Security and the armory

[TheRex9001]

This policy discussion is about the current state of security and the armoury, specifically in relation to taking stuff out of it roundstart. This was previously ruled on in viewtopic.php?f=85&t=32489&p=657300&hil ... ry#p657300 but after a recent discussion I believe its worth taking this subject up again.

Where does the line go for this? Can I take non-lethals like dragnets? Can I take stuff out of the contraband locker roundstart? Can I do it every round? Can I break in as a security officer to do it?

[TheRex9001]

I'll also note here, this ruling needs a refresh in general. Rule 12 isnt a thing anymore and a lot of things about security has changed in 2 years.

[MooCow12]

I would appreciate dragnets being able to be taken out round start just so they get nerfed due to sec using them 24/7


They are not an inherently lethal weapon they are just really good at what they do (instastamcrit shotgun) and can be upgraded to lethal.

[TheLoLSwat]

from a captains POV I open armory for any and all security personnel that feel like they need extra weaponry. Its not too big of a deal going from a disabler to an egun and the visual of incompetent secoffs running around with riot armor and 2 shotguns is entertaining

[JusticeGoat]

I think the warden or captain should be allowed to hand out gear from the armory that is appropriate for the situation round start. they are managing the armory and shouldn't have many restrictions on handing out gear besides maybe holding off on laser guns or such until its needed, but the non lethals or weapons with those options shouldn't be restricted.

[Fatal]

Given security already has access to their own stuff (which is unrestricted to them) and the armory is restricted, I think taking stuff from the armory without good cause, should be forbidden (such as rushing it roundstart repeatedly)

However, if there's good cause to have it, such as, being a solo security officer with 50 crew to deal with, or a particularly high threat alert, or proof of a certain threat being present, that's what the armory is for

Given security are expected to use non-lethal weaponry anyway there should be a reason to carry a lethal weapon, more than "just in case"

[Jacquerel]

Given security are expected to use non-lethal weaponry anyway there should be a reason to carry a lethal weapon, more than "just in case"

it's worth noting that there are nonlethal items in the armoury (dragnets at the very least)

[Vekter]

Given security are expected to use non-lethal weaponry anyway there should be a reason to carry a lethal weapon, more than "just in case"

I would say it depends pretty heavily on the situation. At round start? Not really, since it's supposed to just be a regular day on the station. Like half an hour in after finding out there's fuckery afoot? Sounds more reasonable.

[britgrenadier1]

Sometimes I just want to run a shotgun over a disabler for funzies. Being prohibited from doing that would be lame so we should allow sec to take less than lethal weapons out of the armory roundstart.

[Vekter]

Sometimes I just want to run a shotgun over a disabler for funzies. Being prohibited from doing that would be lame so we should allow sec to take less than lethal weapons out of the armory roundstart.

I think I would be okay with this, but I'm not sure about roundstart. I worry that it's going to lead to situations where someone sees sec pull out a shotgun and assumes they're going to lethal them.

[britgrenadier1]

Sometimes I just want to run a shotgun over a disabler for funzies. Being prohibited from doing that would be lame so we should allow sec to take less than lethal weapons out of the armory roundstart.

I think I would be okay with this, but I'm not sure about roundstart. I worry that it's going to lead to situations where someone sees sec pull out a shotgun and assumes they're going to lethal them.

I don’t think anyone is gonna expect me to lethal them with a shotgun, we don’t have buckshot anymore and scrapshot doesn’t get made much. I wouldn’t want sec to essentially escalation bait with it though since it does do SOME damage. It just requires good faith play on both sides and I’m hoping that that isn’t too much to ask for since I still want to run shotguns.

[GamerAndYeahMick]

I would rather not have blanket policy about this because the restriction will make people not do things in general that could lead to good outcomes which are fun (with the potential for bad ones as well), I do think we have sufficient abilities within the scopes of the rules to suggest to people not to make decisions like this consistently or enough for everyone to notice they are doing it consistently especially when their intention is most likely more focused on the win/lose mentality or treating the game less like a roleplaying sandbox and more like a shooter, I would also suggest that we somehow enable and inform people in command positions that they can and should demote people who are doing things like stealing from the locker without permission and enforce that they have greater power over the management of their department within in-character means, this may be in the form of flavour text or a page on the wiki or some sort of information panel about what is expected from them and what is considered good play and within the scope of their authority, additionally I take issue with the fact that ever changing rulings can be quite hard to follow and can get confusing or bloated, and that as a rule of thumb we should avoid them when we can use a reasonable application of rules in place on a case by case basis, that said I do appreciate the thread being created and the discussion it is creating and understand the point of view of others and why they may feel the need for the policy.

[TheRex9001]

We already have a blanket policy on this, and as mentioned security has changed a lot in 2 years when the old one was made. Refreshing or removing the old ruling is kind of the intent of this policy thread.

[BrianBackslide]

Does the armory distinction even matter when sec can get their hands on most of the armory's lethal and nonlethal compliment without setting foot therein through free departmental orders?

[Jacquerel]

Personally I think that immediately, without any in-round reasoning, taking the guns in the "contraband locker" which are there to imply that time didn't begin the second you hit start and are also explicitly labelled "contraband" and "something you shouldn't be carrying" is the mark of the stinkiest fail RP. IDK what ruling should be made about that, except that maybe if it really is just a loot locker we should just take the guns out of it.
Or at least give them a firing pin that plays a farting noise every time you use it.
I don't think people want us to do that though.

That said I also think this about the Captain's Laser; unfortunately players (and occasionally admins) consistently prove that it's impossible to give people nice things for flavour sometimes.

[Higgin]

make the contraband locker into a secure boobytrapped crate with a puzzle. there are already locked evidence lockers for captured shit that get used just as often.

security should be able to use what they're given and eat the consequences of misuse or overuse - I tend with san's opinion in the original ruling. we should be intervening when that misuse itself constitutes a rulebreak like lethalling people FNR or being a dick with a full loadout of gamer gear, but otherwise, this feels as if to say that doctors shouldn't be making roundstart chems or robotics shouldn't be making mechs if it pleases them -

they do fighting. they're the fighting job. let them try to get the shit they want to fight with and wardens/HoSses/whoever keep them wrangled away from becoming loot pinatas if it suits them.

...

We have thus agreed that security should - at a minimum - wait until the announcement of the station's blue alert status or a report / sighting of an active antagonist to start moving to open the armoury or to distribute high value equipment amongst security team members.

...

refreshing this would be nice because it feels like we often totally neglect the security advisory or blue alert as an OOC thing. they functionally are, but I think letting people treat them as an IC development is much more harmonious and an easy ask.

"gimme riot gear + drag"
"it's a blue star, chill for a bit"
"grrr ok"

"gimme riot gear + drag"
"MIDNIGHT SUN WHY ARE YOU NOT FORTIFYING THE SHIT IS ALREADY ON THE FLOOR"
"GAHHHH"

much better than people wondering if the OOC threshold has been crossed imo - otherwise, if it's an issue of roundstart gear being roundstart dominant, maybe remove some of it and force security to order more of it in or randomize what shows up with spawners.

[JupiterJaeden]

Gonna comment on this from a mostly MRP perspective as I main MRP sec.

I definitely agree with higgin that the threat advisory should be the guide for how freely armory gear is distributed near roundstart, which is normally how I deal with it when I play HOS. Although even on lower threats I usually won't deny a secoff asking for 1-2 pieces of equipment, and I often take a dragnet myself. Regardless of the advisory though, I think there's really no issue with security generally being allowed to utilize a little armory gear roundstart. Anyone who is repeatedly distributing the whole armory roundstart could be dealt with under RPR 10/the general powergaming rules.

The reason for this is that I think it's just more fun as security to have access to more variety in your roundstart loadout, and I don't think a couple pieces of armory equipment here and there seriously disrupts the balance of the game. There is definitely some strong equipment in there but none of it is all that much stronger than the stun baton every secoff gets roundstart anyways. As for things like lethals which are categorically different than stun weapons- anyone who abuses this can be dealt with by other rules already anyways.

I also think if there is no one available to authorize access to it, there is nothing wrong with a secoff breaking into the armory, particularly on lowpop. They shouldn't be disallowed from using the equipment provided to them in their department just because no one could give them access.

The contraband locker is a whole different beast, I don't think there's any reason to be looting that roundstart, at least on MRP. MRP security should generally only be using contraband weapons during a serious emergency. Maybe something like a midnight sun advisory might justify it, but even then it doesn't really hurt to just wait 10 minutes for a threat that warrants it to pop up.

Side note: barriers not being allowed roundstart from that old ruling is outdated and dumb, and barely enforced anymore anyways. I actually think wardens should have more freedom to fortify the brig if they want to, it barely ever happens anyways and it could lead to some creative designs. So long as you aren't like completely making the armory inaccessible roundstart or whatever, let wardens dick around with the brig a bit.

[britgrenadier1]

True, we should let people do whatever with barriers. I see wardens use them to make the brig entrance into a 1x2 all the time. It’s fine imo, warden is there to guard the brig and him fortifying should be like the CE setting up the SM.

[Vekter]

True, we should let people do whatever with barriers. I see wardens use them to make the brig entrance into a 1x2 all the time. It’s fine imo, warden is there to guard the brig and him fortifying should be like the CE setting up the SM.

I'm still not a fan of doing this at roundstart, because it doesn't make sense from an RP perspective, but we used to have a whole rule around it that got thrown out at some point.

[Timonk]

whenever i am HoS i like to only open the armory for my secofficers (including dragnet and egun) when there is an actual threat running around. if someone is telling me to open the armory, i deny their request. However, if one of them somehow do manage to get their hands on armory content without my consent i usually dont go chasing after it.

[britgrenadier1]

True, we should let people do whatever with barriers. I see wardens use them to make the brig entrance into a 1x2 all the time. It’s fine imo, warden is there to guard the brig and him fortifying should be like the CE setting up the SM.

I'm still not a fan of doing this at roundstart, because it doesn't make sense from an RP perspective, but we used to have a whole rule around it that got thrown out at some point.

I think it gets rough to talk about RP perspective for stuff like this. You might look at the warden fortifying and say“Why are you making changes to your company workplace they built it the way they built it.” While that’s fair, I think it might stifle interactions further into the round since now antags and tiders will only ever break into a known brig. IMO it would be fun if there were quirks to brig layout that the warden built. It would be something players have control over and could totally change the tempo and positioning of later brig fights.

Also I just want to add that I like the idea of respecting alert level and star advisory more. Blueshift brig shouldn’t be too crazy, but black orbit brig should be fair game to be made impenetrable by wardens.

[Screemonster]

That said I also think this about the Captain's Laser; unfortunately players (and occasionally admins) consistently prove that it's impossible to give people nice things for flavour sometimes.

elsewhere I PR'd a thing that made the cap's laser randomise its stats at roundstart as befitting an unmaintained antique display piece that draws its inspiration as a theft objective from that one episode of firefly where they were doing a heist to steal an antique laser gun (which, as shown later in the episode, didn't work)

it could (or could not) have a hidden "x shots left until burning out" counter, picked its beam type at random, and could also have a nonzero "chance per shot of malfunctioning" with malfunctions ranging from "just increase the chance from now on and let out some sparks" to "downgrade the beam type" to "drain/damage/destroy the battery" to "just straight-up fucking explode in your hand"

so you could get incredibly lucky and roll a no-downside recharging pulse destroyer
or you could get a practice laser that burns out after two shots and takes your arm off

I'd port it here if you wanted but it's oldass polariscode so it's probably easier just redoing it from scratch

[Vekter]

True, we should let people do whatever with barriers. I see wardens use them to make the brig entrance into a 1x2 all the time. It’s fine imo, warden is there to guard the brig and him fortifying should be like the CE setting up the SM.

I'm still not a fan of doing this at roundstart, because it doesn't make sense from an RP perspective, but we used to have a whole rule around it that got thrown out at some point.

I think it gets rough to talk about RP perspective for stuff like this. You might look at the warden fortifying and say“Why are you making changes to your company workplace they built it the way they built it.” While that’s fair, I think it might stifle interactions further into the round since now antags and tiders will only ever break into a known brig. IMO it would be fun if there were quirks to brig layout that the warden built. It would be something players have control over and could totally change the tempo and positioning of later brig fights.

Also I just want to add that I like the idea of respecting alert level and star advisory more. Blueshift brig shouldn’t be too crazy, but black orbit brig should be fair game to be made impenetrable by wardens.

I'm fine with this, I just don't think that a blue shift brig should have any real changes to it whereas a black orbit being a little harder to break into should be fine.

I really don't like the idea of the brig being this completely impenetrable bunker without a valid reason like "there's war ops".

[TheBibleMelts]

the threshold for opening the armory should be the same for the captain busting his antique out. it's the emergency stash - opening it up for officers/anybody to arm up outside of an emergency is lame.

[ItzRiumz]

I’m against opening the entire armory roundstart without a good reason. However I do believe that officers should be able to request specific equipment from the armory if they want them roundstart(shotguns, energy guns, dragnets, armor.)Variety is the spice of life and I believe officers running around with different equipment is much more interesting than the boring disabler every round. I am hesitant to give out purely lethal weaponry like lasers roundstart unless a good reason is given(black orbit, known dangerous threat, etc.)

I view the contraband locker loot similar to the caps laser gun. You shouldn’t be using the stuff in it unless things have gone entirely wrong within a round (The only exception I’m fine with is the bolas in the syndicate throwing weapon box.). It’s cringe to hand that stuff out for no reason and I will endlessly make fun of you if you do it.

[dendydoom]

my feeling on mrp (and who used to be a warden/sec main) i'll give what i'd consider "alternative" (not more lethal but perhaps more effective) items from the armoury after the threat level is escalated. i never gave out guns unless there was an active threat and we were co-ordinating to beat it. throwing open the armoury and handing out guns to officers walking the beat just in case they might need it felt very lame to me.

basically my sentiment is that people should just have a non-hypothetical reason to want to escalate to greater use of force. people have gone missing, x important person died, i saw a monster in medbay, whatever it is. you could probably leverage anything to get this outcome because the game is a crisis management simulator and things are supposed to escalate and go wrong more or less every single round. but just because this is a given doesn't mean we should stop considering it as an important aspect of the game for the story to ramp up and increase in intensity and therefore necessitate a stronger response when the time comes!

[Higgin]

my feeling on mrp (and who used to be a warden/sec main) i'll give what i'd consider "alternative" (not more lethal but perhaps more effective) items from the armoury after the threat level is escalated. i never gave out guns unless there was an active threat and we were co-ordinating to beat it. throwing open the armoury and handing out guns to officers walking the beat just in case they might need it felt very lame to me.

basically my sentiment is that people should just have a non-hypothetical reason to want to escalate to greater use of force. people have gone missing, x important person died, i saw a monster in medbay, whatever it is. you could probably leverage anything to get this outcome because the game is a crisis management simulator and things are supposed to escalate and go wrong more or less every single round. but just because this is a given doesn't mean we should stop considering it as an important aspect of the game for the story to ramp up and increase in intensity and therefore necessitate a stronger response when the time comes!

I think that in the minds of a lot of folks, imposing limits here means prescribing that "you are going to be caught flat-footed for reasons perfectly within your OOC ability to avoid" and that's not rewarding to the player.

I'm not entirely sure how we might make it more so. Being Officer Friendly with your button-up and tie at some level has to be its own reward or be recognized as valuable in order to not suck when you get riddled with .45 or .357. Some of that reward probably comes from reputation and varies person-to-person.

One alternative is to make it harder to get the stuff or have it with you up front for "normal" use - putting everybody who wants it on more of a hustle to prep and play to the worst possible or even median round, which can suck and get exhausting (also true of medical prep, mechs, etc.)

Another way might be to change the distribution of rounds so that more often than not, you don't need the gear at all. This can also suck unless you've got a community and scene in which people are happy to make their fun in other ways (some of which other servers rely on and we do not allow) - you get less action and still have people preparing for the ceiling of the "worst" that they can imagine even doing this though.

it is a dilemma

[dendydoom]

playing unoptimally or leaving yourself vulnerable when you could quite easily ignore set and setting to pick up a rocket launcher can be frustrating but an important and i'd argue integral aspect of the roleplay in this game is the existence and enforcement of procedure.

sometimes this bleeds over into ooc where admins have to correct people who fall into the trap of playing every round like a flowchart or engaging with the rules/expectations like a checklist, but the ultimate goal in my mind is to have its presence be felt in the IC space more than the ooc.

the dilemma to me is in recognizing that many people in positions of command won't enforce that sort of procedure around guns/tools because it puts them in opposition to the crew's "best interests" (having a shitload of guns so they can win) and when you drill down to any sort of expectation of victory then the first thing you might realize is that having the armoury opened roundstart is the best mechanical course of action.

to me the purpose here isn't to recognize that having guns is good because it means you can kill the bad guys easier, because that's already a given. it's that we're meant to begin every round on a space station where everything is fine, and our headspace when interacting with this scenario shouldn't be like buying an awp at the start of a CT round in full expectation that we'll be running off to use it immediately, but rather that you're thinking and anticipating with as much IC consideration as possible - like a tabletop roleplaying game. in this sense you are given the opportunity to play with procedure and engage with it in the context of that story, but to toss it out entirely because having guns is more optimal is something that i struggle to reconcile within the framework of a roleplaying game.

[Vekter]

playing unoptimally or leaving yourself vulnerable when you could quite easily ignore set and setting to pick up a rocket launcher can be frustrating but an important and i'd argue integral aspect of the roleplay in this game is the existence and enforcement of procedure.

sometimes this bleeds over into ooc where admins have to correct people who fall into the trap of playing every round like a flowchart or engaging with the rules/expectations like a checklist, but the ultimate goal in my mind is to have its presence be felt in the IC space more than the ooc.

the dilemma to me is in recognizing that many people in positions of command won't enforce that sort of procedure around guns/tools because it puts them in opposition to the crew's "best interests" (having a shitload of guns so they can win) and when you drill down to any sort of expectation of victory then the first thing you might realize is that having the armoury opened roundstart is the best mechanical course of action.

to me the purpose here isn't to recognize that having guns is good because it means you can kill the bad guys easier, because that's already a given. it's that we're meant to begin every round on a space station where everything is fine, and our headspace when interacting with this scenario shouldn't be like buying an awp at the start of a CT round in full expectation that we'll be running off to use it immediately, but rather that you're thinking and anticipating with as much IC consideration as possible - like a tabletop roleplaying game. in this sense you are given the opportunity to play with procedure and engage with it in the context of that story, but to toss it out entirely because having guns is more optimal is something that i struggle to reconcile within the framework of a roleplaying game.

Oh look Dendy is correct about something gee who could have predicted this

[Higgin]

[truth]

it's that we're meant to begin every round on a space station where everything is fine, and our headspace when interacting with this scenario shouldn't be like buying an awp at the start of a CT round in full expectation that we'll be running off to use it immediately, but rather that you're thinking and anticipating with as much IC consideration as possible - like a tabletop roleplaying game. in this sense you are given the opportunity to play with procedure and engage with it in the context of that story, but to toss it out entirely because having guns is more optimal is something that i struggle to reconcile within the framework of a roleplaying game.

Oh look Dendy is correct about something gee who could have predicted this

she can't keep getting away with this

i agree entirely as to the thrust of "what is to be done to preserve the kayfabe and openness at the heart of the roleplaying game" and think that getting people in that mindset matters a lot

i think especially for more regular and continuing players, besides those that might just be in it to win it and approaching it fully OOC, that mindset gets harder over time - it's worth considering what people feel that leads them to the armory and what might make the reset of mindset round to round more rewarding

for some of the best sec, what strikes me is an attitude towards making others' rounds fun - being open and vulnerable, or merciful and gracious when you 'win' with an enemy, or creating opportunities where the usual game would not require it, characterize approaches i've seen and heard expressed by people like Jupiter and Nickup in the past -

players who know the score and act in spite of it in sec and as antags rightly get the admiration of other players, and I suspect it's no small part of them continuing to do it that people appreciate them for it and it's known - I think a lot of people who fall into the roundstart routine don't or haven't ever been in a position to get that, or don't have the mechanical security to play more innocently with others, probably creating a more vicious cycle of sec gearing and gunning hard against antags gearing and gunning hard than needs to exist if both sides were fully in it IC playing characters in the roleplaying game of a day like any other until it goes terribly wrong (even if we know that's basically every day)

whatever's to be done with the armory in specific, centering IC reasoning and validating IC cues as authentic (like the threat level/alert change) or removing the ones that aren't feels like it's got to be the thrust over any "wait until x to do y because z ooc reason" solution here

[DrAmazing343]

+1 for IC reasoning above all else. For situations like the Warden creating the 1x2 “lanes” for the Brig airlocks with Barrier Grenades, I’d rule that as prep in structure like any other department (Medbay builds operating computers and surgical tables in the Treatment Center each round for efficiency; I’d argue this falls under the same umbrella as “this makes sense” rather than OOC powergaming.).

Aside from that, fall back upon IC reasoning for how much kit to take out, always always always. After hearing stories of legendary secoffs in the past, I took after the heroes of old and just stopped wearing body armor roundstart as Sec. Keep that shit in my bag, strap on as necessary.

Is this a standard I expect everyone else to follow? Of course not! It’s ridiculous and inconvenient— but I think, at least, we should seek to engender the same sort of sentiment. At least act like we’re characters who live in this setting day in and day out.

Codebases such as Aurora mandate this sort of thing with their rules, prohibiting (at least lightly, from reading their rules) wearing masks, MOD’s, and other realistically uncomfortable things 24/7 because in real life, it’d suck ass to be sucking down internals for hours at a time. Get Dune-tier dents in your nose and shit.

While that’s neither here nor there for our rules, or even particularly for this discussion, I believe it’s valuable as good for thought on our own roleplay and what sort of behaviors add to the setting. Perhaps there’s nothing to reward or punish necessarily, mechanics-wise, but mulling it over, at least, grants insight that’s worthwhile.

[dragomagol]

I would rather not have blanket policy about this because the restriction will make people not do things in general that could lead to good outcomes which are fun (with the potential for bad ones as well), I do think we have sufficient abilities within the scopes of the rules to suggest to people not to make decisions like this consistently or enough for everyone to notice they are doing it consistently especially when their intention is most likely more focused on the win/lose mentality or treating the game less like a roleplaying sandbox and more like a shooter, I would also suggest that we somehow enable and inform people in command positions that they can and should demote people who are doing things like stealing from the locker without permission and enforce that they have greater power over the management of their department within in-character means, this may be in the form of flavour text or a page on the wiki or some sort of information panel about what is expected from them and what is considered good play and within the scope of their authority, additionally I take issue with the fact that ever changing rulings can be quite hard to follow and can get confusing or bloated, and that as a rule of thumb we should avoid them when we can use a reasonable application of rules in place on a case by case basis, that said I do appreciate the thread being created and the discussion it is creating and understand the point of view of others and why they may feel the need for the policy.

I feel like Burger summed up my opinion pretty well: I think this is too micromanage-y of a rule to enforce on all servers, but I would on paper support a warden who wanted to enforce a version of this where they wait for confirmed enemy activity.

Tattle: Wrote it
Kieth4: Agree
Dendy: My concern was that there is no IC reason to arm up with lethals at the start of the round because the alert level is green (flavour text states that security won't be armed because there is no current threat to the station), but as soon as the command report prints and the alert level escalates, then I would support the brig being run as command/warden see fit.