Does the Mayhem in a Bottle insanity effect count as brainwashing?

[bean_sprout]

In a recent round, Mayhem in a Bottle was used in an attempt to stop a cults final summoning. Despite the effect instructing players that alliances ceased to exist and to kill each other, the affected cultists continued to work together to fight off the crew and coordinate the final summoning, all while under the insanity effect.

Afterward, there was some discussion about whether Mayhem was truly a brainwash, and whether it actually outranked cult loyalty in the antag pecking order.

The admins at the time, due to the ambiguity of the situation, advised making a topic here so that the headmins can provide guidance.

Edit: for transparency, the text the Mayhem buff gives you is "KILL, KILL, KILL! YOU HAVE NO ALLIES ANYMORE, KILL THEM ALL!". Also, it was on Manuel, if that matters for MRP purposes.

Edit 2: Also, someone at the time posed the question, if it doesn't count is brainwashing, would that mean a nonantag could pop one in the middle of a crowded medbay, since the instructions aren't really compulsory?

[kinnebian]

id say its pretty clear in "you have no allies anymore" that it trumps everything

[Vekter]

IIRC you're generally expected to start killing the nearest target when it pops regardless of allegiances.

[Mimepride]

This is literally one of the most cut and dry policy threads ever. The admins at the time of this incident, an incident which I personally observed during this round, screwed the pooch immensely. Especially since Trexter555 had gamed so goddamn hard and rigged the round as RD from round start for cult to win by using his captain ID to convert high profile targets and to immediately subvert the AI early on(inclduing making a cult base on AI sat). Bean, right before they were about to summon Nar'Sie, finally tries to turn the tables on Kraven and his powergaming by using the Mayhem in a Bottle. The cultists then proceed to make no effort whatsofuckingever to attack one another, and gang up on bean and then immediately summon Nar'Sie afterwards. Then Lorwp has the gall to say that he's not going to punish a team antagonist for completing their objectives, even though brainwashing literally takes priority over any team objective. And yes: This. Item. Causes. Temporary. Brainwashing. There's no discussion to be had here. It's a brainwashing item.

It's funny how we're told not to rules lawyer, but then when Trexter555 DOES rules lawyer by nitpicking the brainwashing instructions(hurr durr it doesn't give you an antag objective blah blah, so I can just ignore the temporary brainwashing) he gets off scot free. The admins who told us to make this a policy thread have totally refused to do their job and decided to pass the puck to the headmins--and in so doing, have ensured that the unfairness Bean experienced during that round will remain totally unpunished. It's important to note, as well, that this took place on Manuel, so this was even a bigger fail because the offenders didn't even ATTEMPT to roleplay their insanity. But even on LRP, they would have still broken the rules.

The entire purpose of this item is to temporarily brainwash the players affected. If Trexter555's interpretation was valid in any way(it's not) then you could literally just ignore the flavor text completely and this item would have literally no purpose other than everyone getting a free chainsaw that they can't remove.

Here's what SHOULD have happened: the offenders should have been noted/banned, these offenders should/would have appealed this ban, then the headmins would make a ruling AND ONLY THEN should a policy thread have been made. It's such a goddamn clear cut case of rule breaking that it's fucking mind boggling that this occurred, and it enraged me, an observer of the incident with no skin in the round(I was also helping Kraven convert as a ghost), so much that I had to log off. What happened to Bean last night was 100% pure, unadulterated bullshit and NOTHING was done about it except Lorwp saying "this should really be a policy thread". Well guess what? No, it fucking shouldn't. It's a very obvious rulebreak and you fucking dun goofed son. You shirked your responsibility and now its too late to retroactively punish those involved(this post is not a ban request)--and that's ALL your fault.

AND YES! People have been literally banned for using this item FNR, so this was a total misapplication of the rules, and some of the poorest administration I've seen. I get that your volunteers, and I appreciate that, but you guys should really have a greater grasp of the rules if you're going to administrate. There's no ambiguity here whatsoever. So let me make it crystal clear: Brainwashing takes priority over team antags; the bottle of mayhem induces temporary brainwashing. That's it. That's all you need for a successful ruling. It's not ambiguous, it's not complicated, there's no grey area and the probability that you would win an appeal versus an appealer as the banning admin for this decision is extremely high.

This is one of the most unfair things I've witnessed as an observer in game: from both the players and admins involved in this incident. And do you know, children, what one of primary causes of anger in the world is? Unfairness(look it up). Hence my very very angry post. This whole incident was revolting and the people involved need to play better and administrate better.

[NecromancerAnne]

Sounds like another chapel incident in the making if they banned all those people. Making a policy thread is not only easier, but avoids sending 10+ people to sit out antag for a while over a collective misunderstanding of the rules. Lorwp handled that fine then.

[Vekter]

-snip-

Hey buddy, I think you've got the wrong door. Admin Complaints is two blocks down.

[Mimepride]

Sounds like another chapel incident in the making if they banned all those people. Making a policy thread is not only easier, but avoids sending 10+ people to sit out antag for a while over a collective misunderstanding of the rules. Lorwp handled that fine then.

A temporary cult ban for 10 people who don't understand how brainwashing works and who couldn't bear to lose after winning the entire round from start to finish is nothing compared to the unfairness created by just sitting on their hands and telling them to make a policy thread about it. Also, Trexter555 very much knows that it's a brainwashing item. He just didn't wanna lose. If anything, it just goes to show that Lorwp doesn't understand the rules themselves. Also, this post presupposes that the offenders would be banned instead of noted. At any rate, being temporarily cult banned is nothing--and I highly doubt a single person would have had a permanent cult ban. A broad antag ban for this behavior would make no fuckin sense in my mind. A cult and/or brainwashing note/ban would be the fairest option--an option no longer in the cards because the admins in question definitely did not "handle this incident fine".

Hey buddy, I think you've got the wrong door. Admin Complaints is two blocks down.

It's up to Bean to do that, really. And speaking of which, if anything Lorwp should have advised Bean make an admin complaint rather than a policy thread.

Try walking a mile in Bean's shoes: You, a miner, arrives to a very culted station after a long time on lavaland. You fight a little bit, and then you get the notification saying the cultists are summoning in atmos. You bravely charge into atmos against the cultists, alone, counting on your Mayhem in a bottle to cuck the cultist summoning, because it DOES brainwash people. You pop it off. But the cultists gang up on you and don't attack each other at all, despite the obvious flavor text and brainwashing command. These players clearly broke the rules and violated their brainwashing directives. And then, the excellent administrators, rather than doing anything, just say "Hmmmm, I'm not sure, you should make a policy thread" even though it's a cut and dry issue. Bean didn't do anything wrong, the cultists DID and the admins, via inaction, very much DID. And yet...It is only Bean who suffers consequences(unjust death). Yeah, totally fair and just behavior.

Ultimately, my account of the situation and my comments about admin behavior is still on topic because this policy thread only exists due to poor administration. It doesn't need to exist at all. The brainwashing rules are very clear, and the item in question causes temporary brainwashing. Case. Closed.

[TheRex9001]

I’ve been asked this before, to me its a cut and dry ”Yeah”, it only really works if it is a brainwashing effect so it makes sense for it to be one

[EmpressMaia]

I was a construct at the summon during this round. It's important to note that constructs did not get the blood message. So they still behaved as Cult constructs

[bean_sprout]

I was a construct at the summon during this round. It's important to note that constructs did not get the blood message. So they still behaved as Cult constructs

Yes, I had codedived a bit and it seems like the effect wouldn't work on most contructs/simplemobs. EDIT: Also, interesting to note, while I was Mayhem'd, the constructs retained their normal appearance and did NOT show up as demons.(not sure if that's pertinent or not to this discussion)

I thought of a new angle that the headmins might clarify:

Since the Mayhem effect seems like it can actually appear side by side a more traditional brainwash effect, DOES the Mayhem effect supersede traditional brainwashing? I.e. Alice brainwashes Bob to "protect Alice above all else" via brainwashing surgery. Bob the gets Mayhem'd while in a room alone with Alice. Does Bob attack Alice?

[EmpressMaia]

id say the most flavorful solution to this is that the mayhem bottle supercedes all other antagonist directives. because the smell of bubblegums blood is just that strong

[MooCow12]

Mayhem makes everyone else appear as slaughter demons but do you still see the cult hud that gives away fellow cultists?

All huds that show allegiance should be immediately hidden until the effects wear off , if thats not the case then this is a code issue because new players are more likely to take the hud as gospel, even with text in the chat stating otherwise.


Plus it will be harder to spoof it and tell friend from foe… if cultists were still organized to fight crew then chances are they do see cult huds…

This is the least open ended brainwash in the game no custom text, always breaks allegiance remove the huds

[Indie-ana Jones]

Huh. I thought we got rid of Bottle of Mayhem.

[Stabbystab]

Yeah I feel like it’s very metagammy and fail rp to continue to work towards winning in this situation. Everyone should have just started sawing each other to death.

[Stabbystab]

Huh. I thought we got rid of Bottle of Mayhem.

I think it’s a very funny item I rather not have it removed because it’s funny to see it used on the shuttle or medbay

[dendydoom]

some perhaps helpful context to the situation that caused this thread is that we (not me specifically, i was doing event stuff) tested the effects of mayhem in a bottle with cult antag status, and there was also a ticket open with trexter discussing what he saw from his end. the conclusion to this was that it seemed to work strangely with cult, where the visual effects worked but other didn't turn into demons etc etc (i'm paraphrasing here but the point is that the item doesn't work as cleanly as you might expect)

the policy formed from this thread can be pointed to going forward to clarify things better, but wrt this specific situation, there is not much use arguing whether or not the ruling was valid in that specific instance because the main motivation for the admins of that round to let the show go on and not bring it to a screeching halt just to pull someone up and tie them up in an ahelp for 20 minutes while they are trying to perform a very difficult and high pressure antag manoeuvre is a matter of rule 0:

Enforcement of these rules is at the discretion of admins.
Roleplay is king, and admins can disregard other rules to this end should it prove beneficial for the experience of the shift.

it was decided that it was more important to tie the story up and conclude it in a way that made for a cool story rather than drag it out into an argument over the wording of a niche item which wasn't interacting entirely correctly.

so, trying to be helpful here:
- this thread should be for what you would like to see going forward wrt mayhem in a bottle creating a temporary antag status that aligns with brainwashing in the antag directive order, thus removing all team loyalties officially as a matter of applicable policy
- if you disagree with the specific ruling that caused this thread and think the admins were acting incorrectly and in error, this should be a complaint thread

i bring this up because if users try to do both in this thread, it's going to become a clusterfuck of arguments all vying for a different purpose and it will either take headmins an age to read it and come to a conclusion, or they will get fed up and not read your opinions and will do what they think is sensible without hearing your input.

[bean_sprout]

Huh. I thought we got rid of Bottle of Mayhem.

I think it’s a very funny item I rather not have it removed because it’s funny to see it used on the shuttle or medbay

Mayhem in a Bottle is the best item in the game. It has an extremely cool and unique effect, it is uncommon and difficult to obtain, and misuse is (current topic notwithstanding) very cut and dry from an administrative pov. It would be a very sad day indeed if this item were removed.

the conclusion to this was that it seemed to work strangely with cult, where the visual effects worked but other didn't turn into demons etc etc

Out of curiosity, was the discrepancy that human mobs were "turned into' demons, but the cult constructs did not? This seems to be a construct thing, as opposed to a cult thing.

so, trying to be helpful here:
- this thread should be for what you would like to see going forward wrt mayhem in a bottle creating a temporary antag status that aligns with brainwashing in the antag directive order, thus removing all team loyalties officially as a matter of applicable policy
- if you disagree with the specific ruling that caused this thread and think the admins were acting incorrectly and in error, this should be a complaint thread

That is essentially my intention with this thread.

[Stabbystab]

Borgs turn into demons, I think it was just a bug that didn’t cause the cult constructs to change. It was an unintentional thing. Plus the cult normal players should still being trying to chainsaw the cult constructs since you know no allegiance only blood.

[bean_sprout]

Borgs turn into demons, I think it was just a bug that didn’t cause the cult constructs to change. It was an unintentional thing. Plus the cult normal players should still being trying to chainsaw the cult constructs since you know no allegiance only blood.

Interesting. As a non cult, for me, the cult halos no longer displayed, and the constructs were still visibly as constructs. I'm wondering if the cult teammate hud displayed.

[dendydoom]

the conclusion to this was that it seemed to work strangely with cult, where the visual effects worked but other didn't turn into demons etc etc

Out of curiosity, was the discrepancy that human mobs were "turned into' demons, but the cult constructs did not? This seems to be a construct thing, as opposed to a cult thing.

unfortunately i have no idea. i could only read asay at the time and i'm just recalling from my (admittedly poor) memory what those were testing said. i was elbow deep in buttons and plot devices at the time. i am hoping someone else can fill in the blanks here.

so, trying to be helpful here:
- this thread should be for what you would like to see going forward wrt mayhem in a bottle creating a temporary antag status that aligns with brainwashing in the antag directive order, thus removing all team loyalties officially as a matter of applicable policy
- if you disagree with the specific ruling that caused this thread and think the admins were acting incorrectly and in error, this should be a complaint thread

That is essentially my intention with this thread.

aye aye, everything you've posted is 10/10 and i would like the headmins to be able to see it and respond to it directly without getting bogged down in irrelevant arguments that need to be handled in their own way.

[Mimepride]

Ok, I will just post the wiki information then:

Mayhem in a Bottle: When used, it sends everyone on the screen in an unstoppable rage, equipping all of them with chainsaws, giving them a full heal, a red screen, and the objective to 'RIP AND TEAR'. They'll see every other person as slaughter demons. This effects lasts two minutes. You really shouldn't use this as a non-antag. The 'RIP AND TEAR' objective overrides any allegiances.

Cut and dry? Yep, cut and dry. That's exactly how it works in game, and that's how the rules have been enforced around this item. It's unfathomable that someone would argue otherwise, or administrate otherwise. Imagine if you guys had just looked at the wiki. That simple.

What is more important in this context: that the graphics aren't working and they seem janky, or the flavor text given? Obviously the latter because the bedrock of brainwashing in it's essence is the flavor text. As long as the flavor text is working then the brainwashing should take effect.

It's funny that you mention Rule 0--I had actually forgotten it exists. Anyhow--that rule very clearly mentions "roleplay is king". So here's the deal: I get the bottle of mayhem flavor text, and somehow--some way--I rationalize that the correct RP action is to totally ignore the flavor text which says to ignore any allegiances and that I'm in an unstoppable fit of rage, and I decide to remain loyal to Nar'Sie, gang up on Bean and then make no attempt to fight my fellow(former due to the brainwashing) cultists and immediately summon afterward. Yeah...No. i don't get it.

[Timberpoes]

There's so many words spent discussing things that are wholly irrelevant to what antag priority Bullshit in a Bottle gives.

My take is it's whatever the codebase intends it to be. If that doesn't fit nicely on the antag priority chart then we do another blood sacrifice to expand it.

I will ask what they intend it to be and that will probably be my answer.

[Longestarmlonglaw]

There's so many words spent discussing things that are wholly irrelevant to what antag priority Bullshit in a Bottle gives.

My take is it's whatever the codebase intends it to be. If that doesn't fit nicely on the antag priority chart then we do another blood sacrifice to expand it.

I will ask what they intend it to be and that will probably be my answer.

Why does this feel like an infinite "ASK Mom ask dad" loop

Admin: My take is whatever the codebase intends it to be.

Maintainer: My take is whatever the administration intends to be

[Timberpoes]

The responses tl;dr to overriding objective that breaks all allegiances. So that's my vote. And what I expect the status quo currently is.

[TheBibleMelts]

without the victims gaining the brainwashed antag datum i can't expect people to intuit it enough to follow the antagonist loyalty flowchart. code issue imo, which i hope is fixed based on this glaring problem with it. correct me if i'm wrong and it does give you the brainwash objective UI button already.

[bean_sprout]

without the victims gaining the brainwashed antag datum i can't expect people to intuit it enough to follow the antagonist loyalty flowchart. code issue imo, which i hope is fixed based on this glaring problem with it. correct me if i'm wrong and it does give you the brainwash objective UI button already.

I had actually gone to the coderbus discord and inquired about whether it would be acceptable to make it an antag datum. The powers that be said that antag datums shouldn't be an end all be all solution to this kind of thing.

Why does this feel like an infinite "ASK Mom ask dad" loop

Admin: My take is whatever the codebase intends it to be.

Maintainer: My take is whatever the administration intends to be

[dendydoom]

snip

headmins, this essay is not for you. turn back now.

my friend, i'm trying to be sincere here:

i was uninvolved in this ruling. i did not factor into the decision or the outcome. i was busy in-game being a commander and prepping ert teams to try and make the round exciting and enjoyable so that ghosts could have some participation. this is because, like you, i also saw the cult as winning way too easily and i wanted to add another element to the plot. treating us like a collective hivemind who all step in line and parrot the same thoughts is reductive and inaccurate.

secondly, i'm the wiki master. unless the page is protected, the information you find there isn't policy. contributors are supposed to write this when they create content for the game so that people know how to use it when it's merged. contributors and coders aren't admins, and they don't write policy. anyone with a forum account can edit the wiki. i didn't even know what this item was before yesterday and in ~official admin terms~ it's almost entirely policyless. it does not make the victims into brainwashed antagonists, which is what the antag directive order refers to when it uses the term "brainwashed". antag status is what we use to identify antagonists in-game with our hud and our admin panel to try and investigate situations like these. there is no way, for example, to tell who specifically was hit by the bottle in that moment at a glance. giving attention to this is a good thing because it will get resolved in a firm and clear way.

just to be fair to you, i even went and tested this locally:

NSFW:

constructs and borgs don't change. cult HUD icons remain. also of note is that the mayhem message is the default text size, not using our span elements for brainwashing or any other special message, so it quickly disappears amongst the chat and other bright red cult/combat messages and there is no way to recall this message like you would be able to if your mob contained a brainwashed antag datum.


no antag or brainwashing datum is assigned. there is no way to tell who has been hit by the bottle without digging deep into the mob's variables and trying to deduce some kind of flag. so, even if you did want to note everyone who failed to perform their role adequately, good luck finding out who it is.

thirdly, i only offered this information because it's pertinent to the fact that the specific situation you're bringing up may not be as simple as you might think it is and laying the blame squarely at the feet of the players who may have messed up might not have been the fair thing to do considering that there might be bugs happening.

finally, my only purpose in these threads is to try and guide them toward a productive outcome that will benefit the op and the community. i know the system and what headmins will want to see when they enter one of the 47 open policy threads and have to read them and make a decision. every effort i've made here has been for the benefit of this process, right down to sweeping the posts that did nothing but take pot shots at you.

so please take me out of your crosshairs and calm down so we can resolve this like adults by addressing policy issues in the subforum called policy discussion.

[TheBibleMelts]

without the victims gaining the brainwashed antag datum i can't expect people to intuit it enough to follow the antagonist loyalty flowchart. code issue imo, which i hope is fixed based on this glaring problem with it. correct me if i'm wrong and it does give you the brainwash objective UI button already.

I had actually gone to the coderbus discord and inquired about whether it would be acceptable to make it an antag datum. The powers that be said that antag datums shouldn't be an end all be all solution to this kind of thing.

Why does this feel like an infinite "ASK Mom ask dad" loop

Admin: My take is whatever the codebase intends it to be.

Maintainer: My take is whatever the administration intends to be

it would be simpler for everyones sake for it to just grant the datum because people are used to brainwashing datum > cult vs us changing policy to put bottled mayhem forefront in the list and expect people to know it/look it up if they ever get hit by it. i agree that it should supersede everything and make everyone into a murder crazed maniac, but can't in good faith punish people who might not know what the fuck is going on with the policy on an extremely niche item that some people have never/will never see used during their playtime.

[dendydoom]

I had actually gone to the coderbus discord and inquired about whether it would be acceptable to make it an antag datum. The powers that be said that antag datums shouldn't be an end all be all solution to this kind of thing.

at the risk of insulting someone i respect either they did not understand the problem being presented or they have holes in their brain

[Mimepride]

without the victims gaining the brainwashed antag datum i can't expect people to intuit it enough to follow the antagonist loyalty flowchart. code issue imo, which i hope is fixed based on this glaring problem with it. correct me if i'm wrong and it does give you the brainwash objective UI button already.

Kraven employed these same mental gymnastics last night. They don't hold up at all. When you're affected by this item, a chainsaw spawns in your hands and the flavor text provided is not ambiguous in the slightest. He's played the game long enough to know how this item works and about the flavor text. Ignoring it is, in the best case fail RP and in the worst case weasel-tier, and against the rules in any case.

The antag datum argument is irrelevant and rather semantic, in my mind's eye. You literally can expect people to intuit enough to follow the antagonist loyalty flowchart.

I've personally been affected by this item, seen the flavor text and very quickly RIP and TEAR'd everyone as you are expected to.

[TheBibleMelts]

without the victims gaining the brainwashed antag datum i can't expect people to intuit it enough to follow the antagonist loyalty flowchart. code issue imo, which i hope is fixed based on this glaring problem with it. correct me if i'm wrong and it does give you the brainwash objective UI button already.

Kraven employed these same mental gymnastics last night. They don't hold up at all. When you're affected by this item, a chainsaw spawns in your hands and the flavor text provided is not ambiguous in the slightest. He's played the game long enough to know how this item works and about the flavor text. Ignoring it is, in the best case fail RP and in the worst case weasel-tier, and against the rules in any case.

The antag datum argument is irrelevant and one of the most semantic arguments imaginable. You literally can expect people to intuit enough to follow the antagonist loyalty flowchart.

then why didn't the entire room full of people intuit it?

[Mimepride]

then why didn't the entire room full of people intuit it?

Because I'm about to win and I don't want to lose.

[bean_sprout]

it would be simpler for everyones sake for it to just grant the datum because people are used to brainwashing datum > cult vs us changing policy to put bottled mayhem forefront in the list and expect people to know it/look it up if they ever get hit by it. i agree that it should supersede everything and make everyone into a murder crazed maniac, but can't in good faith punish people who might not know what the fuck is going on with the policy on an extremely niche item that some people have never/will never see used during their playtime.

I'm inclined to agree with this, and am considering making a PR regardless and seeing if it gets merged. But this creates a further problem. I believe(and please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm basing this off vague memories and heresy), if Mayhem is changed into a brainwash datum, I believe that it would overwrite and erase previous brainwashing. Assuming that is how it would interact with previous brainwashing, it would go beyond clarity and go into a potentially significant balance change.

[Timberpoes]

I checked with some maints. The tl;dr crib notes is that Mayhem in a Bottle should override loyalties. If the codebase wants to make changes to communicate things better to players, that's on them and not for discussion here. Code solutions go to the Github, coding forums, coding general channel on our Discord or the code forums.

Keep in mind when it comes to antag datums that players don't give a shit about antag datums because they don't know what antag datums are, what ones they have and can't be expected to link some code abstraction like antag datums in the heat of the moment. Relying on the antag datum test is more for admins to weigh up whether a player was an actual antag. I don't write policy around whether a player has an antag datum or not and I'm loathe to start now.

The antag priority flowchart is an administrative solution to dynamic combining previously mutually exclusive conversion antags all together. I personally don't expect players to know it or read it, I usually expect them to learn it via experience as they get into mixed-team situations, mess up and admins advise them on what to prioritise if it happens again.

What matters the most is communicating things to players. It doesn't matter if it's mind control or brainwashing or cult conversion or rev conversion. Clearly communicating expectations to players overrides all other things based on code abstractions. If there's a brainwashing that communicates they have to preserve team loyalties then it doesn't matter what the antag priority list says. What players are communicated in-game reigns supreme.

The Mayhem in a Bottle antag type created may be able to support some policy.json text that gets sent to players when they get converted by it if deemed necessary.

[DrAmazing343]

It overriding all objectives has been my take for forever— but Dreary brings up a great point that sometimes things have to be rule zero’d when it’s a big communal mistake to keep the show on the road. Codebase can do as codebase can do to reinforce this, maybe we can give it a lil json, but ultimately Situation is a Fuck and we just gotta move on.

[Mimepride]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFJvTFYummE

At 2:55 you can see the actual message you receive when you use this item or its been used on you. First of all, it says in big letters RIP AND TEAR(it's pretty eye catching)--second, in smaller text below it says to kill everyone and that you have no allies anymore.

Anyhow, I thought that that remained a pop-up in the top of your screen, but I must be mistaken. Regardless, the text is clear and it is TECHNICALLY a form of temporary brainwashing. Also, while there might not be policy threads on this, there are definitely admins around who have ruled on the issue before, especially with respect to non-antags using it FNR. It's a well known fact that people have been banned for using this item before FNR.

The fact that the cult status icon stays on you while temporarily brainwashed is not that big of a deal to me--golems who have kill cult objectives, when converted to the cult, will also have cult icons and/or halos, but their servant orders(which they must manually remember--there's no flavor text besides obey your master) takes priority over any team antagonist like rev or cult. Same deal here. I also don't see the big issue with cult constructs or borgs not being turned into demons around you--its not the issue here. The only thing that really matters is the flavor text and the affected player's behavior with respect to that. It's all fluff besides that.

I will spoiler the rest of this post for the sake of relevance, headmins can ignore it.

► Show Spoiler

I apologize if it came off like I was treating you as part of a hivemind. It was not my intention--but I still disagree rather strongly with your initial points.

secondly, i'm the wiki master. unless the page is protected, the information you find there isn't policy. contributors are supposed to write this when they create content for the game so that people know how to use it when it's merged. contributors and coders aren't admins, and they don't write policy. anyone with a forum account can edit the wiki. i didn't even know what this item was before yesterday and in ~official admin terms~ it's almost entirely policyless. it does not make the victims into brainwashed antagonists, which is what the antag directive order refers to when it uses the term "brainwashed". antag status is what we use to identify antagonists in-game with our hud and our admin panel to try and investigate situations like these. there is no way, for example, to tell who specifically was hit by the bottle in that moment at a glance. giving attention to this is a good thing because it will get resolved in a firm and clear way.

I'm aware of that and was prepared for this point. The simple fact is that the description for this item explains exactly what it does in game and exactly how rulings with respect to this item have been upheld. It very much indirectly references the fact that people have been banned for using this as non-antags without a valid reason. Thus, me using the wiki in this context is valid--especially since you didn't even know what the item was until last night.

Furthermore, if you don't know what an item is or does, the first thing you should do is check the wiki. I do not believe for a second that the administrators involved did so. Secondly in this regard, the next thing to do would be to ask another admin with a better grasp of this item and how it works what they would do in this situation. Again--my confidence is not high that that was done.

Thank you for explaining the difficulties of identifying the offending parties as an admin, however, I was not aware there was no easy way to determine who was affected. It IS a form of brainwashing though. It was specifically coded to be that way. The fact that it's missing an antag datum or typical brainwashing that admins can see and identify is irrelevant.

You're not in my crosshairs. I just found the catalyst for this policy thread to be revolting and I really didn't like your mentioning of Rule 0 in this context, because I strongly believe that there was an extremely clear rule break involved, and mentioning that rule in this context almost implies that an admin can do whatever they want and enforce whatever rules they want when you and I both know that's not true. In the case of this supposed usage of rule 0, we have a player who acted in good faith punished by unfair rulebreaking behavior, about 10 people who clearly broke the rules who received 0 punishment whatsoever and admin(s) who sat on their hands doing nothing about it, thereby worsening an already unfair situation. I don't believe for a second that rule 0 was meant for situations like last night...

[TheFinalPotato]

at the risk of insulting someone i respect either they did not understand the problem being presented or they have holes in their brain

It was me I have holes in my brain.

I'm roughly on board with timber. Antag datums are fucking nothing and should not dictate policy. The situation here was to my mind motivated reasoning by cultists about to win and I consider it 100% an admin issue.
Admittedly I've been confused by this effect in the past but another popup alongside the other one and the blood red text and the everyone turning evil would not have helped me. Perhaps policy json would help though it does seem a little silly to me given how direct the effect is.

For clarity (lmao lol) I'm not opposed to making it more clear, but I think the argument that because it's not got an antag datum that means it isn't direct is bull. They are code constructs if you have built policy around them that is a you problem.

[NecromancerAnne]

I legit don't think we should base it on antag datum either. I mean, rat kings don't have antag datum but I still can't get anyone to agree whether or not they're antags, but I hear more people say they are than not. They just have flavour text.

[DaydreamIQ]

Bottle of mayhem is one of the most niche items in all of lavaland considering it requires you to get lucky with a Bubblegum kill (Who can arguably be considered one of the hardest megafauna. Imo). And even then the item is so fucking useless as a non antag except for this EXACT situation. So for that entirely I say fuck Nar'Sie, you should be required to throw all other objectives to the wind and KILL

[Mimepride]

Yeah, the antag datum argument holds no water. The flavor text is king, and I don't believe for a second that the people who provided the catalyst for this policy thread acted in good faith with respect to that text. Nor am I convinced that they all missed the big RIP AND TEAR on their screen(some of them might have--certainly not the experienced players involved who've been affected by it before).

[MooCow12]

The fact that the cult status icon stays on you while temporarily brainwashed is not that big of a deal to me--golems who have kill cult objectives, when converted to the cult, will also have cult icons and/or halos, but their servant orders(which they must manually remember--there's no flavor text besides obey your master) takes priority over any team antagonist like rev or cult. Same deal here.

This is the only brainwash / orders in the game that is not open ended you will always see everyone else as an enemy everyone else must die therefore it is a perfect candidate for removing huds and completely masking your former allies, golems can have orders to assist cult even with their maker being a non cultist (likely antag like heretic that wants cult to last a bit longer if its failing) someone can have a brainwash to just lick the floor once in awhile which doesnt prevent acting as cult, mayhem is one clear trigger with one clear goal


The only scenario i can think of where it becomes weird is if someone has a brainwash that changes the meaning of words “rip and tear and kill means heal and protect and rescue”

And that probably requires its own policy thread if brainwash can effect the meaning of other brainwashes and objectives

[Vekter]

Yeah, the antag datum argument holds no water. The flavor text is king, and I don't believe for a second that the people who provided the catalyst for this policy thread acted in good faith with respect to that text. Nor am I convinced that they all missed the big RIP AND TEAR on their screen(some of them might have--certainly not the experienced players involved who've been affected by it before).

I'll go through and make the text more obvious in-game for people, hopefully that should fix any complications with "does this take priority over my team antag"

[dendydoom]

at the risk of insulting someone i respect either they did not understand the problem being presented or they have holes in their brain

It was me I have holes in my brain.

I'm roughly on board with timber. Antag datums are fucking nothing and should not dictate policy. The situation here was to my mind motivated reasoning by cultists about to win and I consider it 100% an admin issue.
Admittedly I've been confused by this effect in the past but another popup alongside the other one and the blood red text and the everyone turning evil would not have helped me. Perhaps policy json would help though it does seem a little silly to me given how direct the effect is.

For clarity (lmao lol) I'm not opposed to making it more clear, but I think the argument that because it's not got an antag datum that means it isn't direct is bull. They are code constructs if you have built policy around them that is a you problem.

uh oh it's the guy i respect

i don't mean that the presence of antag datums should dictate policy - investigating these issues is extremely difficult (very likely next to impossible in the inciting situation here) because there's no real way to deduce who has been affected and what the status of that effect is.

if an admin is handed a mess of a situation with lots of different people involved, resolving that even with access to a hud that shows antag status and the admin panel tracking antags takes a while. the more time an issue takes, the more it holds up the game, the higher the chance the admin is just going to throw their hands up and go "this is a mess, let's just call it a mess, simplify it to keep the majority of people entertained, and move on so we can carry on playing."

these situations need to be as clear as possible. i don't consider this the direction of policymaking, i consider it a feasible and practical application of our abilities to resolve in-game situations fairly. if it's too hard and takes too long, then it's better for everyone (and pretty poor for the single individual affected negatively, but the needs of the many etc etc) to take it into your own hands and simplify it to just resolve the situation and move on.

i did not even test whether or not being affected by the bottle is logged. if not, then in any case where the player chooses to lie about being affected (and they aren't holding a chainsaw) then there is not really any viable way to fact check this.

if this is made easier to resolve by making affected mobs clear, then this situation should not happen again.

[TheFinalPotato]

uh oh it's the guy i respect

i don't mean that the presence of antag datums should dictate policy - investigating these issues is extremely difficult (very likely next to impossible in the inciting situation here) because there's no real way to deduce who has been affected and what the status of that effect is.

if an admin is handed a mess of a situation with lots of different people involved, resolving that even with access to a hud that shows antag status and the admin panel tracking antags takes a while. the more time an issue takes, the more it holds up the game, the higher the chance the admin is just going to throw their hands up and go "this is a mess, let's just call it a mess, simplify it to keep the majority of people entertained, and move on so we can carry on playing."

these situations need to be as clear as possible. i don't consider this the direction of policymaking, i consider it a feasible and practical application of our abilities to resolve in-game situations fairly. if it's too hard and takes too long, then it's better for everyone (and pretty poor for the single individual affected negatively, but the needs of the many etc etc) to take it into your own hands and simplify it to just resolve the situation and move on.

i did not even test whether or not being affected by the bottle is logged. if not, then in any case where the player chooses to lie about being affected (and they aren't holding a chainsaw) then there is not really any viable way to fact check this.

if this is made easier to resolve by making affected mobs clear, then this situation should not happen again.

Ah your concern is administrability rather then policy.
It does log to ATTACK_LOGS though I'm not sure if that's what you're looking for. Do you mean like a hud element for admins while it's happening or what's the vibe.
Does it need to be visual, are you expecting it to show somewhere else, do logs on their own work what would be useful here (especially AFTER the fact)

[bean_sprout]

I know that this board is for policy as opposed for code, but I figured it may be worth mentioning that recently https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/pull/87586 was merged, which significantly increased the text size of the message. Just bringing this up since several people mentioned the text size as a point of concern.

[Vekter]

I know that this board is for policy as opposed for code, but I figured it may be worth mentioning that recently https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/pull/87586 was merged, which significantly increased the text size of the message. Just bringing this up since several people mentioned the text size as a point of concern.

Oh hey, I did that.

[dendydoom]

Ah your concern is administrability rather then policy.
It does log to ATTACK_LOGS though I'm not sure if that's what you're looking for. Do you mean like a hud element for admins while it's happening or what's the vibe.
Does it need to be visual, are you expecting it to show somewhere else, do logs on their own work what would be useful here (especially AFTER the fact)

sorry i forgor to respond to this, basically anything that logs and/or visually identifies when the effect begins and ends. a message in attack logs that it also ended would be good, a visual identifier for the combo hud would be even better!!

[Vekter]

sorry i forgor to respond to this, basically anything that logs and/or visually identifies when the effect begins and ends. a message in attack logs that it also ended would be good, a visual identifier for the combo hud would be even better!!

So like something in attack logs when it triggers?

[TheFinalPotato]

sorry i forgor to respond to this, basically anything that logs and/or visually identifies when the effect begins and ends. a message in attack logs that it also ended would be good, a visual identifier for the combo hud would be even better!!

for clarity the logging you're asking for here already exists, for both addition and removal. conceptually a visual identifier would be a good idea but also I am lazy. If I have the time I'll put somethin together for it but if your concern is post event introspection then I think? that already exists.

[GamerAndYeahMick]

this seems resolved