/tg/Station 13

Byond account and character name: KeyboardCreature - Vincent Vice
Banning admin: MrAlphonzo
Ban type (What are you banned from?): Server and Medical
Ban reason and length: Server for 3 Days. Not sure about the Medical ban. "An extra kick in the teeth ontop of your medbay ban for getting three people killed.
Time ban was placed (including time zone): 2018-12-26 07:51:42 (server time)
Server you were playing when banned (Sybil or Bagil): Sybil
Your side of the story:
When there is danger on the station, I always equip a dead man's switch in the case that I get stunned by a traitor and dragged into maint. It automatically goes into effect when I go into crit via a health sensor. A wizard with a staff of resurrection and a stick thing attacked me and sent me to crit. My dead man's switch activated which resulted in the wizard's death and two other people who were nearby. I tried keeping it brief, but if you need me to clarify more information about the incident, just ask.

Why you think you should be unbanned:
Three days from SS13 isn't a lot, so I don't care about this particular ban. Instead, it occurred to me that one of the reasons that I was banned this time was because of my previous admin notes. Before, I was just lazy and decided not to ban appeal by previous notes, leading to an exaggerated history of notes. Looking back, my laziness has resulted in less and less leniency, resulting only in more notes and more bans based on my history.

I think that I should be unbanned because my ban was primarily based on my history and not the actual offense of having a dead man's switch. Having such a device during a round with wizards, half the station being unlit, and traitors blowing stuff up is not a violation of any of the 10 rules.

In addition, here is a policy thread on the matter that sets a clear precedent to allow for reasonable self-arming. https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... it=grenade

I did not break any rules and my possession of my dead man's switch was reasonable given the circumstances. I did not even hit back once the wizard started attacking me with his stick thing, choosing to run away instead. My actions during this round did not meet the requirements for a 3 day ban. I request an unbanning.

Quoting a previous headmin ruling via peanut policy:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 62#p329751

Armhulen wrote:if your extremely griefy thing doesn't DIRECTLY WIN THE ROUND RIGHT AFTER it's griff and bannable

If this is still valid and your bomb immediately killed the wizard (ending the round), I don't think that killing those three bystanders is a reason for a ban.

Denton wrote:Quoting a previous headmin ruling via peanut policy:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 62#p329751

Armhulen wrote:if your extremely griefy thing doesn't DIRECTLY WIN THE ROUND RIGHT AFTER it's griff and bannable

If this is still valid and your bomb immediately killed the wizard (ending the round), I don't think that killing those three bystanders is a reason for a ban.

Except it didn't end the round.

I'm denying this.

You got three non-antags killed by your dead man's switch, not just two. End of story.

Your history had nothing to do with the length of this ban, 24 hours per dead non-antag, as per protocol.
You were not banned for owning the explosive.
You were banned for what it did.

Interesting. Now I see. Thank you for the clarification. I had thought that the three non-antag killed included the wizard, and two other people nearby. I did not realize that my grenade killed the wizard an two additional people.
I misunderstood your ruling, but now I see that the automatic activation of my grenade was the bannable offense.

However, I'm still curious about which rule I actually broke.

Is this a rule 1 case, (Random murders are not acceptable nor is the killing of other players for poor or little reasoning such as ‘My character is insane’. Each unjustified kill is normally met with one 24 ban.)? I thought that I provided sufficient justification for my actions. In addition to the fact that the grenade was activated automatically, you agree that I had reason to own the explosive.

It's definitely not a rule 2 case, (Do not use information gained outside of in character means.). I had sufficient knowledge to make my dead man's switch. And like you said, I was not banned for owning the explosive.

Is this a rule 7 case, (If you regularly come close to breaking the rules without actually breaking them, it will be treated as the rules being broken.)? If so, you agree that my previous history has no bearing on the enforcement of this ban.

Is this a rule 10 case, (Losing is part of the game. Your character will frequently die, sometimes without even a possibility of avoiding it. Events will often be out of your control. No matter how good or prepared you are, sometimes you just lose.)? Was I acting in bad sport by ensuring that my attacker would die along with me? Is this ban because of the grenade being too powerful for the task? Should I have reduced the radius of the weapon as to allow my attacker a larger window of escape?

Or is this a rule 0 case, (Enforcement of these rules is at the discretion of admins.)? If so, then my ban is perfectly legitimate, if it is your decision to ban me. After all, if you believe that it is for the good of the server, there is nothing I can do to stop you. However, I'm still iffy on the justification of this ban.

Rule 1.

Being afraid that you'll get dunked on, so you fill yourself up with explosives that put everyone else at risk and getting them killed because you want a chance at revenge is being a dick.

I agree that this isnt rule 1, but do you think they still care they died?

wait if the wizard died why didn't the round end

okay so if he did a thing that was supposed to end the round (kill the wizard) and succeeded, the only way it couldn't of ended the round is if an admin denied the round end and had the game mulligan it

meaning the admin artificially made a reason to ban him

iamgoofball wrote:wait if the wizard died why didn't the round end

okay so if he did a thing that was supposed to end the round (kill the wizard) and succeeded, the only way it couldn't of ended the round is if an admin denied the round end and had the game mulligan it

meaning the admin artificially made a reason to ban him

wizard has defaulted to mulligan when the wiz dies for at least a year now, so no

PKPenguin321 wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:wait if the wizard died why didn't the round end

okay so if he did a thing that was supposed to end the round (kill the wizard) and succeeded, the only way it couldn't of ended the round is if an admin denied the round end and had the game mulligan it

meaning the admin artificially made a reason to ban him

wizard has defaulted to mulligan when the wiz dies for at least a year now, so no

I thought it was made so the round ends again. Hence the whole problem with suicide wizards ending the round instantly

NoxVS wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:wait if the wizard died why didn't the round end

okay so if he did a thing that was supposed to end the round (kill the wizard) and succeeded, the only way it couldn't of ended the round is if an admin denied the round end and had the game mulligan it

meaning the admin artificially made a reason to ban him

wizard has defaulted to mulligan when the wiz dies for at least a year now, so no

I thought it was made so the round ends again. Hence the whole problem with suicide wizards ending the round instantly

correction, it defaults to mulligan if the wizard does any mass summons (IE guns, magic) which is fairly frequent (i think this should be changed but that's off topic)

Wiz death without laughter/blood demon/summon guns or magic or events = instant end. Summon guns/magic/events doesn't create new antags besides survivalists or mulligans but does stop instant end. Pretty sure mulligan was disabled around summertime.

PKPenguin321 wrote:

NoxVS wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:wait if the wizard died why didn't the round end

okay so if he did a thing that was supposed to end the round (kill the wizard) and succeeded, the only way it couldn't of ended the round is if an admin denied the round end and had the game mulligan it

meaning the admin artificially made a reason to ban him

wizard has defaulted to mulligan when the wiz dies for at least a year now, so no

I thought it was made so the round ends again. Hence the whole problem with suicide wizards ending the round instantly

correction, it defaults to mulligan if the wizard does any mass summons (IE guns, magic) which is fairly frequent (i think this should be changed but that's off topic)

I don't agree with this ban.

I find it very unlikely this is communicated to players in any way, shape, or form, and therefore he shouldn't of been banned for taking an action that under normal circumstances would lead to the round ending.

especially considering admins still have to manually confirm mulligans mod edit: this part is not true, when mulligan activates it does so automatically. manual intervention is only ever needed to STOP a mulligan as doing so will force a round end.

I approved this post because I think this is a fair point to consider when assigning blame for the ban. That said, this is not a policy discussion thread so I will purge any further discussion on this topic. thanks

Imagine having to agree with goof.

He's indeed right, if it's a wizard round you can deffo max cap the wizard IF YOU SUCCEED.

It does 'win the round for your team immediately after', it just doesn't end the round due to stupid mulligan or survivalist memes but that's not a de jure requirement in this case.

It depends on what you mean by winning the round.

Killing the wizard is not a round victory imo when summon X individuals exist because they’re autonomous and can actually be worse than a wizard. It would be however if you based it off redtext/greentext.

That said, the whole premise of the rule regardless of roundtype and knowledge of mulligan expects you to know information that is nigh-impossible to obtain on a game meant to obscure and limit information a player has, and even requires a bit guessing even with the omniscience.

Personally I’d just prefer minimal bomb usage since the entire thought for bombing during a wizard round is it ends the round after, which shouldn’t be a consideration when choosing IC options. That and jerks can’t resist making their “self defense” bombs maxcaps.

The gamemode was not actually wizard, the wizard was not the main antagonist.

He was the result of a TC trade for only healing spells.

So there were no survivalists, could the player have known there were traitors?

This whole policy of "you can maxcap the wiz but only if you win" came from Oldman blowing one too many holes in the station trying to tag a wizard. However I think back when that shit flinging fight happened Wiz didn't mulligan, and you knew if you killed the wiz the round would end. Now that it mulligans 75+% of the time we should probably decide on a new policy for blowing up wizards, maybe "don't do it ever".

Dax Dupont wrote:So there were no survivalists, could the player have known there were traitors?

KeyboardCreature wrote:I think that I should be unbanned because my ban was primarily based on my history and not the actual offense of having a dead man's switch. Having such a device during a round with wizards, half the station being unlit, and traitors blowing stuff up is not a violation of any of the 10 rules.

And there was an active malf AI going loud and proud at the time, so yes.

WarbossLincoln wrote:This whole policy of "you can maxcap the wiz but only if you win" came from Oldman blowing one too many holes in the station trying to tag a wizard. However I think back when that shit flinging fight happened Wiz didn't mulligan, and you knew if you killed the wiz the round would end. Now that it mulligans 75+% of the time we should probably decide on a new policy for blowing up wizards, maybe "don't do it ever".

Mulligan is gone

Bombs aren't an acceptable self-defense weapon, I'm pretty sure that's been policy for ages.

This wasnt like a planned attack against a wizard either, he was just standing around and got btfo by a wizard and his anti-traitor bomb went off and killed 3 bystanders

Strategically a tear gas anti-traitor bomb is safer than an actual bomb you converted out of from the tear gas.

The issue with 'bombing the wiz and insta ending the round is valid' is that there is no IC communication to the players if the death of the Wizard will end the game or not. In the past, when this ruling was made, Wizard always ended on his death no matter what. Which is no longer the case now and is a coin flip if the rounds ends on his death or not.

Its unfair to punish people because they had to guess if the round will end or not if they take a action that has the same outcome irrespective (the wiz dying).

I do not recall any policy on disallowing a bomb as a self defence weapon in the manner described in the OP or in any vague way. I might be wrong though.

I'm still really confused about this. Is it acceptable to blow yourself if there's an extremely dangerous threat IE: a wizard, a ninja, or a changeling for example and you know you're gonna die regardless? This seems kind of excessive because I've seen plenty of ninjas get suicide bombed without the round ending and no one got banned.

Steelpoint wrote:Strategically a tear gas anti-traitor bomb is safer than an actual bomb you converted out of from the tear gas.

The issue with 'bombing the wiz and insta ending the round is valid' is that there is no IC communication to the players if the death of the Wizard will end the game or not. In the past, when this ruling was made, Wizard always ended on his death no matter what. Which is no longer the case now and is a coin flip if the rounds ends on his death or not.

Its unfair to punish people because they had to guess if the round will end or not if they take a action that has the same outcome irrespective (the wiz dying).

I do not recall any policy on disallowing a bomb as a self defence weapon in the manner described in the OP or in any vague way. I might be wrong though.

note: wizard rounds don't randomly mull but instead if there are any other roles that are an antag 'such as slaughter demon' the round will persist

precedent: you can make bombs for self defense all you want, but if you kill innocents with it that's also your fault for having a maxcap in your bag - in the past we've banged bombers for killing crew with essentially a small nuke just to get a valid on a traitor

Xeroxemnas wrote:I'm still really confused about this. Is it acceptable to blow yourself if there's an extremely dangerous threat IE: a wizard, a ninja, or a changeling for example and you know you're gonna die regardless? This seems kind of excessive because I've seen plenty of ninjas get suicide bombed without the round ending and no one got banned.

The way it's been ruled for a good amount of time is that if you use any kind of mass destruction to stop an antag it must end the round or you get bant for innocent casualties. This was decided back when blowing up a wizard always ended the round 100% of the time. The ruling came from the like 70th time Oldman Robustin blew up the station and killed 20 people with a suicide bomb and failed to tag the wizard. EDIT: I think they were just tired of having to ban Oldman and have the same argument with him in a ban appeal over and over.

This isn't a good policy now that wizard often won't end with the wiz's death and there's no way to know that. There should be a policy thread made to consider changing the policy to "don't use bombs to fight antags unless you ahelp it first and an admin thinks the situation warrants it"

WarbossLincoln wrote:There should be a policy thread made to consider changing the policy to "don't use bombs to fight antags unless you ahelp it first and an admin thinks the situation warrants it"

Honestly that sounds more like something that should be handled in character, asking your head or the captain for clearance to use whatever means necessary to stop a threat (maybe even messaging centcomm to get confirmation from the higher ups). If you're not given the green light, then you shouldn't be surprised when you get boinked for blowing up those standing by.

Minor clarification.

PKPenguin321 wrote:correction, it defaults to mulligan if the wizard does any mass summons (IE guns, magic) which is fairly frequent (i think this should be changed but that's off topic)

This is incorrect. Mulligan does not make a distinction between the wizard and anyone else with antag status in their mind datum. Wizard is set ingame to end when all antagonists die. It does not mulligan, ever.

You put your own ass at risk when you use bombs/explosives to try and kill wizards. It doesn't matter if the game mode is wizard or not. If what you did doesn't end the round, you're responsible for the deaths you caused, and it will be considered grief.
I'm closing this, your appeal is denied.