Borged Antags - Still Antagonists or Slaves to the system

[Nabski]

A tale as old as time. You are a traitor, you die, you get borged.

Does your antagonist status still matter with regards to how you follow your laws via abusing all the non humans as hard as you can until someone orders you to stop or blows you?

Does it matter if you are slaved to an AI or not?

Someone cited in discord

In situations where you wind up with multiple simultaneous antagonist assignments (i.e. a Revolutionary and a Traitor), your team goals, objectives, and directives should take precedence. Furthermore, if someone had to go out of their way to convert you to their team, their goals, objectives, and directives become the priority. Refer to the following flowchart:

Brainwashing/construct orders/Silicon Laws -> Cult -> Revs -> Blood Brother -> Wizard Apprentice/Abductor Teams/Other niche antags -> Nuke Ops -> Traitors

which I don't know where it comes from but seems relevant.

Spoiler:

Disclaimer: I did a stupid and harmed a human, so I was in the wrong regardless, that's why this is policy discussion rather than just ban appeal.

[Ayy Lemoh]

post

I'm not going to fucking write an essay so here's the quick version of what I have to say:

If I am a traitor that was turned into a cyborg (standard asimov) and see a non-human then am I allowed to just fucking frag him despite the AI not being antag? And, if no one stops me, can I just keep murderboning non-humans because I am technically still antag?

That's the main issue I see here.

[Armhulen]

Me and Nabski have been having this long debate from it and essentially I left my stance as such:

Your alignment is with your slaved AI
Traitor AIs make all of their borgs traitors
Nontraitor AIs make all of their borgs nontraitorous
If you are unslaved, then you reside with your own alignment (Which can lead to antagging, as long as you're unslaved and were an antagonist as long as you follow your laws)

[Nabski]

My stance is

You are still an antagonist.
You still have to follow your Silicon laws.
If the AI is a traitor, you have a law zero you are required to follow.
If it isn't, then you're free to continue being a traitor as long as you don't break your laws.

(assuming asimov)
Non humans are fair game.
If anyone orders you to stop, you've got to stop.

(assuming non standard lawset)
You are free to twist your laws as much evil genie as you think you can get away with.


Slaved versus unslaved doesn't matter, all that matters is the law.

[dragomagol]

My assumption has always been that you can follow your traitor objectives/whims as long as you listen to your AI and laws first. Basically, your AI has to listen to server rule 1 but you as a traitor who was borged do not.

[Mothblocks]

My interpretation is the same as dragomagol, I think it's more interesting for everyone involved (including me as a nonhuman player).

[Misdoubtful]

My assumption has always been that you can follow your traitor objectives/whims as long as you listen to your AI and laws first. Basically, your AI has to listen to server rule 1 but you as a traitor who was borged do not.

This. I'm hard pressed to see how your brain getting put in an MMI and then a borg would make your objectives just disappear.

[Naloac]

not a HEADMIN STANCE but I have always treated borged traitors as still traitors. Free to fucking blast every single nonhuman unless told to stop. Its still a traitors mind in that borg. Still with its own will. its just locked to some laws it cannot break

[Not-Dorsidarf]

This comes up occasionally in admin discussion and the consensus is pretty much always "Borged traitors can and should still try do their objectives but laws, obeying/helping their ai, etc always come first. "

So you could bully nonhumans or lock the escape airlocks trapping John Strand-Objective on the station, but if the AI tells you to stop that's the end of it. Also law 3 comes before your objectives so you can't do stuff that will definitely get you destroyed for being rogue

[Armhulen]

I'm not sure I like the idea that it's basically my idea but if you forget to say "don't be a traitor anymore" they can kill people

*as long as they swindle their laws

[Domitius]

It's always been my interpretation that borged traitors are fully expected to be Lawful Evil in the following of their laws and orders. It is foolish for the crew to borg a traitor and expect anything else. They still have their antag status and objectives in their player panel after being borged as well so I feel that should be the litmus test of is "x" antag or not.

[terranaut]

this debate was settled ages ago, antagonist status is tied to the mind. a traitor thats been borged on asimov can genocide nonhumans all he wants, for example

[Armhulen]

Okay but what about SLAVING?

[dragomagol]

Slaving just makes that AI your boss and you have to follow their laws and orders. They're still two separate entities though.

[XivilaiAnaxes]

Slaving just makes that AI your boss and you have to follow their laws and orders. They're still two separate entities though.

To be more precise - if I recall it's more you have to follow their interpretation of the laws as opposed to following their laws.

[cocothegogo]

so you're telling me - all those times i got borgged as T i could have still been antag?

[Cobby]

Being slaved to the AI means you are bound to their interpretations. If it is not an interpretation of your law/lawset you are free to disobey but dont be mad when you get dismantled/spaced.

> so you're telling me - all those times i got borgged as T i could have still been antag?

No, you are a borged traitor. A traitor made into an AI and a traitor/malf AI have different implications, particularly the "laws are just flavortext" bit.

[TheMidnghtRose]

Laws > Hypnosis > Team Antags > Solo Antags

Laws first as they are unable to be broken.
Hypnosis Objectives next as they modify behavior usually. If just a targeting someone thing then this defaults to Solo Antag.
Team Antag Objectives as they have higher priority.
Solo Antag Objectives.
Traitor, wizards, nightmares, heretics, and important to note, xenomorphs can all follow their objectives so long as it doesnt break silicon laws. This also means that they should not allow themselves to be emagged or subverted by another antag. Willingly doing so breaks law one on default Asimov.

[Ghilker]

Borged antag should get their antag status revoked to stop them from just silently and secretly murdering non-humans

This is because borging antags should make it safe for ALL people on the station, not only for humans (and non-humans can still be killed by just ordering silicons to murder)

Edit: also it should go against law 3 to kill non-humans for no reason

[Intercept0r]

Cases to consider:

1. If antag retains antag status after borging, then borging is not a viable way to remove the threat from the station. Why would I give AA and temp/wound resistance to an antag instead of gibbing? Gibbing doesn't give the player the option to continue playing the round, but it does make one antag less.

2. On silicons, the expected place for antag status are the laws themselves - as with malf AI. This is an inconsistency.

3. Tator ruleset always takes precedence over everything else and relaxes standards for enforcement server rules (eg rule1). This is the single exception I know of where tator status doesn't take precedence and it's unclear whether it relaxes rule1 enforcement.

4. Given that borgs are to follow their laws and only their laws, pedantically and strictly, antag status should not in any way expand the allowable actions beyond what the laws themselves permit. Turning this argument into reverse, this means an antag borg and nontag borg would be both free to kill nonhumans for the same reasons and with the same consequences.

5. If 4 holds, then consider this:
As a borg, I roll up to a human: "Order me to kill all nonhumans". Would that be permissible as antag borg? Would that be permissible as nontag borg? Why?

I see borgs as a way to allow players to continue participating in the round after having been discovered by sec. I feel this was the original intention of borging and antag persistence breaks that. While it does permit a new playstyle (deliberately borg yourself if all targets are nonhuman), it also creates several exceptions, grey areas, complicates silicon policy, is confusing to players and is likely to result in a lot of ahelps and discussions. I say borging should clear antag status.

[saprasam]

im fine with antag borgs being allowed to do anything not specifically told off by their lawset

[BeeSting12]

Cases to consider:

1. If antag retains antag status after borging, then borging is not a viable way to remove the threat from the station. Why would I give AA and temp/wound resistance to an antag instead of gibbing? Gibbing doesn't give the player the option to continue playing the round, but it does make one antag less.

2. On silicons, the expected place for antag status are the laws themselves - as with malf AI. This is an inconsistency.

3. Tator ruleset always takes precedence over everything else and relaxes standards for enforcement server rules (eg rule1). This is the single exception I know of where tator status doesn't take precedence and it's unclear whether it relaxes rule1 enforcement.

4. Given that borgs are to follow their laws and only their laws, pedantically and strictly, antag status should not in any way expand the allowable actions beyond what the laws themselves permit. Turning this argument into reverse, this means an antag borg and nontag borg would be both free to kill nonhumans for the same reasons and with the same consequences.

5. If 4 holds, then consider this:
As a borg, I roll up to a human: "Order me to kill all nonhumans". Would that be permissible as antag borg? Would that be permissible as nontag borg? Why?

I see borgs as a way to allow players to continue participating in the round after having been discovered by sec. I feel this was the original intention of borging and antag persistence breaks that. While it does permit a new playstyle (deliberately borg yourself if all targets are nonhuman), it also creates several exceptions, grey areas, complicates silicon policy, is confusing to players and is likely to result in a lot of ahelps and discussions. I say borging should clear antag status.

I agree with all the points given here. This will basically remove whatever incentive is left for security to try to keep antags in the round.

[dragomagol]

1. If antag retains antag status after borging, then borging is not a viable way to remove the threat from the station.

The threat can still be removed. You can order them to tell you what their objectives were and/or tell them not to complete those objectives (as a human or the AI!). As armhulen put it, assuming that the borged person is still considered traitor by server rules,

if you forget to say "don't be a traitor anymore" they can kill people

If this is a concern still, you can unsync them and give them custom laws. Is it a lot of work? Sure. It's not something I would expect if the station was actively on fire. But it's still doable.

4. Given that borgs are to follow their laws and only their laws, pedantically and strictly, antag status should not in any way expand the allowable actions beyond what the laws themselves permit. Turning this argument into reverse, this means an antag borg and nontag borg would be both free to kill nonhumans for the same reasons and with the same consequences.

There is definitely an argument to be made about following law 3, which is the only thing I can think of that might violate Asimov by being a nuisance to non-humans on purpose. If a regular borg was being disruptive while following laws I would consider that a rule 1 violation.

5. If 4 holds, then consider this:
As a borg, I roll up to a human: "Order me to kill all nonhumans". Would that be permissible as antag borg? Would that be permissible as nontag borg? Why?

To me this is on the same level of a silicon saying "hey, change my laws so I can murder nukies." Human orders are like laws lite. If traitor borgs are still considered traitors they shouldn't need to ask permission. If a nonantag borg demands to be ordered to murder non-humans I would consider that against the rules.

I see borgs as a way to allow players to continue participating in the round after having been discovered by sec. I feel this was the original intention of borging and antag persistence breaks that. While it does permit a new playstyle (deliberately borg yourself if all targets are nonhuman), it also creates several exceptions, grey areas, complicates silicon policy, is confusing to players and is likely to result in a lot of ahelps and discussions. I say borging should clear antag status.

You're right that it creates more work for the crew and AI by keeping them around and disincentivizes people from borging antags. But there are so many counters to borgs acting out (flashes, robotics console to lock or detonate, new laws, verbal orders...) and I think this niche case of a traitor retaining their antag status is exponentially more interesting than gaining a new compliant borg.

[wesoda25]

Nothing is being lost here because this is how borged antags have worked for as long as I can remember.

As an antagonist borg, you can do whatever you want, short of defying your laws or your AI. This is how it works, this is not difficult to understand nor does it produce edge cases.

Borging antags is still viable because you can either order the AI to keep them in line, or the borg itself. If you choose not to go with borging because you feel it isn't safe, feel free to employ the numerous other ways that security and other departments have of keeping antagonists in the round.

tldr borg is antag why is this a thread

[Cobby]

If the only way you can ever play the game is to put antags in situations by which they are 100% disabled from ever doing literally anything conflict-driven for the rest of the round, regardless of however minor that might actually play out, you might just have a shit mentality? Not even considering you still have room to "disable" a borg through laws and still keep them in the round pacified.

Just wait until you learn that AIs can be traitor and/or subverted, so adding borgs in general carries innate risk if you aren't careful (and these tells are less obvious than a known traitor being borged).

[Intercept0r]

You're right that it creates more work for the crew and AI by keeping them around and disincentivizes people from borging antags. But there are so many counters to borgs acting out (flashes, robotics console to lock or detonate, new laws, verbal orders...) and I think this niche case is exponentially more interesting than gaining a new compliant borg.

For transparency, I was never at the receiving end of an antag borg.

The other interesting option I see is borg your BB, formaldehyde/freeze the body, complete objectives with help of apparently assimov borg then unborg. Assuming your BB is human, law1 prohibits revealing tator status or objectives, reducing number of hard tells from figuratively zero (excluding those who pick apart headmin rulings) to literally zero.

Seeing as borgs don't have hands and are additionally restricted by laws, in practice the few times I've seen this happen the objectives are no longer achievable and neutered tator status becomes a server rule1 relaxation used to excuse otherwise ahelpable behavior. I believe this case constitutes the majority of borged antag scenarios.

I'm not opposed to borg antags, even roundstart ones (imagine bodysnatch objective), provided the game is modified to accommodate them mechanically and include aspects of good antag design such as:
- Tells other than behavior/ knowledge of headmin ruling
- Non-ambiguous rules of tatoring contained in-game without opening external forums
- Replacement/handling/alternatives for impossible win conditions (hands/inventory)
- Communication (wiki/PR/etc) that oddly behaving assimov borg may be an IC, not OOC issue

If the only way you can ever play the game is to put antags in situations by which they are 100% disabled from ever doing literally anything conflict-driven for the rest of the round, regardless of however minor that might actually play out, you might just have a shit mentality?

And yet, borg antags incentivize exactly that. A sec player should not assume AI is going to get subverted in the same way atmos shouldn't disconnect plasma pipes without reason. With players being allowed to have IC knowledge about mechanics, this makes borging a liability, or fiddly, or both (see BB example), discouraging it as a method to deal with tators in favor of the shuttle.

[Cobby]

you have enough intelligence to know the intrinsic nature of how the bbeg's brain functions when placed in a MMI but not enough to law 2 it carefully or append laws to it so it doesnt act out of line? At that point you may as well suggest you cant borg people because there's a chance the AI can get subverted or better yet be a traitor themselves.

Not gonna even bother with the "well im allowed to know mechanics" argument, it isn't ever worth bringing it up especially when we aren't even referring to mechanics. Again, may as well just not borg them because you're ALLOWED to know the AI could be subverted or a traitor. it's stupid.

It's like arguing why put them in perma where you have an immense amount of control over them but still provide an opportunity for escape versus just offing them? Like just take a step back, maybe your thought process of "I like to remove antags in the most effective way possible" comes at a cost of the enjoyment of the game overall. Understanding that sometimes you are going to fuck up and lose is ok, or maybe even something completely beyond your control fucks up which results in yours or other people's death. There seems to be an unhealthy amount of people who don't understand this concept anymore.

[Tlaltecuhtli]

what if....... antag borgs himselfs willingly to then stealthly cause a catfag genocide with ai powers?

[XivilaiAnaxes]

what if....... antag borgs himselfs willingly to then stealthly cause a catfag genocide with ai powers?

You probably wouldn't slave yourself to the AI, and you would probably just set your own laws beforehand (actually unsure if you can do that to a borg? I know you can do it to an AI core and have done it before myself)

[stan_albatross]

what if....... antag borgs himselfs willingly to then stealthly cause a catfag genocide with ai powers?

You probably wouldn't slave yourself to the AI, and you would probably just set your own laws beforehand (actually unsure if you can do that to a borg? I know you can do it to an AI core and have done it before myself)

the only way to actually borg yourself by yourself is with roburgers and I believe borgs from roburgers get auto-slaved

other niche methods include transform staffs (I believe they are not slaved) and cyborg converter (obviously slaved to the malf ai)

making a new borg, you can disable ai slaving and ai autoupdate pre-install of mmi, but you cannot change its laws before the mmi is installed.

fun fact, the three methods above are the only way to borg a ling. And the only way to make it station aligned by default is with the roburgers (and to stop it using anatomic panacea to cure the robot transformation disease you have to pump it full of BZ/n2o mixture)

[Intercept0r]

you have enough intelligence to know the intrinsic nature of how the bbeg's brain functions when placed in a MMI but not enough to law 2 it carefully or append laws to it so it doesnt act out of line?

You missed my original point, which was about intentional and voluntary borging of one of the BBs, without revealing antag status of either. This creates a borg which is slaved, has AI connection, AI laws but is indistinguishable from a metafriending/policy-ignoring borg player by means other than observing borg behavior and ahelp responses.

Assuming the BB antag status of the borg is/becomes known, it would be able to deny a law 2 request to sell out his BB because of law 1.

Unlinking from AI and adding custom anti-tator laws would be a good and fun solution, however I have never seen it happen. With antag borging being relatively easy, explicitly mentioned in wiki/space law/tips, I would expect the opportunities to install these custom laws to be plenty. Question to everyone - can anyone provide a round report where such custom anti-tator laws were applied?

I am speculating here that this situation practically does not happen (do prove me wrong), and the reason for that is this situation isn't well supported in code and is not explained well in-game. If borg antags are to be a thing, at minimum I would expect:
- Unconditionally adding extra hidden law at end: "Accomplish your objectives at all cost, except where doing so would conflict with previous laws"
- Print traitor prompt/objectives upon MMI/borg insertion, same as upon tator revival.

At that point you may as well suggest you cant borg people because there's a chance the AI can get subverted or better yet be a traitor themselves.

False equivalency. Preventively disarming an AI which later could or could not be subverted is metagaming. Borging a traitor is guaranteed to result in preservation of traitor status (and bad faith law interpretation) IC and guaranteed rule1 relaxation OOC.

It's like arguing why put them in perma where you have an immense amount of control over them but still provide an opportunity for escape versus just offing them?

Both perma and significant gulag are undesirable and boring compared to borging, which is why many players would rather simply die than RP to spare their lives and spend the round in perma. Those who do get permad, even with sec effort (prison uniform, ID..) often suicide or go SSD.

For this reason, on Terry at least, sec generally destroy the body as the default approach and consider perma only if the the player gave reason to believe he won't airtank himself first thing the cuffs are off.

Like just take a step back, maybe your thought process of "I like to remove antags in the most effective way possible" comes at a cost of the enjoyment of the game overall.

That is your personal, subjective opinion of what type of playstyle you find enjoyable. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle_ta ... ayer_types for a broader picture.

[Cobby]

You missed my original point, which was about intentional and voluntary borging of one of the BBs, without revealing antag status of either. This creates a borg which is slaved, has AI connection, AI laws but is indistinguishable from a metafriending/policy-ignoring borg player by means other than observing borg behavior and ahelp responses.

Which is a fair play if you dont consider the fact they are considered dead for the purpose of greentext if they stay as borg. Heaven forbid you have to watch borgs to make sure they act up, antag or otherwise.

Assuming the BB antag status of the borg is/becomes known, it would be able to deny a law 2 request to sell out his BB because of law 1.

Yep, welcome to asimov. This wouldnt matter if they are antag or not. That is arguably the intention of why we default to asimov.

Unlinking from AI and adding custom anti-tator laws would be a good and fun solution, however I have never seen it happen. With antag borging being relatively easy, explicitly mentioned in wiki/space law/tips, I would expect the opportunities to install these custom laws to be plenty. Question to everyone - can anyone provide a round report where such custom anti-tator laws were applied?

for asimov you dont need additional laws just a well formatted order. It is probably quite rare if ever considering the amount of people who can borg are vastly larger than the amount of people who can edit laws by default. That isnt the point though if you COULD do it for the purpose of policy.

I am speculating here that this situation practically does not happen (do prove me wrong), and the reason for that is this situation isn't well supported in code and is not explained well in-game. If borg antags are to be a thing, at minimum I would expect:
- Unconditionally adding extra hidden law at end: "Accomplish your objectives at all cost, except where doing so would conflict with previous laws"
- Print traitor prompt/objectives upon MMI/borg insertion, same as upon tator revival.

I think you're missing the point where this has ALWAYS been the policy, at least since I started playing. It isnt a new thing, it's been this way for years.

False equivalency. Preventively disarming an AI which later could or could not be subverted is metagaming. Borging a traitor is guaranteed to result in preservation of traitor status (and bad faith law interpretation) IC and guaranteed rule1 relaxation OOC.

you dont have to be a traitor borg to have a bad faith interpretation of a law. If you do your laws or orders (if asimov) right they are literally no different than a normal AI which is my point. If you think they are shit then dont bring them back into the round

That is your personal, subjective opinion of what type of playstyle you find enjoyable. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle_ta ... ayer_types for a broader picture.

You can tell me that when you aren't arguing putting people out of hour+ rounds for literally existing as the bad guy if you cannot ensure there is no way for them to be 100% no longer bad.

Its not exactly subjective this particular playstyle displaces every other one when on the topic of ss13, so much that we in this community had to literally make another server that curbed that particular playstyle directly.

[Intercept0r]

Thanks for an in-depth reply Cobby.

Which is a fair play if you dont consider the fact they are considered dead for the purpose of greentext if they stay as borg. Heaven forbid you have to watch borgs to make sure they act up, antag or otherwise.

I did, the body would be formaldehyded and the borg force-unborged before roundend. Not sure if OP or valid strategy, I'm going to enable BB and see if it's feasible.

I think you're missing the point where this has ALWAYS been the policy, at least since I started playing.

I disagree with the policy, but I acknowledge it. Seeing as there is little support to overturn it, I would like your opinion on whether you agree that this mechanic is insufficiently transparent in-game and would benefit from changes in code.

[Cobby]

It is transparent by the nature that nothing suggests you lose traitor, even your IC memory still very much suggests that you have the objectives and so long as you are within laws you are ok.

That's not to say we cant put in a blurb in policy making sure everyone understands that given the ordeal here,but I dont see a *code* solution here.

[Armhulen]

With new interpretations like "Traitorborgs slaved to a nonantag AI can go around killing nonhumans" you will see even less (used to happen way more in ye olde times) of keeping antags in as borgs and any time a traitorborg is made it will feel a LOT more like roboticists knowingly setting up an antag to kill people and a LOT less like the borg is wily and interpreting their laws in a cheeky way.

[Intercept0r]

It is transparent by the nature that nothing suggests you lose traitor, even your IC memory still very much suggests that you have the objectives and so long as you are within laws you are ok.

I'd say your knowledge of the code, and how memories tab is mechanically tied to antag status, is not representative of the wider playerbase. The fact that these threads keep appearing occasionally to reiterate the same ruling also indicate this rule is not clear. Sec guide lists forceborging being an alternative to execution, both unique by requiring cap approval, implying they're a permanent way to deal with the tator, inherent silicon risks nonwithstanding. Retention of tator status is not mentioned.

That's not to say we cant put in a blurb in policy making sure everyone understands that given the ordeal here,but I dont see a *code* solution here.

Please review:
- Unconditionally adding extra hidden law at end: "Accomplish your objectives at all cost, except where doing so would conflict with previous laws"
- Print traitor prompt/objectives upon MMI/borg insertion, same as upon tator revival.

With new interpretations

I'm not neccesarily arguing for a new interpretation, I think the current interpretation is fine, provided it is better explained in-game.

[Zybwivcz]

Regardless of what the 'correct' interpretation of the relevant rules are, there should be a special case for slaved borgs that override(as long as the brain is still in the borg) antag status.

Fairly certain the most common player belief on antags and borging is that it suspends antag status. Otherwise antags, or possible antags, would never get borged. Or anybody for that matter. Why would a roboticist be willing to borg that assistant at round start if they might be a blood brother who's going to use it to plasmaflood?

Traitorborging exists as a favor to traitor players. It's good for them because it means getting caught doesn't necessarily mean their round is over. It's good for the rest of the station because it's good to have another borg around if that borg isn't going to just immediately try to murder you.

[Domitius]

I'm seeing a lot of people arguing that borging antags is a favour to keep them in the round but posibrains exist allowing them to freely rejoin the round if they wish. As well if there is no active roboticist setting up posibrains than there isn't an active one ready to borg them.

I feel particularly strongly about antagonists still retaining their status as a slaved borg(As long as they follow those laws and their AI). The whacky nature of this game lends itself to imperfect design such as this so conflict can emerge. Further restricting antags in any capacity from raging at the dying of the light as they scream into their MMI just feels wrong.