oh boy another drone policy question

[Deitus]

so can drones make science or other department's shit

like if i wanna make an autocloner by the bridge or make my own RND lab in escape or a food stand with hydro trays or something is that kosher

i've been bwoinked for it before but others seem to do it fine so i dunno if the policy changed or if its just a per-admin basis

fanks

[Lazengann]

It's currently a per admin basis but there should probably be an actual policy set down.

I'd argue that making additional autocloners has a major effect on the round as it forces antagonists to change their strategies or fucks them over if they didn't know about some secret brig cloner. I don't think drones should have that sort of round impact.

[Armhulen]

"Improve the station unless your improvements help people"

??????????

[onleavedontatme]

Which admin

[Anonmare]

It's perfectly kosher to make an autocloner.
Also if you have medical ID, you can delete cloning records, deconstruct it with a screwdriver/crowbar, disable the power, blow it/override it with malf powers etc.
Not hard for any remotely able antagonist to accomplish


Making an AI Upload in the middle of a hallway or a robotics control would be not kosher as they can be used to directly interfere with another being, while an autoloner is inidrect

[bandit]

I would argue that an autocloner is a step too far, as it has a direct effect on people entering and re-entering the round, and arguably fucks up a traitor round way more than, say, repairing shit after a bomb, or wetting floors, both of which admins have said are not kosher. This isn't an official policy declaration, but the policy on these edge cases is so logically inconsistent I don't blame players for being confused.

Honestly, even the idea of making R&D stuff strikes me as out of the spirit of drones. This isn't a policy declaration either but an argument. Basically, we can think of drones either as mindless repair bots, or as quasi-crew members able to do anything a crew member does. Drone policy has been drifting toward the latter, which leads to gray areas like this, and thus endless questions about the microspecifics of what drones can and cannot do.

[onleavedontatme]

You're allowed to repair shit after a bomb though, you just can't disable the bomb before it goes off

[feem]

It comes down to game disruption. You can add features that are otherwise accessible and useful, but can't disrupt people or the round. I don't personally see a problem with cloners, or sleepers, or breach generators in escape, or things like that, unless they're being used to actively deny something to an antagonist or another player (e.g. a breach generator deployed while someone is breaking in from space).

I also don't personally see any problem with running R&D in theory, but I think that needlessly consuming resources or burning cards and things in the analyzer that can't be immediately replaced or which might actually be used is disruptive.

Basically, just as in the other discussions of this, drones are NOT player characters, but they are played by players. They can't directly and intentionally influence any individual's round (playing dumb doesn't count, "HOW WAS I SUPPOSED TO KNOW THEY'D OPEN THAT TANK OF PLASMA I PUT IN THE HALL???" is not a valid excuse), and they're explicitly instructed not to interact with game-critical items.

For this question, I'd suggest that anything which automatically and immediately brings a new character into the round (outside of additional drones -- and only drones) or anything which automatically and immediately can be used to take someone out of the round counts as a no, but I don't think that things which improve the ability of the station to sustain its crew are bad, so long as they are upgrades to the station and not things that autonomously affect other players (e.g. autocloner, viruses, etc).

As bandit said, drones are NOT player replacements. They're after-death perks or for that subset of players (like me) who sometimes just like to take time off from giving a fuck about anyone and play the construction minigame.

[bandit]

For this question, I'd suggest that anything which automatically and immediately brings a new character into the round (outside of additional drones -- and only drones) or anything which automatically and immediately can be used to take someone out of the round counts as a no, but I don't think that things which improve the ability of the station to sustain its crew are bad, so long as they are upgrades to the station and not things that autonomously affect other players (e.g. autocloner, viruses, etc).

The distinction between cloner and autocloner is important here, I think. It's a huge effect on the round to suddenly gain the ability for dead people to immediately pop back to life. Especially if no one was doing R&D before (I've had drones ask me if they can do R&D for the crew and my brain always dies a little)

[feem]

Yeah, I agree, that's a big distinction. That's why I tried to discriminate between things that help the currently-living players and things which help bring people back into the game.

Agency is something that only living players should have, short of a situation like a wizard making ghosts visible or messing with chaplains or ouija boards or spirit swords or whatnot.

A drone, as with any ghost role, has its own set of rules and rule protections. I think someone running around killing every drone they see without a good reason is bad. I also think a drone going around trying to urge people to resurrect players is bad.

I've bwoinked drones, recently, for things like fighting monsters on lavaland, or making borgs, or consuming a miner's haul of materials. But if it's something simple like building a sleeper or advancing a few levels of R&D with junk that nobody else is going to use anyway I don't really see a problem.

Drones ARE given the explicit instruction to upgrade stuff, and that would include turning an already-existing cloner into an autocloner, assuming they're allowed to print the items.

I think it comes down to a case by case basis: is what you're doing disruptive to someone else's round? If not, then who cares. If so, shame on you.

But that, arguably, leaves a lot of ambiguity for the average drone player to sort through on their own, especially if they're carrying the burden of having died in the round or having observed for a bit and they know generally what the round 'needs' from a drone. So a headmin ruling on this is probably worthwhile.

[BeeSting12]

I feel like an autocloner would be okay though. As long as you're not forcing people into the cloner, you're not really interfering, just making an improvement. I also thought that doing RnD was okay as long as you stop when someone else wants to do it.

[onleavedontatme]

"You can build a cloner to improve the station but you can't build an autocloner because it improves the station too much" seems really arbitrary and unfair to players who don't religiously follow every random post in policy discussion.

[leibniz]

I'll be honest, it is hard to rule right regarding drones, right now we are very lenient, which is probably the sane option as opposed to micromanagement.

>fixing a light a dude broke while they are still at the scene
>interference

>fixing 9000 tiles of damage a traitor did through hard work
>not interference because they are not standing next to you

It doesn't feel right.

[Anonmare]

First example is interference only if the guy at the scene tells you to stop and you ignore them

[lumipharon]

It's an often spammable ghost role, designed to have minimal impact on the round. It would be much more straight forward if drone law/policy said they could only maintain/repair the station. "Improve" is broad as fuck and as this thread shows, you can't make any reasonable line that the average player can logically figure out without having to dig through forums/policy.

If you want to make a mega meme station then can't you just be a derelict drone anyway?

[Dax Dupont]

If you want to make a mega meme station then can't you just be a derelict drone anyway?

eh not really because there's barely anything to work with.

[DemonFiren]

If you want to make a mega meme station then can't you just be a derelict drone anyway?

eh not really because there's barely anything to work with.

https://gitgud.io

[Anonmare]

It's an often spammable ghost role, designed to have minimal impact on the round. It would be much more straight forward if drone law/policy said they could only maintain/repair the station. "Improve" is broad as fuck and as this thread shows, you can't make any reasonable line that the average player can logically figure out without having to dig through forums/policy.

If you want to make a mega meme station then can't you just be a derelict drone anyway?

Not enough materials, either mundane or mining minerals and it takes a lot of effort to get the R&D on there going. Anyone who plays derelict with plans like that will go to the station for the purpose of stealing minerals and equipment.

[Cobby]

Yes, although in a perfect world + being a ghost role you'd have an understanding of how it might impact the round and consider that before making the call to do such knowing you are suppose to play as background noise.

[Dr_bee]

It feels to me that bwoinking drones for building machines is counter to what they were put into the game to do in the first place.

Weren't drones made stupidly easy to kill specifically so that if you see a drone doing something you dont want them to you can kill them easy? Why add OOC concequences when the IC concequences of building an autocloner that an antag doesnt want would be enough. Drones have a limited effect on the round but it should still be something antags need to play around.

I mean it is like a bomber complaining about drones repairing the bomb they detonated, you can VERY EASILY pop the drones and destroy the drone dispenser to prevent them from doing it.

OOC protecting lazy antags from having to deal with the weakest ghost role is just kinda lame. The proper response to an antag complaining about a drone should be "why dont you just destroy them and the dispenser?"

[imblyings]

Building rnd stuff including autocloners is fine as long as you don't interfere with any beings using RND and you use a minimal amount of minerals.

re: removing improve, that cuts out drones being able to autism project and thats very sad, I'd rather admins respond with proportionate warnings or just advice/tap on the shoulder if a drone starts edging into 'improve' activities that interfere too much. This applies to drone autism done in good faith, obviously actual malicious or grossly (or line-toeing of the two sort) autism should be treated harshly.

[cedarbridge]

Building rnd stuff including autocloners is fine as long as you don't interfere with any beings using RND and you use a minimal amount of minerals.

re: removing improve, that cuts out drones being able to autism project and thats very sad, I'd rather admins respond with proportionate warnings or just advice/tap on the shoulder if a drone starts edging into 'improve' activities that interfere too much. This applies to drone autism done in good faith, obviously actual malicious or grossly (or line-toeing of the two sort) autism should be treated harshly.

Drone R&D has always been a staple since drones were introduced. Certain autism projects are just a huge pain in the ass without R&D being done and sometimes that means the little spider bots have to build their own nest to do it. So be it.

I mean, on a personal level, I'm a bit annoyed when I see drones running around the halls fully visible like they're just another dude. They should actively be avoiding the crew, not merely ignoring them. That means going off and doing your projects in maint, connected appendage-like space protrusions, etc. Frankly, the best drone players are the ones who are never seen by human players.

In regards to autocloners, I can't see a reason that drones would ever construct one when the station already has a cloner. We presume that drones taking ghost roles have at least a basic understanding of their impact on the round in an OOC sense. In what way is the station itself improved by adding autocloners to random parts of the station? "Well the crew can revive more and more quickly in their departments" is the only rational response and its the response that kills their viability as an "improvement" that doesn't violate the non-interaction clause in the drone laws.

[imblyings]

>They should actively be avoiding the crew, not merely ignoring them.
the things and drone emotes I get away with, you haven't played drone right until you ready up lengthy emotes which for all intents and purposes break your laws until you add at the very end, 'but in a manner that doesn't interact with any beings' and go driveby emote people. Or other things hmm

The crew will benefit from autocloners but they will too from a big breach being fixed. A drone diligently and quickly fixing such a breach may be the difference between a shuttle call or not. I think context should help an admin in making a decision here. If there is a mountain of bodies in genetics due to a murderboner and a drone builds an autocloners in genetics or it's cult and a drone builds an autocloner in the brig? Over the line and admins can use escalating responses from advice and deletion of the built stuff to other things, since there's a very real intent to shape the round. If it's a quiet round and autocloners are one of a few things that the drone is building? Why not?

Admins should judge intent very carefully I think

[Vekter]

Cloners interact with people. They actively revive folks. I say no. Drones should be relegated to either making autism forts or fixing the station.

[onleavedontatme]

I say no.

The post above yours is the headmin saying yes though

[Vekter]

I say no.

The post above yours is the headmin saying yes though

I get that, I was giving my opinion on the matter. If it's closed for discussion, the thread should be locked.

[bandit]

>They should actively be avoiding the crew, not merely ignoring them.
the things and drone emotes I get away with, you haven't played drone right until you ready up lengthy emotes which for all intents and purposes break your laws until you add at the very end, 'but in a manner that doesn't interact with any beings' and go driveby emote people. Or other things hmm

The crew will benefit from autocloners but they will too from a big breach being fixed. A drone diligently and quickly fixing such a breach may be the difference between a shuttle call or not. I think context should help an admin in making a decision here. If there is a mountain of bodies in genetics due to a murderboner and a drone builds an autocloners in genetics or it's cult and a drone builds an autocloner in the brig? Over the line and admins can use escalating responses from advice and deletion of the built stuff to other things, since there's a very real intent to shape the round. If it's a quiet round and autocloners are one of a few things that the drone is building? Why not?

Admins should judge intent very carefully I think

I agree with all of this, but the distinction has historically been very hard to explain to players, who a) are confused as fuck, based on the huge number of threads and ahelps we get about drone policy, and b) tend to say things like "BUT THIS GUY WAS ALLOWED TO BUILD AN AUTOCLONER" and do not grasp the distinction.

EDIT: It also is pretty unintuitive if you go by the message that drones receive and the ones that are in the rules -- we tell drone players basically to disregard the existence of other beings, but making this distinction kind of requires that you don't

[Dr_bee]

I agree with all of this, but the distinction has historically been very hard to explain to players, who a) are confused as fuck, based on the huge number of threads and ahelps we get about drone policy, and b) tend to say things like "BUT THIS GUY WAS ALLOWED TO BUILD AN AUTOCLONER" and do not grasp the distinction.

EDIT: It also is pretty unintuitive if you go by the message that drones receive and the ones that are in the rules -- we tell drone players basically to disregard the existence of other beings, but making this distinction kind of requires that you don't

That is why drones really shouldnt be punished for doing things that effect the round in ways that dont involve direct contact with people, they are told conflicting information, you are supposed to act like a people dont exist but at the same time you are expected to have near meta-level knowlege of what is going on in the round so you dont accidentally fuck over an antag.

Ill say this again, as long as drones arent actively cloning people or something they should be left to build whatever for whatever reason, drones are stupidly easy to destroy and there are no consequences for destroying them, why add OOC consequences to the drone when a human popping them for doing something they dont like would be enough.

drones should only get admin attention if they are looting from corpses or cloning people or disabling bombs and powersinks, not for building a destroy-able building that might inconvenience an antagonist.

[imblyings]

Cloners interact with people. They actively revive folks. I say no. Drones should be relegated to either making autism forts or fixing the station.

Nuance

A drone showing off with wire art or an escape bar is definitely planned interaction but we let that go because the players intent is to just build something others will find cool looking. To a somewhat similar extent, I believe a drone player building autocloners as part of several rnd projects and upgrades around the station is also a planned interaction but as part of a general desire to "improve" the station rather than an explicit desire to shape something currently unfolding.

Again it doesn't mean you have to tolerate autocloners every time they get built and its a quiet round. But also consider the average player doesn't autisticly argue and discuss policy like we do. Remember that admins have such a wide range of responses to a potential situation where you've deemed autocloners are not okay. It could be a ban, but it could also be deleting it, a rough refund of the materials and a quick explanation of why to the player.

[Bawhoppennn]

What drones are allowed to do is really dependent on the specific scenario they're engaged in. We just need a big list like "doing x" = fine, "doing y" = bad

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Can we please just replace all drone vision modes with "all mobs are invisible to drones" already

[DemonFiren]

Can we please just replace all drone vision modes with "all mobs are invisible to drones" already

that'll make escaping from carp difficult
that'll make figuring out whether your modifications/resource acquisition/autismfort building is interfering difficult because you can't see if anyone else is in the area
that'll make it easier to pretend you didn't know the engine was being sabotaged/an atmos setup was still being worked on/etc because you can't see the culprit

[Deitus]

Can we please just replace all drone vision modes with "all mobs are invisible to drones" already

that'll make escaping from carp difficult
that'll make figuring out whether your modifications/resource acquisition/autismfort building is interfering difficult because you can't see if anyone else is in the area
that'll make it easier to pretend you didn't know the engine was being sabotaged/an atmos setup was still being worked on/etc because you can't see the culprit

the ligger speaks the truth.

[Cobby]

Can we please just replace all drone vision modes with "all mobs are invisible to drones" already

that'll make escaping from carp difficult
that'll make figuring out whether your modifications/resource acquisition/autismfort building is interfering difficult because you can't see if anyone else is in the area
that'll make it easier to pretend you didn't know the engine was being sabotaged/an atmos setup was still being worked on/etc because you can't see the culprit

If you see something functioning "on its own" [although OOC we know it's someone else], you can assume it's of the highest improvement, automation, and as such no longer concerns you until it degrades.

[lumipharon]

I seriously disagree with saying building shit like autocloners is ok.

If you say "well its not interacting with people directly so it's ok" even though you clearly know people will, why could I not improve disposals by cutting out the middle man and piping it straight out to space? I'm not FORCING people into disposals myself, and disposals ultimately spaces shit anyway, I'm just making it more efficient and automated :^)

Alternatively, I might decide to turn the vacant office into a supermatter engine. If someone tampers with the valves I have in the corridor outside that's not my problem, they're doing it themselves, no interaction from me, all I'm doing is making more power for the station :^)

The whole autocloner thing is pretty bullshit because while it's not impossible to overcome or some bullshit like that, but it DOES make your life harder, solely because of a ghost role that's not supposed to interfere with anything.
Yes you can blow it up or wipe the records if you have the right access, but what if you don't know it exists? What if it's in the public and there is always people nearby?

If a player does it, that's all well and good, but I can readily see people getting pretty salty when a drone does it.
It is not comparable to repairing bomb damage or making an autism fort somewhere. If I'm blowing shit up it's not to stop the chemists from making lube, it's to kill people and hopefully take them out of the round. 9/10 times it doesn't matter if the hole in the ground gets repaired or not.

[Dr_bee]

I seriously disagree with saying building shit like autocloners is ok.

If you say "well its not interacting with people directly so it's ok" even though you clearly know people will, why could I not improve disposals by cutting out the middle man and piping it straight out to space? I'm not FORCING people into disposals myself, and disposals ultimately spaces shit anyway, I'm just making it more efficient and automated :^)

Alternatively, I might decide to turn the vacant office into a supermatter engine. If someone tampers with the valves I have in the corridor outside that's not my problem, they're doing it themselves, no interaction from me, all I'm doing is making more power for the station :^)

The whole autocloner thing is pretty bullshit because while it's not impossible to overcome or some bullshit like that, but it DOES make your life harder, solely because of a ghost role that's not supposed to interfere with anything.
Yes you can blow it up or wipe the records if you have the right access, but what if you don't know it exists? What if it's in the public and there is always people nearby?

If a player does it, that's all well and good, but I can readily see people getting pretty salty when a drone does it.
It is not comparable to repairing bomb damage or making an autism fort somewhere. If I'm blowing shit up it's not to stop the chemists from making lube, it's to kill people and hopefully take them out of the round. 9/10 times it doesn't matter if the hole in the ground gets repaired or not.

'

Using your logic of "if it makes an antag's life harder drones shouldnt do it" they shouldnt repair breaches in the station after a mass bombing, or repair lights if there is a nightmare, or fix broken windows even after the antag left the area.

This line of thinking needs to stop when it comes to drone policy. Drones are stupidly weak and easy to kill specifically so they are easy to shut down by antags, throwing policy as a block to protect antags is shitty and pretty much hugbox for antags.

"oh no what if a ghost role doing its job effects me in some way" the answer should be "play to counter it via the various means that have been programmed in to counter it" not "well lets neuter what drones can and cannot build via policy so playing them is basically asking for a ghost role ban, and lets make sure this list isn't codified in any way so it completely confuses the drone players! that'll teach em!"

[Lazengann]

You shouldn't redtext because a drone built an autocloner in the armory that you didn't know about.
I think it's misleading to compare fixing a breach to building an autocloner, as antags can have assassination objectives and the objective is interfered with.

[Dr_bee]

You shouldn't redtext because a drone built an autocloner in the armory that you didn't know about.
I think it's misleading to compare fixing a breach to building an autocloner, as antags can have assassination objectives and the objective is interfered with.

You shouldnt redtext because you didnt pay attention to the goings on of the station and didnt disable all methods of the person coming back?

Sounds like an excuse more than a couter argument.
Building machines is part of playing a drone, Playing around with the construction system is the only thing they CAN do.

They should be expected to build and if drones continuously have their role restricted by policy threads because antags cant take the time to actually do their objective correctly then they might as well not be in the game at all as they are slowly just becoming banbait.

Ghost roles can fuck you over, that is why they are always valid, and why specifically drones have only 20 HP and can be popped via robot console with no ID check. Punish the drone via gameplay, not bitching to admins that the 20hp mob stopped you from getting greentext you probably didnt deserve in the first place.

[oranges]

When are we gonna give up on drones and just make them borgs

[lumipharon]

Oh noes, the small target that can run as fast as you and is exceedingly hard to shoot, than can vent crawl anywhere and has all access on the station built an autocloner I had no way of knowing about, or no practicable way of removing, if only I was able to identify every single drone, every single drone shell and spawner and the map and kill/destroy them before being able to do anything related to my objective! Fuck I'm so bad.

Repairing bomb damage is no comparison, that was half the point of my post.

Guess I'll just have to build super matter engines in random rooms as a drone and shrug my shoulders when anyone walking by can instantly sabotage it and blow up half the station, I wasn't interferring with players after all :^)

[Dr_bee]

Guess I'll just have to build super matter engines in random rooms as a drone and shrug my shoulders when anyone walking by can instantly sabotage it and blow up half the station, I wasn't interferring with players after all :^)

That is exactly what I am talking about, the drone is literally doing what is suggested in the message you get when you spawn as one, what a player does with what the drone does IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE DRONE.

As long as they take the time to actually do it correctly and secure the area, and you know, actually roleplay like a little repair bot, then they shouldnt be held accountable.

you are asking the drones to read the minds of a non-existant future antag or get drone banned instead of just playing the game.

That being said, I agree with you about drones being too small of a target, they should be able to be hit by shots in their direction and not just shots directly aimed at them, to make them easier to kill. But that is a coding issue not a policy one.

Also remember drones cant tell if you are carrying a weapon so you can almost always get the drop on a drone and 1 shot it with any weapon that does 20 damage or more, such as a throwing spear.

Edit: /vg/ drone equivalents have a super large, spider like sprite specifically to make them easier to murder if they act up, so that may be something to consider, just increasing the sprite size would do wonders.

[Lazengann]

What you're forgetting is that drones aren't allowed to touch other antag objectives. They can't fuck over the guy who has to steal the nuke disk by surrounding it with rwalls, so I don't think they should be able to fuck over the guy who has to kill someone by letting them revive in some hidden location.

[lumipharon]

Guess I'll just have to build super matter engines in random rooms as a drone and shrug my shoulders when anyone walking by can instantly sabotage it and blow up half the station, I wasn't interferring with players after all :^)

That is exactly what I am talking about, the drone is literally doing what is suggested in the message you get when you spawn as one, what a player does with what the drone does IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE DRONE.

As long as they take the time to actually do it correctly and secure the area, and you know, actually roleplay like a little repair bot, then they shouldnt be held accountable.

you are asking the drones to read the minds of a non-existant future antag or get drone banned instead of just playing the game.

That being said, I agree with you about drones being too small of a target, they should be able to be hit by shots in their direction and not just shots directly aimed at them, to make them easier to kill. But that is a coding issue not a policy one.

Also remember drones cant tell if you are carrying a weapon so you can almost always get the drop on a drone and 1 shot it with any weapon that does 20 damage or more, such as a throwing spear.

Edit: /vg/ drone equivalents have a super large, spider like sprite specifically to make them easier to murder if they act up, so that may be something to consider, just increasing the sprite size would do wonders.

A drone is under no obligation to 'secure' anything. While I can't make a supermatter engine in the middle of the corridor and kill everyone with rads, it's perfectly fine to place it in such a way that any fuck head walking past can flip a switch and set the whole thing critical.

[Arianya]

What you're forgetting is that drones aren't allowed to touch other antag objectives. They can't fuck over the guy who has to steal the nuke disk by surrounding it with rwalls, so I don't think they should be able to fuck over the guy who has to kill someone by letting them revive in some hidden location.

This encompasses nearly everything drones do though. Repair a bomb hole that was blocking the way for the crew? They can now access the corpse of [x] who was the antag's objective.

Repair damaged power cables in maint that were depowering escape? You just sabotaged the antag's hijack objective.

Reinforce door wires with metal? You just sabotaged the antag's attempt to get a supermatter sliver.

Asking drones to avoid any action that could get them shitbinned for ~interfering~ with an antag's objective is just banbaiting. I think its important to remember that someone's antag status is not sacred. You can't have an on station ghost role tasked with improving the station and then punish them when they improve the station in an entirely legitimate way that inexorably links back to the antag through an objective the drone had no way of knowing much less predicting.

[DemonFiren]

if a bomb leaves your target's corpse you suck at bombing
if you just cut one cable instead of ripping out all of them making it obvious that was intentional you deserve to fail your hijack
if you can't get past a reinforced door you should just suicide and hand your traitor roll to somebody else

[Arianya]

if a bomb leaves your target's corpse you suck at bombing
if you just cut one cable instead of ripping out all of them making it obvious that was intentional you deserve to fail your hijack
if you can't get past a reinforced door you should just suicide and hand your traitor roll to somebody else

My point is that any or all of these could be interpreted as "interference" even though they have legitimate purposes (unlike, for example, rwalling the disk fnr) and the drone can absolutely do them without malicious intent of interfering.

[Cobby]

When are we gonna give up on drones and just make them borgs

Remove Remove Remove!

The whole premise of them is to repair and build but in a way that's so secluded you may as well not build at all and half of the repairing comes off as antag sabotage so you get banned.

[feem]

I think a critical point has been lost here and that might be partly my fault, early on.

90% of the time a drone bwoink is because they're doing something blatantly, obviously against their laws or blatantly, obviously disruptive.

The majority of the rest of what I said, and a lot of what's been discussed in this thread, while largely a consistent interpretation of the rules, is intended _as a guideline for you, the player, to keep from getting into situations where you end up blatantly, obviously violating your laws._

The likelihood of me giving you a note or a drone ban because you fixed a gaping hole in the bridge is pretty low, unless you actively and intentionally attempt to sabotage whatever the antag is doing at that moment.

There was a situation early in my adminhood where a drone created a singularity in maintenance, and did a pretty bang-up job about it (to start with). It did end up getting loose, and I did end up bwoinking them to talk about it, but they didn't get a note or a ban because they were able to explain what happened clearly and it was an obvious autism fort project and not an intent to disrupt.

The notes or bans I've made about drones:

* Someone attacked people and tried to turn themselves into a different creature with a staff of chaos, as a spawned-in (NOT polymorphed) drone.
* Someone repeatedly set off foam grenades and activated the slipper on a shuttle which happens to have a slipper installed.
* Someone attacked a cogscarab as a drone.
* Spammed comms as a drone.
* Became a miner and fought monsters on lavaland, as a drone.

The point I'm making here is that the strict letter of the law is what's spelled out in your drone laws: Don't intentionally interact, don't mess with a round-critical object, and don't sabotage.

The rest of it is _suggestions based upon admin experience_ to make sure you don't inadvertently violate those laws.

It doesn't mean 'you will be bannu' without review of the situation, or shouldn't.

[Slignerd]

A couple of questions:

- Are non-sentient, non-pet vermin, such as randomly generated mice and cockroaches considered beings?
- If a crewmember repeatedly attempts to pick up a drone while it's working and chase it when it runs away, would a drone be allowed to emit a brief, bright light (i.e. use a flash) and skitter away?

[Atlanta-Ned]

A couple of questions:

- Are non-sentient, non-pet vermin, such as randomly generated mice and cockroaches considered beings?
- If a crewmember repeatedly attempts to pick up a drone while it's working and chase it when it runs away, would a drone be allowed to emit a brief, bright light (i.e. use a flash) and skitter away?

yes, no