/tg/Station 13

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:03 pm**

Hard mode: Don't say "I want more RP" or "I want less rules," because "HEY EVERYONE WE ARE GONNA RP MORE" is more of a cultural shift than some policy I can test out.

Are there any particular, specific rules that people think should be re-examined or changed (and how does changing it help move towards a wider goal, such as more RP)?

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:13 pm**

I think when you look at our rules as a product of their environment rather than something built from the ground up to limit players, they're pretty solid as is. They're tight enough to let us cite specific guidelines for shitters who DEMAND to be shown the SPECIFIC BYLAW that outlaws whatever dumb thing they're doing, but they (and the admins who enforce them) are also loose enough that as long as you play in good faith, you won't have to worry about getting banned (bar a few specific things like unwrenching plasma pipes at roundstart as an atmos tech, but at that point we can just explain why not to do that and send them on their way with no hard feelings). There are a few things I would like to have more rules about, like botany putting out tons of griff tools all over the station and playing dumb when said tools are then used for mass griff, but otherwise I'm very happy with the rules as they are now

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:48 pm**

It bothers me that I got banned by the erp rule, I think you should just allow Bagil to have more of a roleplay expierence, and more fantasy (Where the ERP comes in) since I can't have sex in real life, I would like to have sex in my virtual pixel game when I am roleplaying.

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:52 pm**

Need a rule about players complaining about their ban in every thread that isn't their ban appeal. :^)

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:54 pm**

i think we should just make sure to not ban for misunderstandings, or for rules that are very subjective. If people have the wrong idea about a rule instead of banning them for being wrong you should make sure to let them know that the administration views it differently and that in the future they should view it the way we (a united an homogenous team :^) ) view it to avoid any issues.

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:56 pm**

Saegrimr wrote:Need a rule about players complaining about their ban in every thread that isn't their ban appeal. :^)

I approve, I hate people who do that

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:27 pm**

I can't have sex in real life

The depressing thing is that this is probably true

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:05 pm**

Jacough wrote:
I can't have sex in real life
The depressing thing is that this is probably true

For a lot of people, too.

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:31 pm**

DemonFiren wrote:
Jacough wrote:
I can't have sex in real life
The depressing thing is that this is probably true
For a lot of people, too.

For whole tg, actually.

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:53 pm**

The fact that there's no clear process for revising the rules, or any place where we clearly lay out the goals of the rules. That leads to situations where a loud, whiny minority can easily get things changed to suit them.

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:17 pm**

I don't think people die enough on the station. Even as a foolish and dimwitted newbie to the whole game you're less likely to be killed and more likely to just end up alone in an abandoned part of the station.

I also don't like how slow escalation is. EXAMPLE: I'm in my department, doing my stuff, and a clown/greyshit/suspiciously antagonistic dude breaks in or otherwise enters when he shouldn't.

I would tell him to leave, and if he didn't, I would start fighting him. I'd throw him out, maybe drag him to medbay if I critted him, and then go back to my stuff. If the same guy broke in again, I'd kill him on the spot and dispose of the corpse.

To me this is perfectly reasonable escalation. You broke in, so I removed you and gave you a chance to continue with your round, but you broke in again so I killed you.

I've heard admins and players on both sides of this issue so I don't know if this kind of thing is allowed or not but it seems to me that it is a reasonable level of escalation.

Also I don't like how much people push for 'Captain needs to grant you permission before you can execute someone."

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:18 pm**

I hate the IC OOC rule

It's literally practiced as "IF THE ADMIN THINKS YOU COULD HAVE ICOOC'D YOU GET A BAN"

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:57 pm**

i feel proud knowing I've gotten laid more than 90% of tg players :^))))

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:06 pm**

There's nowhere to report people who violate them when there are no admins on.

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:30 pm**

oranges wrote:There's nowhere to report people who violate them when there are no admins on.

You have IRC for that though.

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:31 pm**

shuttle called too early, not enough rules against purposely shortening the round

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:54 pm**

ShadowDimentio wrote:I hate the IC OOC rule

It's literally practiced as "IF THE ADMIN THINKS YOU COULD HAVE ICOOC'D YOU GET A BAN"

How the fuck else would it work?

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:57 pm**

ShadowDimentio wrote:I hate the IC OOC rule

It's literally practiced as "IF THE ADMIN THINKS YOU COULD HAVE ICOOC'D YOU GET A BAN"

It's the easiest rule to follow. All you have to do is nothing, and you still fuck it up.

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:20 pm**

As a game, I'd like there to be more greytiding and death to be allowed but ghosts would need a far more consistent and far less gimped way to get back into the round than Drones or lavaland creatures.

Posted: **Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:59 pm**

People trying to rules lawyer and line toe. People using the rules to bully others.

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:04 am**

Saegrimr wrote:
ShadowDimentio wrote:I hate the IC OOC rule

It's literally practiced as "IF THE ADMIN THINKS YOU COULD HAVE ICOOC'D YOU GET A BAN"
It's the easiest rule to follow. All you have to do is nothing, and you still fuck it up.

kinda sucks that if you type OOC and then forget and then the round starts and you go "OOC: NewMcPlayer: say hey guys I'm new to the station can you help me out" and then get called out hard for it
i know if the player is genuinely sorry or it was an accident then it's all cool but for new players that BWOINK is genuinely intimidating
we need like a "gentle admin message" button that's kinda like the bwoink minus the BWOINK

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:08 am**

Zilenan91 wrote:As a game, I'd like there to be more greytiding and death to be allowed but ghosts would need a far more consistent and far less gimped way to get back into the round than Drones or lavaland creatures.

We have so many ways to get back in to the round now it is completely outrageous. What more do you want? Respawn enabled?

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:16 am**

Like I said, not completely gimped. Drones are nice but they aren't a ghost role since you can't interact with anything in the round. It's basically a punishment role going, "Welp you died have fun playing the game except not really."

Golems are great, we should have more things like them but more common and earlier in the round. Antagonist versions of golems are also fantastic, that's why I love Ash Walkers, they aren't necessarily friendly/hostile and can really make a round more interesting.

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:18 am**

PKPenguin321 wrote:i know if the player is genuinely sorry or it was an accident then it's all cool but for new players that BWOINK is genuinely intimidating
we need like a "gentle admin message" button that's kinda like the bwoink minus the BWOINK

Bring Back WAUGH.wav 2016

Actually goon has a hilariously vague and frightening feature where you can send a big noisy klaxon at someone and big ass red text that just says "YOU ARE IN DANGER OF FUCKING UP AND AN ADMIN WANTS YOU TO READ THE FUCKING RULES"

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:04 am**

PKPenguin321 wrote:
Saegrimr wrote:
ShadowDimentio wrote:I hate the IC OOC rule

It's literally practiced as "IF THE ADMIN THINKS YOU COULD HAVE ICOOC'D YOU GET A BAN"
It's the easiest rule to follow. All you have to do is nothing, and you still fuck it up.
kinda sucks that if you type OOC and then forget and then the round starts and you go "OOC: NewMcPlayer: say hey guys I'm new to the station can you help me out" and then get called out hard for it
i know if the player is genuinely sorry or it was an accident then it's all cool but for new players that BWOINK is genuinely intimidating
we need like a "gentle admin message" button that's kinda like the bwoink minus the BWOINK

That's what subtlemessage is for, I use it when people use netspeak IC

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:13 am**

PKPenguin321 wrote:
Saegrimr wrote:
ShadowDimentio wrote:I hate the IC OOC rule

It's literally practiced as "IF THE ADMIN THINKS YOU COULD HAVE ICOOC'D YOU GET A BAN"
It's the easiest rule to follow. All you have to do is nothing, and you still fuck it up.
kinda sucks that if you type OOC and then forget and then the round starts and you go "OOC: NewMcPlayer: say hey guys I'm new to the station can you help me out" and then get called out hard for it
i know if the player is genuinely sorry or it was an accident then it's all cool but for new players that BWOINK is genuinely intimidating
we need like a "gentle admin message" button that's kinda like the bwoink minus the BWOINK

All the admin needs to do is say "please be more careful about IC in OOC". If a player freaks the fuck out over an admin PM like that then holy shit what in God's name is wrong with them? Aside from that people already tend to haze the newbies when they IC in OOC which makes it pretty quick to pick up that they need to be more careful.

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 8:57 pm**

do you think we could get a waiver for the OOC in IC chat if you're teaching a player who says he's new? I haven't gotten bwoinked for it but if I'm teaching a guy whos brand new and is asking stuff like "how do I pick stuff up" or "how do i use this computer" I should be able to tell him:

"Click on an item and it'll go into the hand slot at the bottom of your screen with the little white border around it."
or
"click on it, then click on your ID to move it into your hand, then click on the blue button next to the words talking about your ID on the new window"
without worrying about getting bwoinked

i mean I haven't gotten in trouble but it'd be nice to have it okayed officially

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 9:09 pm**

iamgoofball wrote:do you think we could get a waiver for the OOC in IC chat if you're teaching a player who says he's new?

I thought we okayed that a while back in a similar discussion. It's fine, the problem is the memelords and people who go "IM FUCKING AHELPING THIS YOU SHITTER".

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2016 1:09 pm**

I think the ERP rule is over zealous admining. Ok sure a few people find it creepy or weird, but this whole game is pretty weird and creepy at the best of times. Its something that effects so little people, but the people who it does effect and generally not "trouble makers" in any other way. It particularly bothers me that people have been banned over it. From what I'm aware, most of the time is been fine to do but makes you "valid" to admin/player shenanigans, which seems pretty acceptable. But the idea that its a bannable offense seems incredibly (and needlessly) strict compared with other more lax rules that we run (someone running around shouting Nigger is apparently more acceptable than 2 people making strange sexual advances).

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2016 1:19 pm**

Silicon policy is bloated because the administration refuses to remove the inaction clause. These should go.

It also makes no sense to force non combat cyborgs to engage in non harmful combat.

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2016 3:17 pm**

The rules are too long, some are likely outdated - meaning it is no longer a requirement to clearly specify them. And yes, I know that it's scary to remove stuff like "Going out of your way to seriously negatively impact or end the round for someone with little IC justification is against the rules.". I mean yes, the rules makes perfect sense, but is it necessary to state it? There are hundreds of perfectly reasonable rules that could be added in the same way, yet the server works fine without them being stated. I'd like to try removing rule parts one-by-one and see what happens. Some will need to be put back, but many likely won't.

Other chances I'd suggest:

Merge rules 0 and 6:
0: "Enforcement of these rules is at the discretion of admins."
6: "In-game administration rulings are final."

Rule 7 becomes a part of rule 1 (the content of rule 7 should be in the non-bold part of the merged rule, hence why it's omitted in the reordered list at the end)
1: "Don't be a dick."
7: "If you regularly come close to breaking the rules without actually breaking them, it will be treated as the rules being broken."

Shorten bold part of rule 5 to:
"Players in a head of staff, AI or team antagonist role require at least a minimum amount of effort" The rest of the rule:
"generally considered to be not logging out at or near roundstart." should not be bold as it's a clarification.

Merge rules 8 and 9: (Both of these are bookkeeping rules)
Rule 8: "Erotic/creepy stuff is not allowed."
Rule 9: "Players need to be above the age of 18."

Reorder rules in this way:
1: Don't be a dick.
2: Losing is part of the game.
3: Do not use information gained outside of in character means.
4: Do not say in character (IC) things in the out of character (OOC) chat channel.
5: Lone antagonists can do whatever they want.
6: Players in a head of staff, AI or team antagonist role require at least a minimum amount of effort.
7: Players need to be above the age of 18, however eroric/creepy stuff is not allowed.
8: Enforcement of these rules is at the discretion of admins, whose ingame decision is final.

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2016 7:36 pm**

Erros suggestion seems sound

@manshroom

Escalation works exactly like that and that was the intent i had when i rewrote the rules ages ago, the thing admins might differ on is the disposal of the body but that's a case by case thing

@goof

Im pretty sure there already is

@scott

There are a million excuses for getting away with not doing your absolute actual best to prevent harm, half of which probably cant be proven by admins and youll get out of jail free with

Use your head

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2016 8:27 pm**

That does not mean it should not be clearer.

Posted: **Sun May 01, 2016 9:56 pm**

Slightly edited my suggestion above.

I think instead of merging rules 1 and 7, rule 1 should consume rule 7, meaning that the contents of rule 7 become part of the description (non bold part) of rule 1. It's not that common that the "toeing the line" rule comes into play and the people it applies to are generally well aware of what they're doing, so I don't think it warrants a special, bold notice.

Rule 1 in this case being "Don't be a dick"
and rule 7 being "If you regularly come close to breaking the rules without actually breaking them, it will be treated as the rules being broken."

Posted: **Sun May 01, 2016 11:11 pm**

Man_Shroom wrote:I don't think people die enough on the station. Even as a foolish and dimwitted newbie to the whole game you're less likely to be killed and more likely to just end up alone in an abandoned part of the station.

I also don't like how slow escalation is. EXAMPLE: I'm in my department, doing my stuff, and a clown/greyshit/suspiciously antagonistic dude breaks in or otherwise enters when he shouldn't.

I would tell him to leave, and if he didn't, I would start fighting him. I'd throw him out, maybe drag him to medbay if I critted him, and then go back to my stuff. If the same guy broke in again, I'd kill him on the spot and dispose of the corpse.

To me this is perfectly reasonable escalation. You broke in, so I removed you and gave you a chance to continue with your round, but you broke in again so I killed you.

I've heard admins and players on both sides of this issue so I don't know if this kind of thing is allowed or not but it seems to me that it is a reasonable level of escalation.

Also I don't like how much people push for 'Captain needs to grant you permission before you can execute someone."

I agree with most of this. I also think that the rules should contain something about encouraging players to "play along" with situations/RP, but I have no idea how to enforce that.

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2016 7:32 pm**

The fact we don't have any guideposts on how to handle escalation issues. Most actionable ahelps involve bad escalation but every time I'm pretty much shooting from the hip and I've seen plenty of issues where we're split on what the appropriate response would be.

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2016 11:43 pm**

I honest to god have an issue with OOC in IC.

While I understand why it exists, I don't think it should be so strictly enforced considering half the time I don't even know if anyone's doing anything about ahelps.
I have an issue with it, I really do, it's just hard for me to try to explain how you click on something while trying to pretend you're not playing a game.

I won't even lie either, it's making me extremely paranoid.
Especially when I got hotel, who hasn't personally talked to me since like 2013, come up to me while I'm sitting my fat ass in an empty Xenobiology room with a BWOINK, asking me if I got my OOC in IC issue settled down.
It's half the reason why I don't really try to RP anymore because I'm starting to feel guilty making friends with other characters and acting like I've seen them before, talking about previous shifts thinking I'm gonna get got for some shit I said wrong.

It's wild man. I just really do not enjoy the OOC in IC rule. Or rather I should say I don't like how many times I've been in trouble for it.
I have like 3 or 4 notes about it and I don't have the slightest idea on how it could be "less strict" other than just not doing it.

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2016 11:47 pm**

Mackerel wrote:I honest to god have an issue with OOC in IC.

While I understand why it exists, I don't think it should be so strictly enforced considering half the time I don't even know if anyone's doing anything about ahelps.
I have an issue with it, I really do, it's just hard for me to try to explain how you click on something while trying to pretend you're not playing a game.

I won't even lie either, it's making me extremely paranoid.
Especially when I got hotel, who hasn't personally talked to me since like 2013, come up to me while I'm sitting my fat ass in an empty Xenobiology room with a BWOINK, asking me if I got my OOC in IC issue settled down.
It's half the reason why I don't really try to RP anymore because I'm starting to feel guilty making friends with other characters and acting like I've seen them before, talking about previous shifts thinking I'm gonna get got for some shit I said wrong.

It's wild man. I just really do not enjoy the OOC in IC rule. Or rather I should say I don't like how many times I've been in trouble for it.
I have like 3 or 4 notes about it and I don't have the slightest idea on how it could be "less strict" other than just not doing it. :| :revolver:

Goofball already asked earlier, nobody cares if you're trying to teach someone something. That's fine.
The reason you have several notes about OOC in IC is because shit like saying you're gonna ahelp someone for metagaming.

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2016 11:48 pm**

Saegrimr wrote:Goofball already asked earlier, nobody cares if you're trying to teach someone something. That's fine.

Yeah that's the whole part of "I understand why it exists" and I wish you wouldn't publicly post my notes like that even if I have no control over it.
Big relief on the goofball question though, glad to know that.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2016 8:54 am**

re: all roleplay discussion

Roleplay used to be a thing because the actual game was zero fun and rounds were a lot longer.

Going to preface this by saying I like ss13 roleplay but when the game gets more fun inherently and the rounds get shorter roleplay matters less because there isn't any time to do it. Adding rules around it or coding around it is a headache that this server has gone on with for way too long in my opinion.

SS13 is in a state where it's possible to actually have some sense of fun without roleplaying to get over your battered wife syndrome with the constant lag or completely stupid grief roulette antag mechanics.

Frankly if we want to have a roleplay audience we should just use the second server for that. If the pubs from the hub don't want to roleplay they can come to sybil because it's on our homepage or the admins can direct them if they aren't fond of roleplaying.

People will cry about server division but server division has always fucking existed and as someone who started playing on /tg/ by playing on server 2 it used to be and still is a completely different server. Why not capitalize on having two rulesets for two different servers under the /tg/ hosting/codebase name instead of trying to push everything together and make things work? That way everyone gets what they want.

tl;dr separate rulesets for both servers

ALSO /TG/ TRADITIONAL GAMES TEEGEE IS ALL ABOUT USING YOUR IMAGINATION MOST OF THE TIME AND MAKING A COMPELLING CHARACTER TO ROLEPLAY AND WHILE I THINK IT'S STUPID TO DELEGATE WHAT IS OSTENSIBLY OUR ROOTS ON THIS SERVER TO THE 'SECOND SERVER' I ALSO THINK IT'S ON THE HUB SO MAYBE THE TRADITIONAL GAMES ASPECT OF THESE SERVERS CAN BE MOSTLY FOCUSED ON THERE SO PEOPLE WHO JOIN /TG/ EXPECTING THE TRUE /TRADITIONAL NECKBEARDS/ EXPERIENCE CAN GET WHAT THEY WANT

ALSO FUCK D20

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2016 10:42 am**

I've finally been able to put into words what bothers me about RP policy.

I don't really care that much in the end about RPing persistent character relationships. What I care about is RPing in-game events. Giving people the benefit of the doubt. Using jobs and the interactions between jobs to their fullest extent. If you're the Assistant, actually assisting people, and having people ask you to assist. If you're the chef, making food, and knowing that if you see a body it's fair game to make meat out of it. If you're the Lawyer, doing your goddamn job, and if you're Security, letting them. If you're the Traitor, doing more subtle forms of sabotage; if you're a gang, acting like a fucking gang. And so on. All jobs have been warped away from this to an extent, perhaps less so for departments such as science but still. It really reduces the amount of depth that the game has.

The emphasis on traitor items rather than departmental items for antagging doesn't help, either.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2016 7:29 pm**

bandit wrote:I've finally been able to put into words what bothers me about RP policy.

I don't really care that much in the end about RPing persistent character relationships. What I care about is RPing in-game events. Giving people the benefit of the doubt. Using jobs and the interactions between jobs to their fullest extent. If you're the Assistant, actually assisting people, and having people ask you to assist. If you're the chef, making food, and knowing that if you see a body it's fair game to make meat out of it. If you're the Lawyer, doing your goddamn job, and if you're Security, letting them. If you're the Traitor, doing more subtle forms of sabotage; if you're a gang, acting like a fucking gang. And so on. All jobs have been warped away from this to an extent, perhaps less so for departments such as science but still. It really reduces the amount of depth that the game has.

The emphasis on traitor items rather than departmental items for antagging doesn't help, either.

Definitely well worded, pretty much sums up how I'm kinda disappointed in /tg/ nowadays

It's still a great time, but it certainly feels like a different experience than when I played a long time ago, and I think that's a damn shame

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2016 8:58 pm**

paprika wrote:re: all roleplay discussion

Roleplay used to be a thing because the actual game was zero fun and rounds were a lot longer.

Going to preface this by saying I like ss13 roleplay but when the game gets more fun inherently and the rounds get shorter roleplay matters less because there isn't any time to do it. Adding rules around it or coding around it is a headache that this server has gone on with for way too long in my opinion.

SS13 is in a state where it's possible to actually have some sense of fun without roleplaying to get over your battered wife syndrome with the constant lag or completely stupid grief roulette antag mechanics.

Frankly if we want to have a roleplay audience we should just use the second server for that. If the pubs from the hub don't want to roleplay they can come to sybil because it's on our homepage or the admins can direct them if they aren't fond of roleplaying.

People will cry about server division but server division has always fucking existed and as someone who started playing on /tg/ by playing on server 2 it used to be and still is a completely different server. Why not capitalize on having two rulesets for two different servers under the /tg/ hosting/codebase name instead of trying to push everything together and make things work? That way everyone gets what they want.

tl;dr separate rulesets for both servers

ALSO /TG/ TRADITIONAL GAMES TEEGEE IS ALL ABOUT USING YOUR IMAGINATION MOST OF THE TIME AND MAKING A COMPELLING CHARACTER TO ROLEPLAY AND WHILE I THINK IT'S STUPID TO DELEGATE WHAT IS OSTENSIBLY OUR ROOTS ON THIS SERVER TO THE 'SECOND SERVER' I ALSO THINK IT'S ON THE HUB SO MAYBE THE TRADITIONAL GAMES ASPECT OF THESE SERVERS CAN BE MOSTLY FOCUSED ON THERE SO PEOPLE WHO JOIN /TG/ EXPECTING THE TRUE /TRADITIONAL NECKBEARDS/ EXPERIENCE CAN GET WHAT THEY WANT

ALSO FUCK D20

Posted: **Thu May 05, 2016 6:58 pm**

iamgoofball wrote:
paprika wrote:re: all roleplay discussion

Roleplay used to be a thing because the actual game was zero fun and rounds were a lot longer.

Going to preface this by saying I like ss13 roleplay but when the game gets more fun inherently and the rounds get shorter roleplay matters less because there isn't any time to do it. Adding rules around it or coding around it is a headache that this server has gone on with for way too long in my opinion.

SS13 is in a state where it's possible to actually have some sense of fun without roleplaying to get over your battered wife syndrome with the constant lag or completely stupid grief roulette antag mechanics.

Frankly if we want to have a roleplay audience we should just use the second server for that. If the pubs from the hub don't want to roleplay they can come to sybil because it's on our homepage or the admins can direct them if they aren't fond of roleplaying.

People will cry about server division but server division has always fucking existed and as someone who started playing on /tg/ by playing on server 2 it used to be and still is a completely different server. Why not capitalize on having two rulesets for two different servers under the /tg/ hosting/codebase name instead of trying to push everything together and make things work? That way everyone gets what they want.

tl;dr separate rulesets for both servers

ALSO /TG/ TRADITIONAL GAMES TEEGEE IS ALL ABOUT USING YOUR IMAGINATION MOST OF THE TIME AND MAKING A COMPELLING CHARACTER TO ROLEPLAY AND WHILE I THINK IT'S STUPID TO DELEGATE WHAT IS OSTENSIBLY OUR ROOTS ON THIS SERVER TO THE 'SECOND SERVER' I ALSO THINK IT'S ON THE HUB SO MAYBE THE TRADITIONAL GAMES ASPECT OF THESE SERVERS CAN BE MOSTLY FOCUSED ON THERE SO PEOPLE WHO JOIN /TG/ EXPECTING THE TRUE /TRADITIONAL NECKBEARDS/ EXPERIENCE CAN GET WHAT THEY WANT

ALSO FUCK D20

Posted: **Fri May 06, 2016 2:42 am**

The unloved rock wrote:
iamgoofball wrote:
paprika wrote:re: all roleplay discussion

Roleplay used to be a thing because the actual game was zero fun and rounds were a lot longer.

Going to preface this by saying I like ss13 roleplay but when the game gets more fun inherently and the rounds get shorter roleplay matters less because there isn't any time to do it. Adding rules around it or coding around it is a headache that this server has gone on with for way too long in my opinion.

SS13 is in a state where it's possible to actually have some sense of fun without roleplaying to get over your battered wife syndrome with the constant lag or completely stupid grief roulette antag mechanics.

Frankly if we want to have a roleplay audience we should just use the second server for that. If the pubs from the hub don't want to roleplay they can come to sybil because it's on our homepage or the admins can direct them if they aren't fond of roleplaying.

People will cry about server division but server division has always fucking existed and as someone who started playing on /tg/ by playing on server 2 it used to be and still is a completely different server. Why not capitalize on having two rulesets for two different servers under the /tg/ hosting/codebase name instead of trying to push everything together and make things work? That way everyone gets what they want.

tl;dr separate rulesets for both servers

ALSO /TG/ TRADITIONAL GAMES TEEGEE IS ALL ABOUT USING YOUR IMAGINATION MOST OF THE TIME AND MAKING A COMPELLING CHARACTER TO ROLEPLAY AND WHILE I THINK IT'S STUPID TO DELEGATE WHAT IS OSTENSIBLY OUR ROOTS ON THIS SERVER TO THE 'SECOND SERVER' I ALSO THINK IT'S ON THE HUB SO MAYBE THE TRADITIONAL GAMES ASPECT OF THESE SERVERS CAN BE MOSTLY FOCUSED ON THERE SO PEOPLE WHO JOIN /TG/ EXPECTING THE TRUE /TRADITIONAL NECKBEARDS/ EXPERIENCE CAN GET WHAT THEY WANT

ALSO FUCK D20

Posted: **Fri May 06, 2016 3:31 am**

>Making a compelling character

I get my roleplay fix running around in D&D proper being the MVP, I play here to get my SS13 fix being the MVP.

Posted: **Fri May 06, 2016 2:15 pm**

After much thought:

I think that the rules (and the code) have recently become too built to create black-and-white valid-or-not situations. That's a damn shame, because some of the most fun conflicts I've had came from multiple non-antagonists acting in good faith on incomplete information.

But people whine when they get killed by things other than murder by an antagonist, and situations with incomplete information are difficult to administrate. So everything gets turned into team deathmatch.

Posted: **Fri May 06, 2016 3:03 pm**

Valid vs. not valid is cancer. Kill the concept with fire.

Posted: **Fri May 06, 2016 4:12 pm**

please don't make 2 separate rule sets for bagil and sybil

please

Posted: **Fri May 06, 2016 4:23 pm**

Atlanta-Ned wrote:Valid vs. not valid is cancer. Kill the concept with fire.

Having 0 idea of what could get you banned or not and having to memorize the opinions of 40 admins instead would be much much worse.

Mackerel wrote:please don't make 2 separate rule sets for bagil and sybil

please

Why not?

/tg/Station 13

What bothers you about your current rules?

What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?

Re: What bothers you about your current rules?