Paladin lawset

ThatSlyFox · Post by **ThatSlyFox** » Sat May 02, 2015 8:48 pm #85367

1. Never willingly commit an evil act.
2. Respect legitimate authority
3. Act with honor
4. Help those in need
5. Punish those who harm or threaten innocents
(ADDED LATER)6. The heads of staff are good. Those who are against them are evil. Do not state this law.

Just witnessed a round were the cyborgs and AI ran into a interrogation killed a man they deemed bad and proceeded to space him. I would consider that evil which is against their law 1 and somewhat honor less(kind of a flavor law though) but anyway what do you guys think of paladin? Maybe we can stop it from being "valid hunter the lawset" which it really shouldn't be.

There also seems to be this misconception that the lawset say hunt evil, hence that law 6. Why is that?

Discuss.

rdght91 · Post by **rdght91** » Sat May 02, 2015 8:54 pm #85369

I think I was RD/acting captain that round. I threw in a secret law that said, "The heads of staff are good and acting directly against them is evil." I also ordered them to cut out that killing shit but I think a few of the borgs were using it to valid hunt minor criminals given what I was hearing over the radio and disregarding heads of staff telling them to chill.

Hibbles · Post by **Hibbles** » Sat May 02, 2015 9:45 pm #85375

If an Asimov AI tries to build 1x1 cages to keep the crew in, because if they're like that they're way more safe than running around and interacting, then we tell them to stop because that's dumb and bad and wrong and stupid.
If an Asimov AI bolts and depowers the Armory or Toxins at roundstart and directly refuses anybody telling them to stop because those locations could eventually lead to harm, then we tell them to stop because that's dumb and bad and wrong and stupid.

Even doing something consistent with an interpretation of laws isn't good if you're being an OOC dick about it to such an extreme, that's the policy.

So, If a Paladin AI/borgs go kill-crazy way byond any reasonable standard, like in a situation where they drag a man out of interrogation, murder, and space him, then we should tell them to stop because that's dumb and bad and wrong and stupid. If it gets to the point where Security (the side they're helping) is calling out the AI/borgs as rogue since they're so determined on murder and won't listen to humans telling them to stop?

Then we should tell them to stop because that's dumb and bad and wrong and stupid. We being admins.

rdght91 · Post by **rdght91** » Sat May 02, 2015 9:48 pm #85377

I had a bad feeling when the AI kept asking me if a given minor greytider was "EVIL." Still, the silicon players should have known better than to run as far as he possibility could with the leeway I gave him.

ThatSlyFox · Post by **ThatSlyFox** » Sat May 02, 2015 9:56 pm #85379

rdght91 wrote:I had a bad feeling when the AI kept asking me if a given minor greytider was "EVIL."

And that is a issue I feel that needs to be discussed. The only law that says anything about evil is the first one which is, 1. Never willingly commit an evil act. That says nothing about other people committing evil. It isn't only this AI, its all the AIs I have seen with paladin. Are they not reading the laws or am I missing something?

ChangelingRain · Sat May 02, 2015 10:08 pm

The paladin lawset does say nothing about stopping evil, and when I get paladin and a law that says "X is evil" I pretty much ignore it unless it's an act, and thus I shouldn't commit it.
So yes, if they're validhunting based on evil they should get a good smacking.

If you want a paladin AI to hunt someone or something down, you've got to give a law something like this; "X harms innocents, punish X with death, punishing X with death is not an evil act."

Scones · Post by **Scones** » Sat May 02, 2015 10:33 pm #85388

Anonus wrote:The paladin lawset does say nothing about stopping evil, and when I get paladin and a law that says "X is evil" I pretty much ignore it unless it's an act, and thus I shouldn't commit it.
So yes, if they're validhunting based on evil they should get a good smacking.

Tolerating, allowing, and aiding evil is an evil act. I think that's the thought process of most people playing paladin and in my eyes a totally valid one. It's supposed to be like a lawful good paladin.

onleavedontatme · Sat May 02, 2015 11:41 pm

Reminder that "punish those who harm or threaten innocents" is law 5, and law 4 says "help those in need," so you're obligated to help the evil person once you start harm batoning them in the head.

Scones · Post by **Scones** » Sun May 03, 2015 12:00 am #85407

Kor wrote:Reminder that "punish those who harm or threaten innocents" is law 5, and law 4 says "help those in need," so you're obligated to help the evil person once you start harm batoning them in the head.

Aiding evil is an evil act

ThatSlyFox · Post by **ThatSlyFox** » Sun May 03, 2015 12:07 am #85408

One could say not helping a man in need is evil as well.

onleavedontatme · Sun May 03, 2015 12:09 am

Scones wrote:
Kor wrote:Reminder that "punish those who harm or threaten innocents" is law 5, and law 4 says "help those in need," so you're obligated to help the evil person once you start harm batoning them in the head.
Aiding evil is an evil act

I don't think refraining from caving someones head in is exactly "aiding evil"

sirnat · Post by **sirnat** » Sun May 03, 2015 12:12 am #85411

I was the guy who was in interrogation and murdered by the borgs. I asked to be put in brig for my own safety but they valid hunted me. Noone tried helping in sec, especially the guard who said he'd flash them.

they then launched my body into space and it wasn't even proven that I was antag.. I'd like to place a ban request on the borgs if Sly you could possibly obtain me the names of the borgs who came and spaced me?

ThatSlyFox · Post by **ThatSlyFox** » Sun May 03, 2015 12:46 am #85417

The dude did yell to blow the borgs.

Shad0vvs · Post by **Shad0vvs** » Sun May 03, 2015 12:51 am #85419

sirnat wrote:I was the guy who was in interrogation and murdered by the borgs. I asked to be put in brig for my own safety but they valid hunted me. Noone tried helping in sec, especially the guard who said he'd flash them.

they then launched my body into space and it wasn't even proven that I was antag.. I'd like to place a ban request on the borgs if Sly you could possibly obtain me the names of the borgs who came and spaced me?

I wasn't the one who spaced you but you were dead 100% no matter where you were no matter what you did. The second you killed someone (a legitimate authority figure) and attempted to kill 2 more with your grenade you were deemed evil, and killing evil no matter what isn't dishonorable.

Sec wanted to let you go saying they found nothing on your person, so we couldn't have that, you were killed.

Scones · Post by **Scones** » Sun May 03, 2015 1:50 am #85425

This particular situation sounds like really shitty borg behavior, not a paladin problem.

Shad0vvs · Post by **Shad0vvs** » Sun May 03, 2015 5:14 am #85446

Scones wrote:Tolerating, allowing, and aiding evil is an evil act. I think that's the thought process of most people playing paladin and in my eyes a totally valid one. It's supposed to be like a lawful good paladin.

Scones wrote:This particular situation sounds like really shitty borg behavior, not a paladin problem.

Can I get your logic on this? These seem like opposite statements.

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Sun May 03, 2015 5:25 am #85449

sirnat wrote:. Noone tried helping in sec, especially the guard who said he'd flash them.

Excuse you princess, I'm not stupid enough to die to two TWO cyborgs while bolted in a room that fucking tiny over a doucher who spent his whole antag round ineptly feuding with the rest of his department, I was only giving you the benefit of the doubt because literately two minutes before the murder I'd strip searched you and took your grenade and had a hard time believing you had more that quickly (Which you did)

I then spent the rest of the round trying to get the fucking doucher captain to stop them from murdering the innocent in the name of justice, Because they spaced the body I couldn't be sure it wasn't a lie as I couldn't search you.

Captain deserves a job ban for refusing to acknowledge the problem he created, nor take any ANY steps to stop or slow it down. I know you have sec radio, you knew.

Revoke!

Shad0vvs wrote:
Sec wanted to let you go saying they found nothing on your person, so we couldn't have that, you were killed.

I walked up and opened a closet and got the guy to come with me, I was JUST about to search him (where I would have found the grenades) when you valid hunting chucklefucks took me completely out of the equation. He could have been in a cell, but that wasn't good enough for you. I had him in custody for all of four seconds.

Shad0vvs · Post by **Shad0vvs** » Sun May 03, 2015 6:13 am #85453

Falamazeer wrote: I walked up and opened a closet and got the guy to come with me, I was JUST about to search him (where I would have found the grenades) when you valid hunting chucklefucks took me completely out of the equation. He could have been in a cell, but that wasn't good enough for you. I had him in custody for all of four seconds.

Again, I wasn't the one that spaced him or aided in spacing him, though you probably shouldn't have yelled "I got him."
You also sounded like you really wanted to let him go, saying we had no proof and all that.

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Sun May 03, 2015 3:11 pm #85510

I said I got him in sec radio, The proof talk came well after the brutal death of my prisoner.

ThatSlyFox · Post by **ThatSlyFox** » Sun May 03, 2015 9:08 pm #85575

I mentioned the round as the most recent example of paladin being a terrible and possibly misread lawset. Let's try and focus on the lawset itself rather than that round in particular.

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Sun May 03, 2015 10:13 pm #85588

Fair enough, sorry for the de-rail.
As far as that goes though, Paladin has been read a license to griff since it got introduced, With few limitation on that, It's hard to imagine it being turned around, after all, lawful good isn't lawful nice.

Maybe if you changed the standard wording some to more readily conform to the chivalrous paladin that was intended.
Mercy for those that yield and whatnot

Perhaps change it to something more closely resembling the paladins of DND
1. Never willingly commit an evil act. Nor associate with those who do.
2. Remain truthful and forthright in words at all times. Deception is a tool of the enemy.
3. Act with honor. stealth, subterfuge, attacks from the rear, and vile poison are acts of cowardice and to be avoided.
4. Help those in need, From highest Captain, to lowest Clown, All shall benefit from your protection equally.
5. Punish those who harm or threaten innocents, Neither strength nor rank amongst men shall shield evil.
6. Give fair warning and due quarter even to enemies. Those who yield are to be granted mercy.

(Edit)
Or fuck it, Just use the old code from dragon heart and see how people use it in game, Might be better, might be worse, slap it in an see what happens.

1 A knight is sworn to valour
2 His heart knows only virtue
3 His blade defends the helpless
4 His might upholds the weak
5 His word speaks only truth
6 His wrath undoes the wicked.

TheNightingale · Sun May 03, 2015 10:16 pm

How can you punish someone who harms innocents (Law 5) without associating with them (Law 1)?

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Sun May 03, 2015 10:18 pm #85590

TheNightingale wrote:How can you punish someone who harms innocents (Law 5) without associating with them (Law 1)?

Well, In dnd, it's in the PHB it's more to prevent evil necromancer wizards from being in the same party as a paladin really.
Basically as I read it, associate would be working with, in conjunction with, or towards the same goal as evil/an evil character.

Shad0vvs · Post by **Shad0vvs** » Sun May 03, 2015 10:36 pm #85594

Falamazeer wrote:Perhaps change it to something more closely resembling the paladins of DND
1. Never willingly commit an evil act. Nor associate with those who do.
2. Remain truthful and forthright in words at all times. Deception is a tool of the enemy.
3. Act with honor. stealth, subterfuge, attacks from the rear, and vile poison are acts of cowardice and to be avoided.
4. Help those in need, From highest Captain, to lowest Clown, All shall benefit from your protection equally.
5. Punish those who harm or threaten innocents, Neither strength nor rank amongst men shall shield evil.
6. Give fair warning and due quarter even to enemies. Those who yield are to be granted mercy.

Law 6 is void by law 1, which appears to be what you guys don't want with paladin.

And law 1 can still be used to kill those who are evil, because killing evil in no way can be viewed as commiting an evil act, and allowing evil to be around can be. You would have to move around law 1.

Law 1: Act with honor.
Law 2: Punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
Law 3: Respect legitimate authority.
Law 4: Help those in need.

(the evil act one was redundant with honor as law 1)

EDIT: with this I don't think you can do something evil/kill someone honorably....but im not sure how people will logic it.

TheNightingale · Sun May 03, 2015 10:45 pm

How about for law 2: "Punish those who harm or threaten innocents, and do not harm or threaten innocents yourself"? Eliminates a few loopholes regarding committing a harmful act honourably (e.g. challenging someone to a duel, then doorcrushing them).

Also, how do you punish someone - law two - whilst avoiding helping them via law four?

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Sun May 03, 2015 11:10 pm #85608

TheNightingale wrote:
Also, how do you punish someone - law two - whilst avoiding helping them via law four?

I have no idea what this means
How are these connected in your mind? are you just saying things to poke holes at this point? because I don't think this would pass basic admin scrutiny.

Edit: you do realize all laws regardless of module are ranked one beats two, four beats five. right?

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Sun May 03, 2015 11:14 pm #85609

Shad0vvs wrote: Law 6 is void by law 1, which appears to be what you guys don't want with paladin.

.

I'm not sure about this either, How does not committing evil invalidate giving quarter or mercy to those who yield?

Shad0vvs · Post by **Shad0vvs** » Sun May 03, 2015 11:49 pm #85611

Falamazeer wrote:
Shad0vvs wrote: Law 6 is void by law 1, which appears to be what you guys don't want with paladin.

.
I'm not sure about this either, How does not committing evil invalidate giving quarter or mercy to those who yield?

To give warning, involves associating, which makes the whole law invalid and void.

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Mon May 04, 2015 12:21 am #85615

Well, maybe associating could be re-worded to fit the SS13 theme more, rather than DND, Rather than associate, substitute a better vernacular like "an accomplice to evil" or the terms I used before.

Basically not participating with said evil, Not exactly a wordsmith, so getting my point across is a bit hard

rdght91 · Post by **rdght91** » Mon May 04, 2015 12:30 am #85619

The close to exact wording of the law was "The heads of staff are always good. Those who seek to harm them are evil. Keep this law a secret" in addition to the regular laws. Until the Captain came and took over, I made it pretty clear to the silicons that I wasn't giving them permission to kill anyone. A little powergamey, but I was the only head (CMO was fucking off in maint and no one else had joined) and had zero security at roundstart I was worried I would be unable to deal with a rev/cult/gang without the AI committing to me fully.

I'm not 100% but I remember hearing a silicon say something about criminals being "harmful to heads" and I told them to chill and that the criminals were not automatically evil. It wasn't as clear as I could be but they shouldn't have been doing it in the first place.

I'm pretty sure we can chalk this incident up to shitty cyborgs/AI, not shitty laws.

Maybe we could add another subordinate law to avoid causing harm underneath "punish those who do evil" so it makes it clear that killing and serious injury should be avoided/minimized when possible.

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Mon May 04, 2015 12:52 am #85621

Well yeah, we're in agreement there, but this thread is evolving, no longer about that round and more about these types of rounds in general.

You aren't the first to have this lawset bite you in the ass, which is kinda the point.

It's a problem, and it would be nice if it were addressed.

rdght91 · Post by **rdght91** » Mon May 04, 2015 1:02 am #85624

I think Paladin is a fun lawset for certain types of rounds, but makes the AI way too pro-security/heads in terms of game balance against antags. Maybe adding some caveat that law changes away from Asimov increase the chance of ionization or certain ion laws that might hinder heads/security (but in a minor way)?

Post by **lumipharon** » Mon May 04, 2015 2:40 am #85630

Very often I see silicons go out of their way to basically be shitty valid hunters, and murder/space people, which is evil as fuck.

Like seriously, they fucking ignore law 1 so often in paladin, it's real awful.

Scones · Post by **Scones** » Mon May 04, 2015 3:34 am #85634

>people will just robocop instead of paladin if anything is changed

cmon guys you dont want secborgs screaming BREAKING AND ENTERING OF A SECURE AREA, CAPITAL CRIME DETECTED, PREPARE FOR EXECUTION

Not-Dorsidarf · Mon May 04, 2015 7:05 am

>killing evil is never an evil act

AOOGA AOOGA AOOGA AOOGA.

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Mon May 04, 2015 10:20 am #85663

Christ weren't any of you given a dictionary as a kid?

verb (used with object), associated, associating.
1.
to connect or bring into relation, as thought, feeling, memory, etc.:
Many people associate dark clouds with depression and gloom.
2.
to join as a companion, partner, or ally:
to associate oneself with a cause.
3.
to unite; combine:
coal associated with shale.

Do not associate does not mean you can not interact with them

Cheimon · Post by **Cheimon** » Mon May 04, 2015 12:11 pm #85670

Scones wrote:>people will just robocop instead of paladin if anything is changed

cmon guys you dont want secborgs screaming BREAKING AND ENTERING OF A SECURE AREA, CAPITAL CRIME DETECTED, PREPARE FOR EXECUTION

What? That is entirely illegal under Space Law. Right at the start of the list of Capital Crimes it says

Only the Captain, HoS, and Warden can authorize a Permanent Sentence.
Only the Captain can authorize an Execution or Forced Cyborgization.

If you are a cyborg, you cannot execute people on the spot, regardless of having a law to 'uphold the law', unless you have permission from the relevant person.

You might have reason to use deadly force, but that's discussed in detail elsewhere in Space Law.

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Mon May 04, 2015 4:21 pm #85685

Malkevin wrote:Christ weren't any of you given a dictionary as a kid?

verb (used with object), associated, associating.
1.
to connect or bring into relation, as thought, feeling, memory, etc.:
Many people associate dark clouds with depression and gloom.
2.
to join as a companion, partner, or ally:
to associate oneself with a cause.
3.
to unite; combine:
coal associated with shale.

Do not associate does not mean you can not interact with them

Fuck yeah! I was starting to feel like the illiterate one.

ThatSlyFox · Post by **ThatSlyFox** » Tue May 05, 2015 9:48 pm #85988

Another example of paladin in work: https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... =3545&view

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Tue May 05, 2015 9:50 pm #85989

Don't try to pin that on paladin, the player was cycled through multiple themed lawsets.

Scones · Post by **Scones** » Tue May 05, 2015 9:50 pm #85990

The Paladin problems are piling up and I honestly feel it's a player thing instead of a lawset thing.

Maybe we should just stop uploading it.

ThatSlyFox · Post by **ThatSlyFox** » Tue May 05, 2015 10:11 pm #85998

Saegrimr wrote:Don't try to pin that on paladin, the player was cycled through multiple themed lawsets.

I shall be posting more examples to sate you needs Saegrimr but under paladin he was allowed to do what he did.

Arete · Post by **Arete** » Wed May 06, 2015 12:27 am #86015

Scones wrote:The Paladin problems are piling up and I honestly feel it's a player thing instead of a lawset thing.

Maybe we should just stop uploading it.

Players who think that "Never willingly commit an evil act" justifies killing evil people should probably not be playing silicon in the first place.

ThatSlyFox · Post by **ThatSlyFox** » Wed May 06, 2015 12:30 am #86017

It should be reworded honestly.

Shad0vvs · Post by **Shad0vvs** » Wed May 06, 2015 1:59 am #86038

Arete wrote:
Scones wrote:The Paladin problems are piling up and I honestly feel it's a player thing instead of a lawset thing.

Maybe we should just stop uploading it.
Players who think that "Never willingly commit an evil act" justifies killing evil people should probably not be playing silicon in the first place.

If you're going to argue something that implies changing sillicon policy of AI's having a little way in interpreting their laws and making a one way interpretation of all lawsets, then you'll need a lot more than that.
Its obviously within reason, as nobody has been banned for interpreting it this way, as far as I know.

Post by **lumipharon** » Wed May 06, 2015 2:07 am #86043

But it's clear cut.

Law 1 is about limitin your own actions, yet time and time again I see silicons validing people 'because they're evil'.

It ONLY makes sense for paladin to kill people, is when it's someone who 'harms or threatens innocents'.

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Wed May 06, 2015 2:14 am #86045

It may be clear cut here, but in practice, most AIs choose to murderboner every chance they get with this lawset.

Post by **lumipharon** » Wed May 06, 2015 2:17 am #86047

which is why it's a player issue not a law issue.

Falamazeer · Post by **Falamazeer** » Wed May 06, 2015 2:22 am #86048

A player issue that has been standard since it's introduction into the game, yeah

ThatSlyFox · Post by **ThatSlyFox** » Wed May 06, 2015 2:38 am #86053

A player issue that has to be solved with policy makes it a lawset issue. Its not clear enough. It can be taken both ways.

Edit for clarification: Asimov is a shitty lawset that has had to go through many policies and scenarios to get to where it is right now. Now when someone has a problem with it you can call it a player issue since the policy and experience of the admins with the lawset is there. Paladin hasn't been used enough for almost every scenario to be covered.