[Proposal] The Mergening

[TheBibleMelts]

Bottom post of the previous page:

Overview: Toss MRP/LRP tags into the trash, and instead grade the servers based on the threat level setting that dynamic will throw at them on an average basis. Overall goals would be getting the community to mingle more between servers depending on what kind of shift they want to play. You want high-octane chaos? You got it. You want chill spess vibes and project building sectors? You can have it.

Terry/Sybil - High Danger Sectors

Basil - Medium Threat/Wildcard Sector

Manuel/Campbell - Low Threat Sectors

Q: What about the MRP ruleset on Manuel?

Most people who shift between Manuel and the other servers will already tell you that the line between /tg/'s "LRP and MRP" experience is already almost indistinguishable in regards to the quality of RP offered, with the MRP rulesets as they are being used currently mostly acting to amplify an already existing rule infraction you're doing in instances of a bwoinking.

I'd like to trim down and adjust the RP ruleset to what's being realistically enforced as the rules that promote good-faith gameplay, and then apply that ruleset universally between all servers - bringing us back to one community with one ruleset. Overall, this would raise the floor of RP on Sybil/Terry/Basil, (to essentially raise it back from the perception that they're the 'NRP' servers) and allow the higher-level of RP people anticipate from Manuel to be sourced from a position of lower station-ending threats to deal with, as opposed to strictly enforced regulations on how they're allowed to RP.

I'd like to hear the general perception on this idea from the community before I get ahead of myself and begin drafting the roleplay rules adaptations.

I was going to scrap this as a concept, but some folks prompted me to share it and see if it was worth workshopping some more. I've already had some very valid concerns over this shared with me by some people of whose opinions I respect very much, and am likely not to press this as a goal without taking both community and administrative feedback deeply to heart.

[Cheshify]

some of the mrp rules should not be implemented if there ever was a merge, like rpr 7 & 9 but im all for it

Out of curiosity, why not?

[NecromancerAnne]

some of the mrp rules should not be implemented if there ever was a merge, like rpr 7 & 9 but im all for it

You know, those aren't as actively restrictive as you think they are unless you're actively bulldozing everything in a mad dash for power. And I mean gunning for it. RPR 7 gets applied as Rule 12+. If you are character focused, it usually isn't a problem, because powergaming is typically only an issue if you are doing it too frequently as to be noticeable, or in a way that you are actively making yourself a problem for others in your pursuit (such as theft and B&E, or RPR 9). It's usually more likely that you're running into problems via RPR 4, because you're making yourself a bigger opponent to overcome regardless of an active threat, and the pursuit of power over the course of the round probably shouldn't be your only focus. It is usually done as a way to enter into conflicts with antags with a significant advantage or posturing in a way to goad them into that conflict before revealing your significant lead in power. People have been very able to become powerful on Manuel without being at the exclusion of other considerations if they do so with a degree of tact/roleplay and interaction involved. (Obviously, some roles do this naturally via their job content; in those cases, it is not a RPR 7 problem, but a game design consideration)

RPR 9 has the caveat of allowing you to assume responsibilities of empty departments. If you're breaking in to do someones departmental work on them, while the department is staffed, without actually being a part of the work with those in it, you that is when you're breaking this rule. Ask them first, and let them take the initiative. That's it. I would go as far to say that it's almost a more pointed request to allow people to play their role without you kicking them out of the way (potentially literally) because they're an inconvenience, and feeds back into RPR 7 and rule 12. And by extent, rule 1. Asking first and it still being a problem is a stronger cause for conflict to occur, after all, then you simply forcing the conflict by making yourself a problem. This has precedent even on the core servers as a thing you may want to keep to a minimum just so you're not forcing people to escalate into you too much because you're B&E into every department and stealing their stuff. And players have been banned in the past on the core ruleset if this behaviour happens too frequently (extreme tiding more or less).

These are only a problem if you are never touching your talk button and showing any degree of self control and consideration for the play experience of others. Its the bare minimum expectation of courtesy, and is the basis of all the RPR's rules for the most part. If we can't make these concessions, what is the point in retaining any of them, they're all focused on that same goal. Less convenient for you, but considerate of the other party in a given situation.

[wesoda25]

Looking at RP rules, I'd prefer if 5 and 9 never touch LRP. I also think we could do without 7. Rule 4 from the base ruleset should absolutely not be touched imo.

Explanations:

► Show Spoiler

RP 5 & Base 4: Specifically, I don't ever want to see a Sybil/Bagil (should it regain pop) where murderboning isn't allowed. Your round and your personal narrative within it is not sacred. More on that later.
RP 7: Unnecessary imo, I think base rule 12 contains the most important section from RP 7: play2win is not allowed. I'm not familiar with current enforcement of the rule but I assume that LRPmins dont use it as much as they could. In that sense I'd be happy to see some admins with MRP sensibilities change its enforcement. The positive effect of this is that we'll see the worst sort of murderbone be curbed, and hopefully only the more interesting/fun forms of it will survive.
RP 9: Specifically I dislike the second sentence of precedent 2: that players being unable or unwilling to assist you is not a valid reason to stray from your lane. I say fuck that, I'd sooner deal with underage troglodytes who insist on doing everything themselves than with that sort of limitation.

In all this sort of merge would be fun and probably ultimately good, but you'd also trample on a LOT in the process. That seems arrogant to me. I don't see this happening, but cheers to the thought
PS: itd be neat to see how much support this gets from both admins and players, server by server

[Cheshify]

some of the mrp rules should not be implemented if there ever was a merge, like rpr 7 & 9 but im all for it

You know, those aren't as actively restrictive as you think they are unless you're actively bulldozing everything in a mad dash for power. And I mean gunning for it. RPR 7 gets applied as Rule 12+. If you are character focused, it usually isn't a problem, because powergaming is typically only an issue if you are doing it too frequently as to be noticeable, or in a way that you are actively making yourself a problem for others in your pursuit (such as theft and B&E, or RPR 9). It's usually more likely that you're running into problems via RPR 4, because you're making yourself a bigger opponent to overcome regardless of an active threat, and the pursuit of power over the course of the round probably shouldn't be your only focus. It is usually done as a way to enter into conflicts with antags with a significant advantage or posturing in a way to goad them into that conflict before revealing your significant lead in power. People have been very able to become powerful on Manuel without being at the exclusion of other considerations if they do so with a degree of tact/roleplay and interaction involved. (Obviously, some roles do this naturally via their job content; in those cases, it is not a RPR 7 problem, but a game design consideration)

RPR 9 has the caveat of allowing you to assume responsibilities of empty departments. If you're breaking in to do someones departmental work on them, while the department is staffed, without actually being a part of the work with those in it, you that is when you're breaking this rule. Ask them first, and let them take the initiative. That's it. I would go as far to say that it's almost a more pointed request to allow people to play their role without you kicking them out of the way (potentially literally) because they're an inconvenience, and feeds back into RPR 7 and rule 12. And by extent, rule 1. Asking first and it still being a problem is a stronger cause for conflict to occur, after all, then you simply forcing the conflict by making yourself a problem. This has precedent even on the core servers as a thing you may want to keep to a minimum just so you're not forcing people to escalate into you too much because you're B&E into every department and stealing their stuff. And players have been banned in the past on the core ruleset if this behaviour happens too frequently (extreme tiding more or less).

These are only a problem if you are never touching your talk button and showing any degree of self control and consideration for the play experience of others. Its the bare minimum expectation of courtesy, and is the basis of all the RPR's rules for the most part. If we can't make these concessions, what is the point in retaining any of them, they're all focused on that same goal. Less convenient for you, but considerate of the other party in a given situation.

This post kind of sums up what some of my thoughts on RPR 7 & 9 are. Powergaming is not when you're reasonably prepared to handle issues the rounds present, it's when you're overpreparing to demolish any issue that could make the round interesting by instantly murdering it. Staying In Your Lane is not being forced to only do what your job signed up as, it's a protection against people who are going to prevent you from doing what your department is for and invalidating any RP or job content that you otherwise signed up for.

Both of these rules exist to give a little bit of OOC backing for people, and both of them can be entirely ignored in what's essentially normal LRP gameplay by making the game fun for others, cooperating, and roleplaying wacky scenarios. Wordlessly making yourself into a stunimmune hulk with every gun you could find by hacking into departments and stealing things adds nothing but dead antags to a round, but signing up as a scientist, and working with other departments on a Super Soldier program adds to the round by giving people a plot hook to follow and allowing antagonists to bounce off of that in ways that make things better for everyone.

I have my own thoughts on how SS13 combat is more fun the less prepared both parties are for it, but that's probably better for another post.

[saprasam]

some of the mrp rules should not be implemented if there ever was a merge, like rpr 7 & 9 but im all for it

Out of curiosity, why not?

i dislike rpr 9 because i am a simple man. if i want to do something that isn't in my job's expectations i do not want to be punished for it, especially if i have done what is needed of me beforehand (for example if im a scientist deciding to go help medical for whatever reason, usually dicking about/bored.)(like thats ever gonna happen)

some of the mrp rules should not be implemented if there ever was a merge, like rpr 7 & 9 but im all for it

wordswordswordsjesuschristwords

words

i agree with the powergaming thing, i just ultimately felt like the rule was a bit vague. at what point would it have been considered powergaming is my thought, but you've demonstrated that it's for the type of people who speedrun ephedrine meth combos and the like roundstart.

i still disagree with rule 9 as although i can see the reasoning behind players overtaking job content, most of the time it's minor things like "speedrunning hi-parts as a secoff so that they don't have to waste 35 seconds recharging a gun". i only really see the value in this rule if somebody were to say, overtake the entire medbay's job wordlessly, but at that point i really feel like that's a player problem instead of a rules issue.

[bluedino1025]

I am not a fan of this due to the different cultures between servers, plus the rp rules do relatively help Manuel filter out the shitters.

[Hoolny]

If this means increasing the current threat on sybil and making basil different from sybil in some way Im all for it

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Powergaming is not when you're reasonably prepared to handle issues the rounds present, it's when you're overpreparing to demolish any issue that could make the round interesting by instantly murdering it. Staying In Your Lane is not being forced to only do what your job signed up as, it's a protection against people who are going to prevent you from doing what your department is for and invalidating any RP or job content that you otherwise signed up for.

See, these are the kind of opinions where i'm like "Yeah, that's absolute true and I agree with this" but that is only the case for the current headadmin term. There's no guarantee without writing it down ironclad that this will survive past the next six months - there've been plenty of admins who disagreed in the past and I'm sure there'll be plenty in the future. There's a pretty long history on tg of the admin team having to vaguely guess the meaning of a "this is obvious ok" ruling/definition written five years ago by an old headmin, and on a topic as charged as "what is powergaming?" you basically guarantee rules drift, you know?

Is stealing the lawyer's spare sunglasses at roundstart every round to become revproof powergaming?
What if you also steal your departmental sec locker headset (never used by any officer ever) so you're flashbang immune too?
What if you're also making a stunprod and stashing it in your office gearlocker?

Does it change whether these are powergaming if the person doing them never seeks out fights or antags and only plays reactively towards them?

Admin opinions on powergaming can range from "The first step is already powergaming" to "none of these steps are powergaming"

[sinfulbliss]

some of the mrp rules should not be implemented if there ever was a merge, like rpr 7 & 9 but im all for it

powergaming is typically only an issue if you are doing it too frequently as to be noticeable, or in a way that you are actively making yourself a problem for others in your pursuit (such as theft and B&E, or RPR 9).

This is very untrue in my experience. One time I logged on Manuel by accident thinking it was Sybil, and got noted for powergaming as sec because I had a shotgun loaded with improv shells. They were never used. I’m not saying that’s unjust or anything, but I think it flies in the face of your assertion that it’s only an issue if “frequent or noticeable,” or “making an issue,” since none of these applied here.

I think asking ourselves “WHY is powergaming allowed on LRP?” is an important question. The reason, as far as I can tell, is because of antag freedoms and general chaos levels. It is very likely you find yourself engaged in a fight, it’s very likely the station deteriorates into some unique flavor of a hellscape — it makes sense to let players grab some gamergear to try to survive it.

[Hoolny]

some of the mrp rules should not be implemented if there ever was a merge, like rpr 7 & 9 but im all for it

powergaming is typically only an issue if you are doing it too frequently as to be noticeable, or in a way that you are actively making yourself a problem for others in your pursuit (such as theft and B&E, or RPR 9).

This is very untrue in my experience. One time I logged on Manuel by accident thinking it was Sybil, and got noted for powergaming as sec because I had a shotgun loaded with improv shells. They were never used. I’m not saying that’s unjust or anything, but I think it flies in the face of your assertion that it’s only an issue if “frequent or noticeable,” or “making an issue,” since none of these applied here.

I think asking ourselves “WHY is powergaming allowed on LRP?” is an important question. The reason, as far as I can tell, is because of antag freedoms and general chaos levels. It is very likely you find yourself engaged in a fight, it’s very likely the station deteriorates into some unique flavor of a hellscape — it makes sense to let players grab some gamergear to try to survive it.

Murderboning and Valid hunting are two sides of the same coin.

Both are the biggest extents of player freedom, thats what they represent and thats why their allowed.

If you allow murderboning but not valid hunting the balance crumbles with the antagonist having an unfair advantage every round.

If you allow valid hunting but nor murderboning the balance crumbles with the crew having an unfair advantage every round.

You have to either not allow both or allow both.

As sybil allows both it stands for letting players have the utmost freedom by so letting them "power game".

Meanwhile, manuel chooses to have neither and replaces it with administrative action putting the power not in the people but the governing body.

This is the main difference between LRP and MRP what do you value more freedom or safety?

[Cheshify]

Powergaming is not when you're reasonably prepared to handle issues the rounds present, it's when you're overpreparing to demolish any issue that could make the round interesting by instantly murdering it. Staying In Your Lane is not being forced to only do what your job signed up as, it's a protection against people who are going to prevent you from doing what your department is for and invalidating any RP or job content that you otherwise signed up for.

See, these are the kind of opinions where i'm like "Yeah, that's absolute true and I agree with this" but that is only the case for the current headadmin term. There's no guarantee without writing it down ironclad that this will survive past the next six months - there've been plenty of admins who disagreed in the past and I'm sure there'll be plenty in the future. There's a pretty long history on tg of the admin team having to vaguely guess the meaning of a "this is obvious ok" ruling/definition written five years ago by an old headmin, and on a topic as charged as "what is powergaming?" you basically guarantee rules drift, you know?

Is stealing the lawyer's spare sunglasses at roundstart every round to become revproof powergaming?
What if you also steal your departmental sec locker headset (never used by any officer ever) so you're flashbang immune too?
What if you're also making a stunprod and stashing it in your office gearlocker?

Does it change whether these are powergaming if the person doing them never seeks out fights or antags and only plays reactively towards them?

Admin opinions on powergaming can range from "The first step is already powergaming" to "none of these steps are powergaming"

Things possibly being bad in the future is never a reason not to try to improve things now. We currently have anti-powergaming rules on MRP and there are very few issues being unable to spot anti-fun powergaming there.

[NecromancerAnne]

some of the mrp rules should not be implemented if there ever was a merge, like rpr 7 & 9 but im all for it

powergaming is typically only an issue if you are doing it too frequently as to be noticeable, or in a way that you are actively making yourself a problem for others in your pursuit (such as theft and B&E, or RPR 9).

This is very untrue in my experience. One time I logged on Manuel by accident thinking it was Sybil, and got noted for powergaming as sec because I had a shotgun loaded with improv shells. They were never used. I’m not saying that’s unjust or anything, but I think it flies in the face of your assertion that it’s only an issue if “frequent or noticeable,” or “making an issue,” since none of these applied here.

Unfortunately you may well have joined during a period of focused crackdown, where security players other than yourself were doing that on a per round basis so that they could easily ownzone antagonists they had no knowledge of with a very potent round (at the time). It started to be a problem when people made improv shotgun arrests every so often. It wasn't a matter of just you, but the playerbase overusing that and unbalancing the gentleman's agreement of overpreparing.

That is consistent with my statement, but it requires a bit more context you weren't privy too. There is also the more specific expectation in general that sec at least should only be arming with lethals with knowledge of a confirmed threat that justifies them. The expectation is that you keep it nonlethal/less-than-lethal until then. If you didn't have that reasoning, that may be the issue.

[sinfulbliss]

some of the mrp rules should not be implemented if there ever was a merge, like rpr 7 & 9 but im all for it

powergaming is typically only an issue if you are doing it too frequently as to be noticeable, or in a way that you are actively making yourself a problem for others in your pursuit (such as theft and B&E, or RPR 9).

This is very untrue in my experience. One time I logged on Manuel by accident thinking it was Sybil, and got noted for powergaming as sec because I had a shotgun loaded with improv shells. They were never used. I’m not saying that’s unjust or anything, but I think it flies in the face of your assertion that it’s only an issue if “frequent or noticeable,” or “making an issue,” since none of these applied here.

Unfortunately you may well have joined during a period of focused crackdown, where security players other than yourself were doing that on a per round basis so that they could easily ownzone antagonists they had no knowledge of with a very potent round (at the time). It started to be a problem when people made improv shotgun arrests every so often. It wasn't a matter of just you, but the playerbase overusing that and unbalancing the gentleman's agreement of overpreparing.

That is consistent with my statement, but it requires a bit more context you weren't privy too. There is also the more specific expectation in general that sec at least should only be arming with lethals with knowledge of a confirmed threat that justifies them. The expectation is that you keep it nonlethal/less-than-lethal until then. If you didn't have that reasoning, that may be the issue.

I suppose this makes sense, but it’s far flung from Chesh’s example of a “stun immune hulk with every gun.”

I don’t think Dorsidor’s point was “it may be bad in the future” also. I think he’s bringing up the issue that, unless the rule is explicit in what type of behavior it disallows (which it can’t really be unfortunately), it will always just be up to the admin to choose what’s powergaming and what isn’t.

Some admins will bwoink for stealing the shades roundstart i’m sure, maybe more will bwoink for doing so frequently. Who knows really? It’s a complete crapshoot and rules that become admin dicerolls are always irritating for players who want more consistent enforcement. It’s even worse in the context of the Mergening where now you have LRP and MRP admins unified under one ruleset enforcing the culture they’re used to.

[Vekter]

I'm against this, not because of any sort of concern about having to play with LRP players, but because I'm concerned about the level of RP falling below what MRP is. I enjoy the difference between the servers and I'm afraid that losing a lot of that is going to kill my enjoyment for the game.

Yes, I know, I haven't played much recently, I have been busy elsewhere.

[TheBibleMelts]

alright gang, i'm going to close this up - i've listened to your thoughts on what you think we're doing right, what can be done differently, and will think about what paths to take to try and buckle down on what we're doing right, and make smaller nudges on improving what you think we're doing wrong.

i appreciate everybody who gave feedback both here and in the discord, and genionely enjoyed brainstorming it with you all. i'm going to call my proposal officially closed, as i do not think it is what the server needs right now.