/tg/Station 13

I wanted to open this policy thread to start up a discussion over "EoTC" and if it's place in space law is currently too harsh or not.

It's currently listed under Grand Felonies, "Crimes that can result in permanent incarceration, exile, or parole after serving a timed/labor camp sentence and being fitted with tracking, anti-teleportation, or chemical implants. Criminals can be sentenced to execution if they have established themselves to be uncontainable by available means."
https://wiki.tgstation13.org/Space_Law

I talked a little with Jeff Gaiman/JupiterJaeden who worked with TBM when this was set in place, Jeff's reasoning is that he doesn't like it when antags don't even try to hide that they're a traitor, feeling it an antithesis towards roleplay and creating paranoia and uncertainty. (He said he's not set on it staying this way either)
If you watch Jeff play as HoS, he also only really permabrigs someone for EoTC in cases where there's so much chaos that he can't really deal with the antagonist coming back again later on.

But I've also witnessed HoS's or security officers permabrig people for EoTC on chill shifts, which I feel is against the idea of a "catch and release" style of play.

Many people on Manuel in particular prefer lower threat shifts, and since we've been doing away with many antagonists that end the round early, I think it's vital to give antagonists more breathing room to run around and cause chaos, which would benefit medical and security especially, and add room for pulling off more interesting stories or gimmicks.

My personal opinion is that we're still struggling to adapt to the after effects of having dynamic be so high for so long, it's hard to let a traitor go because of the fear that everything will quickly degrade into shit. (People also tend to pin the blame on security if they do let an antag go free and then they get hurt by the antagonist...)

All in all, I would like to see more "catch and release" style play on Manuel.

i personally only perma for murder or if they’ve attempt to attack or kill a crew, otherwise it’s usually just tracker and release. gotta leave some fun for yourself, yknow? but regardless i think it should only be a normal felony.

EOTC charge is pointless right now, because you need proof to charge someone with it, and that proof lies in ANOTHER charge (like grand theft, possession of syndicate or heretic contraband, attempted murders, etc). To stick the EOTC charge onto someone, they would have had to have done a crime that's already tied to a massive brig sentence or perma. And you can't "stack" charges, so I've never seen it really do anything, and it often seems to spark an angry argument about "why did you charge me with this?." IC it's a far more obvious charge to tie someone's sentence to what they actually did, versus what they OOCly are. As for lore, Nanotrasen arresting people for being enemies of the corp makes sense, though. Lorewise it has a reason to exist.

So the question becomes, is it good for the game? If I had to choose, I'd say I'd prefer people to serve sentences for what they were caught doing in the shift. If that charge is not enough for a permabrig, and they're caught doing it again, you're allowed to upgrade the charge to perma then. So being caught with some heretic items wouldnt' warrant a perma immediately for EOTC charge (but you could still perma for murder, or attempted murder).

Better sec players who understand the flow of the game tend to know that RRing or permaing antags is not always for the betterment of the round, and sometimes they should be allowed to escape and get back into the game even if the charge you COULD give them was high. But a lot of sec players don't play that way, and it seems worth it to bring the space law more in line with what we'd like to see in gameplay.

People used to straight up execute over EoTC, regardless of type.
There was a ruling eventually that EoTC in and of itself isn't valid for execution (unless uncontainable IE ling (and later, heretic, unfortunately)). It's a lot better than it used to be, but it's still a sort of soft-RR a majority of the time.

If you catch a traitor who's not really done anything or fought back, take their uplink (if it's open) and implant them, let them go, so on. Maybe they'll manage to get a new uplink, maybe not.
If you catch a traitor who's been blowing shit up all over, send them to GITMO.
You'd think this would be a fairly obvious distinction given the stressing of "punish them according to their crimes" but it's sadly not really done unless certain people are HoS/Warden.

Antagonists should always have a fear of the station in the back of their minds, as they are an enemy of the corporation. This would be an IC culture change primarily and should be encouraged by playing a lot of security/HOS and being the change you want to see and not be hardwritten into policy (yes yes i know space law isn't policy or whatever but still).

On MRP there's one rule that rules them all when it comes to antag punishments: With the following key precedents: Space Law isn't policy on the RP server and it doesn't overrule or supercede the rules in any way, such is the case precisely to allow it to have some IC flavour without politicking around with what ends up being rules lawyering policy, especially since LRP and MRP both get to use Space Law equally.

My second term removed/overturned the previous term's decision to make Space Law actual policy. A gift to future headmin terms to not have to deal with micromanaging an RP guide with more rules than our actual rules pages, so they can simply rule "Space Law isn't policy, the wiki team can do whatever they want with it as long as it's still a good roleplay guideline" and walk away.

I think our rules are both comprehensive enough and clear enough on the topic of the OP. Not only in RPR6 itself - Restricted antagonists (or crewmembers) should be handled in proportion to their committed crimes - but also in the precedents in exhaustive detail repeating what the rule says with even more words.

If our admins are actually enforcing the rules that are written down right there on the rules page, or they've just decided it would be too inconvenient or high effort to do so, may perhaps be a different question to research. However, as per the spirit and actual literal letter of the rules, just being an antag without anything else alongside it currently isn't a permabriggable offence unless the antag is unrestricted - in which case pretty much all bets are off.

this might be better as a general players club thread / manuelcord discussion. Its a culture change plea and its up to the players to do so, not a generally passive admin team

Timberpoes wrote: ↑Fri Jul 04, 2025 5:27 pm On MRP there's one rule that rules them all when it comes to antag punishments:

Spoiler:

RP Rule 6. Deal with the bad guys in proportion to their crime(s) wrote: Restricted antagonists (or crewmembers) should be handled in proportion to their committed crimes. The decision to execute an antagonist should have good in-character reasoning based on their crimes and the state of the shift. Punishments against antagonists that repeatedly commit minor crimes may be escalated. Only antagonists that have committed the most severe crimes may be met with immediate execution.

Security members are expected to consider the full range of punishment options available when dealing with antags. This includes (but is not always limited to) pacification, implants, timed brig sentences, gulag sentences, permabrig, forced borging and execution. Forced borging is considered equivalent to execution in punishment severity.

With the following key precedents:

Spoiler:

Security and Punishments wrote:When dealing with the crew and antagonists, make sure their punishments are in proportion to their crime(s). Minor crimes such as departmental break-ins, stolen equipment should be met with short, but increasing sentences depending on recurring visits by the apprehended. Stealing critical station equipment and items such as the hand teleporter, Chief Engineer's hardsuit, or AI upload boards are more severe crimes and should be met with longer prison times, or potentially permabrigging if the crime is deemed severe enough.

Murder and Major Sabotage rank amongst the most severe of crimes and can generally be met with permanent imprisonment or death, though leniency can still be offered. These are all general guidelines, and the particular context of a situation can vary greatly, so you are given some leeway as to how harsh or lenient you can be.

...

The overall status of the station factors in to the severity of committed crimes and the proportionality of security response, an assault on an officer resulting in an arrest is unlikely to be worthy of execution while the station is in perfect shape and security are otherwise unoccupied, but is reasonably worthy of an on-the-spot field execution if it occurs during active assault by war-ops with comms down and half the station torn in half by explosions.

Security are fully allowed and encouraged to use non-standard or lesser punishments such as community service, mandatory psychological visits or other interaction-focused less punitive punishments where relevant and fun – crimes do not have to be met with standard punishments where other options are more interesting.

Space Law isn't policy on the RP server and it doesn't overrule or supercede the rules in any way, such is the case precisely to allow it to have some IC flavour without politicking around with what ends up being rules lawyering policy, especially since LRP and MRP both get to use Space Law equally.

My second term removed/overturned the previous term's decision to make Space Law actual policy. A gift to future headmin terms to not have to deal with micromanaging an RP guide with more rules than our actual rules pages, so they can simply rule "Space Law isn't policy, the wiki team can do whatever they want with it as long as it's still a good roleplay guideline" and walk away.

I think our rules are both comprehensive enough and clear enough on the topic of the OP. Not only in RPR6 itself - Restricted antagonists (or crewmembers) should be handled in proportion to their committed crimes - but also in the precedents in exhaustive detail repeating what the rule says with even more words.

If our admins are actually enforcing the rules that are written down right there on the rules page, or they've just decided it would be too inconvenient or high effort to do so, may perhaps be a different question to research. However, as per the spirit and actual literal letter of the rules, just being an antag without anything else alongside it currently isn't a permabriggable offence unless the antag is unrestricted - in which case pretty much all bets are off.

I think the whole gist is that "in proportion" doesn't really mean anything, cause what's "proportionate"? Most manuel players use space law as a guideline to see what's proportionate from what I can tell. Being an antag is a crime, you're working for eldritch god/enemy corporation/whatever, so what's proportionate to just being an antag? Let's say sec found a heretic because he showed the mansus hand but did nothing else bad. What is proportionate to his crime? Is it valid to perma them under EOTC? Spacelaw guideline says it is so people follow it this way (or followed now that heretic is turned off). Does it leave space for a better RP environment? I doubt

So, in proportion is defined in the precedents with the examples.

Quote: It covers examples of minor crimes, more severe crimes, the most severe crimes, how the status of the shift can change things and that security are fully allowed and encouraged to use more interesting non-standard options.

Showing a mansus hand would probably be similar in scope to carrying contraband, i.e. that the antag did a thing that outed them as an EotC but what they actually did wasn't a crime of any true severity akin to grand theft or murder or whatever.

I think any kind of policy change here should really just modify space law with it. I don’t want players being told they should do one thing while space law says another.

Honestly? Just remove the charge and break it up into subcharges. LRP is free to do what they want since the whole “antags are valid” is an OOC concept already. Add in a contraband charge for items in this vein and that should really cover the actual usage of EOTC in MRP. Make it a felony or something so it’s not perma or execution worthy. If you’re executing or permaing someone it’s normally for another crime anyways.

I think it wouldn't hurt to just remove EOTC from space law entirely and just have people point to RPR 6 if they're confused. It's basically what's encouraged already anyhow

do spies fall under EoTC? they are not mentioned directly on space law and the stuff they steal is generaly sold on the black market, and yet are pretty much treated as a full on traitor of being permaed + trackered for stealing the booze machine on MRP

makes no sense to me that a corporation like nanotrasen wouldn't consider being a member of an enemy agency worthy of holding them indefinitely until evacuation.

TheBibleMelts wrote: ↑Sun Jul 06, 2025 6:05 am makes no sense to me that a corporation like nanotrasen wouldn't consider being a member of an enemy agency worthy of holding them indefinitely until evacuation.

svper trvth nqva

TheBibleMelts wrote: ↑Sun Jul 06, 2025 6:05 am makes no sense to me that a corporation like nanotrasen wouldn't consider being a member of an enemy agency worthy of holding them indefinitely until evacuation.

Nor would it make sense that Nanotrasen doesn't just order security to shoot them all on sight and yet we have RPR6, at some point using the excuse of "Muh immersion" doesn't cut it. Can we just for once consider whether or not it makes the game more fun?

NoxVS wrote: ↑Sat Jul 05, 2025 3:14 am I think any kind of policy change here should really just modify space law with it. I don’t want players being told they should do one thing while space law says another.

Yeah i agree with this, we say to follow RPR6 and to prosecute someone for the crimes they committed, but if you prosecute a traitor for EoTC before they even get to commit a crime (or just contraband) because they happened to let slip that theyre a tot too early

Seems like it's boring for security since they never gave time to let the tot cook, and in the worst case scenario, it's kind of ban baity if an admin decided to rule on RPR6 on the secoff who followed space law a little too literally

The only thing I wouldn't wanna see is antags getting a little too comfy with not hiding their antag status or even bothering to cover their tracks, that's pretty boring too, and I believe it's why EoTC was added to space law to begin with

Lore wise, it makes sense, but we also gotta consider how it translates in game imo, and how it ends up getting roleplayed out
Its roleplay-adjacent to follow space law to a T
but by not letting antags cook or removing them, theyre essentially removing job content for themselves (and for doctors) and this can lead to a competent security team extremely bored with nothing to do
And antags with gimmicks lose out on the chance to make a round more memorable imo

DaydreamIQ wrote: ↑Sun Jul 06, 2025 12:05 pm

TheBibleMelts wrote: ↑Sun Jul 06, 2025 6:05 am makes no sense to me that a corporation like nanotrasen wouldn't consider being a member of an enemy agency worthy of holding them indefinitely until evacuation.

Nor would it make sense that Nanotrasen doesn't just order security to shoot them all on sight and yet we have RPR6, at some point using the excuse of "Muh immersion" doesn't cut it. Can we just for once consider whether or not it makes the game more fun?

RPR 6 is a rule and those are to protect player fun. Space law not being enforced policy allows it to go in depth on crimes and how it should be punished, as a reference for security to follow. Also being able to read a comprehensive book on how crime looks and how to punish it (and then going out to apply it) is a large part of the fun for security even if its muh immersion.