game balance at least we wouldn't be responsible

Ayy Lemoh · Post by **Ayy Lemoh** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 12:52 am #483135

wesoda25 wrote:Jerry I honestly have no clue what you’re saying, why the fuck are you talking about lizard metagroups?

If your argument is that “those days are past us, nonhumans are well integrated and deserve rights and asimov protection” I disagree. Nonhumans were added with the idea of humans always being on top, to make asimov not roundstart would be to make nonhumans equal with humans. If you don’t see whats wrong with going against the entire reason these species exist, read animal farm or some shit.

Or who knows maybe thats not your argument and you’re just memeing.

yeah, im just asking a question. what benefits do they have besides snowflake features and a really minor niche? besides that, it is basically an issue of "now i can't send my goons against the ligger antag"

I am not defending different lawsets or making lizzers have equal rights. I just want to know what fucking advantage they have.

wesoda25 · Post by **wesoda25** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:10 am #483145

They don’t. Which is the spot for nonhumans. You sacrifice your asimov protection, but become a separate race. This would put all nonhumans on tier with humans, which is obviously against the reason for their existence.

All things aside this is a nonhuman buff. Yes, it would add flavor, variety, and complexity for people playing as AI, along with the crew, but at what cost? Another 8 pages tagged onto the already massive silicon policy? Shitty AI players looking for any excuse to valid hunt, maybe even being obligated to by their laws? Imagine the floods of ban appeals we’d get as AIs do shit and try to validate it, with admins having to enforce an entirely new set of silicon policy. Not to mention, balance and lore involving nonhumans completely thrown out the window. Nah.

Malkraz · Post by **Malkraz** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:49 am #483164

hehe you wanted to play the game in the first 3 minutes? sorry captain but my lawset allows me to shockbolt you into your room permanently : )

Gigapuddi420 · Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:54 am

Nothing stopping the Captain or RD from changing back to asimov, or adding laws to reflect the lower status of those non-human races. The point is kind of moot as all non-human races have negatives besides not being asimov compliant. Asimov would still exist and crew would be encouraged to care more about what lawset they are on. If they care about non-humans being uplifted they can still act on that because go figure, no non-human Heads of Staff.

That said, the second point about silicon policy already being complicated enough for our default lawset is something I agree with. Without some work on silicon policy like taking a axe to it and stripping out as much of the clutter as possible making the other lawsets fall into the default catagory would be increasing the minefield silicon players already have to navigate. Though I don't know, Heads of Staff already can (and often do) change the laws from default and all this proposal means is increasing how often that happens. I'm opposed to it, but it's not something I think we need either.

Malkraz · Post by **Malkraz** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:46 am #483176

Gigapuddi420 wrote:Nothing stopping the Captain or RD from changing back to asimov

except the AI

Tlaltecuhtli · Thu Mar 14, 2019 9:31 am

paladin is the crew friendly lawset for stuff like cult/rev/ nigger one humaning the ai i dont see why remove it as else ppl will just copy paste law 4: bad ppl not human

Not-Dorsidarf · Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:03 pm

Tlaltecuhtli wrote:paladin is the crew friendly lawset for stuff like cult/rev/ nigger one humaning the ai i dont see why remove it as else ppl will just copy paste law 4: bad ppl not human

Well that's how people play it, because its vague and useless if you try to actually follow the laws

confused rock · Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:26 pm

Ai’s already a shitshow, laws are followed loosely enough that purged ais can’t kill everyone and usin loopholes is being an obnoxious lawsets, any lawset that isn’t asimov or a onehuman variant is a joke

Post by **Ordo** » Fri Mar 15, 2019 12:34 pm #483456

Gigapuddi420 wrote:Nothing stopping the Captain or RD from changing back to asimov, or adding laws to reflect the lower status of those non-human races. The point is kind of moot as all non-human races have negatives besides not being asimov compliant. Asimov would still exist and crew would be encouraged to care more about what lawset they are on. If they care about non-humans being uplifted they can still act on that because go figure, no non-human Heads of Staff.

That said, the second point about silicon policy already being complicated enough for our default lawset is something I agree with. Without some work on silicon policy like taking a axe to it and stripping out as much of the clutter as possible making the other lawsets fall into the default catagory would be increasing the minefield silicon players already have to navigate. Though I don't know, Heads of Staff already can (and often do) change the laws from default and all this proposal means is increasing how often that happens. I'm opposed to it, but it's not something I think we need either.

I think your point regarding silicon policy argues for testing more lawsets, not fewer. Assuming we want silicon policy to be a generalized guide to behavior while playing a silicon, that policy will need to account for an incredibly wide variety of lawsets and scenarios. Because unless we remove the freeform lawcard, then there will be odd situations; and that's half the fun of AI anyway. Part of the current problem with silicon-crew interactions viz. policy is that the moment someone puts in an ambiguously worded law 4, we're already in the 'use good faith' realm. Current policy just requires you pick a reasonable interpretation and stick to it consistently, but that creates a problem where the crew and AI have wildly different expectations of what will happen, and while that can be incredibly fun a-la Monkey's Paw targeted karma-strikes, it can also turn in to competitive rules lawyering in ooc/ick fashion, with people arguing about silicon policy in game through thinly veiled references.

I think that if we'd like to alter silicon policy to be better, that seeing the innumerable edge-cases and counter-intuitive results is important. If AI going full murderbone or shockbolting the Captain into his office just because they don't have laws NOT to do so is a problem, that seems like something that SillyPolicy should address, as opposed to leaving it to to chance. Purged AI are not antag, they just get escalation rights, but it seems like the crew and many AI don't understand this, in part because that statement is buried under the section labelled "Asimov Specific Policies", which again speaks to the problem of having silicon policy balanced around a single lawset.

tl;dr
If we make a new silicon policy but the vast majority of all playtime is on asimov parameters, silicon policy probably won't be balanced well for when things are not asimov, which is where a significant amount of the rancor about silicon policy comes from in the first place, rendering the new silicon policy at best marginally better than the old.

WarbossLincoln · Fri Mar 15, 2019 1:58 pm

Arianya wrote:Realistically this is the kind of fundamental change that would need to be put to player vote. Both whether it should be on and which lawsets should be in rotation (IRV) with a cutoff at 3 or less.

I think it could work if silicon policy and lawsets get some rework done. Which I know is being considered

confused rock wrote:Ai’s already a shitshow, laws are followed loosely enough that purged ais can’t kill everyone and usin loopholes is being an obnoxious lawsets, any lawset that isn’t asimov or a onehuman variant is a joke

the rock has a point. It's too easy to loophole the other lawsets into you being a complete dick. That's fine, and is a big part of being an AI, but it would be tiresome if it could happen any given round without a player uploading them manually.

I would kind of like to see ion storms have a chance to swap you to a different lawset(not antimov or 02 is poisonous, or maybe a super low chance). That could be interesting.

Dr_bee · Post by **Dr_bee** » Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:09 pm #483559

Dronemother existing without drones makes me sad.

Making the strange and esoteric lawset boards available via RnD would be nice, but roundstart lawset changes would be a pain in the ass for AIs. greyshits would immedately scream AI rogue every round the AI didnt roll asimov because the AI told them no.

imsxz · Post by **imsxz** » Sat Mar 16, 2019 3:05 am #483615

im probably alone here but i dont really like lawsets that force me to validhunt, shit like paladin/robocop/corporate/most non-asimov lawsets where i cant brush off the assistant breaking into tech storage and im forced to make an ass of myself screeching about it to get them arrested

i always preferred to play sillycucks as a passive support role for the majority, opening doors and such and saving people that are dying, playing aggressive as borg makes me feel gross most of the time.

Malkraz · Post by **Malkraz** » Sat Mar 16, 2019 3:21 am #483616

based imsxz

Post by **Dax Dupont** » Sat Mar 16, 2019 12:28 pm #483660

Do it

WarbossLincoln · Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:42 pm

imsxz wrote:brush off the assistant breaking into tech storage and im forced to make an ass of myself screeching about it to get them arrested

Same, I have more fun watching Sec get butthurt because I didn't report a crime spree that wasn't harmful.

"WHERE IS ALL THE SHIT IN MY OFFICE?"
"Gone"
"WHERE"
"Someone took everything after I let them in"
"WHO?"
"I'm not telling you, you harmed the last person who tresspassed in your office"
"REEEEEE AI ROG"

Reece1995 · Post by **Reece1995** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 12:29 pm #485170

Malkraz wrote:
Gigapuddi420 wrote:Nothing stopping the Captain or RD from changing back to asimov
except the AI

If AI is being played by a non turd then all the captain should do is bring another head of staff with him and the AI should let him in, or hell, any two heads of staff.

WarbossLincoln · Thu Mar 21, 2019 6:50 pm

Malkraz wrote:
Gigapuddi420 wrote:Nothing stopping the Captain or RD from changing back to asimov
except the AI

Unless you have a reason to believe the law change will be harmful(like a dummy captain who says "I'm going to change the AI's laws so we can kill the cult") you're supposed to let the Captain or RD in to do it.

leibniz · Post by **leibniz** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 7:43 pm #485236

While we are here, let's fix paladin by removing "respect legitimate authority" so it has actually interesting opportunities

Maybe add something like "Respect courage and selflessness." in its place.

Malkraz · Post by **Malkraz** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 8:12 pm #485243

WarbossLincoln wrote:
Malkraz wrote:
Gigapuddi420 wrote:Nothing stopping the Captain or RD from changing back to asimov
except the AI
Unless you have a reason to believe the law change will be harmful(like a dummy captain who says "I'm going to change the AI's laws so we can kill the cult") you're supposed to let the Captain or RD in to do it.

We're talking about changing TO Asimov here, so there's likely no law dictating this.

Farquaar · Post by **Farquaar** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 1:11 am #485420

leibniz wrote:While we are here, let's fix paladin by removing "respect legitimate authority" so it has actually interesting opportunities

Maybe add something like "Respect courage and selflessness." in its place.

This is a good idea, though a voice in the back of my head tells me that some AIs will abuse it to take the side of antags because "they're being brave to serve the syndicate"

lmwevil · Post by **lmwevil** » Sun Mar 24, 2019 10:12 am #485989

imsxz wrote: i always preferred to play sillycucks as a passive support role for the majority, opening doors and such and saving people that are dying, playing aggressive as borg makes me feel gross most of the time.

InsaneHyena · Post by **InsaneHyena** » Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:14 pm #486015

Just use the up to date paladin code from the Fifth Edition.

Honesty. Don't lie or cheat. Let your word be your promise.
Courage. Never fear to act, though caution is wise.
Compassion. Aid others, protect the weak, and punish those who threaten them. Show mercy to your foes, but temper it with wisdom.
Honor. Treat others with fairness, and let your honorable deeds be an example to them. Do as much good as possible while causing the least amount of harm.
Duty. Be responsible for your actions and their consequences, protect those entrusted to your care, and obey those who have just authority over you.

Grazyn · Post by **Grazyn** » Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:33 am #486144

1. Be without fear in the face of your enemies.
2. Be brave and upright that God may love thee.
3. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death.
4. Safeguard the helpless and do no wrong.

Post by **Cobby** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:14 pm #487020

Sure so long as you can make a set of default lawsets that 1) retain neutrality and 2) not require a policy writeup equivalent to asimov.