/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

For some reason, a great deal of people think that playing a friendly antag is better roleplay when it isn't.

Examples of friendly antags that would NOT be banned (hence "soft ban"):
- Antags who do their objectives and from then on are essentially like ordinary crew
- Antags who opt to do the inverse of their objectives (IE protect rather than assassinate) assuming this is still allowed

Friendly antags who need to be thrown in the shitter:
- Antags who immediately hand their uplink to R&D/sec and say "yeah I'm a traitor but I think this makes us even" which is SHIT RP, it's SHIT
- Changelings that join sec within the first minute of the round and openly declare that they are a sec-ling
- Blatantly hostile/lethal antags (slaughter demons, space dragons) that opt to antag hunt instead of antagonize

What I really want to ban but find hard to enforce:
- Antags who do nothing antagonistic and make no attempt at any objective

Antags need to drive the round for roleplay to actually be interesting. Immediately betraying your allegiance to the syndicate/the hivemind is shitty roleplay. Think about the character you're playing; a cold syndicate agent who has trained for this moment has finally infiltrated the station, bypassing all security. His missions have been burned into his mind, his code phrases and uplink passcode memorized, and his first action is... To immediately side with the station for no reason because "durr u get syndie tech that way!!!" Bullshit, and worse still, that's not interesting at all. You've provided nothing to the round and have in fact made it worse. You deserve a temp antag ban.

"Friendly" antags who actively hunt other antags are the worst of the bunch imo. They're meant to provide interesting conflict to the overall story of the round, but they steal that interesting conflict for themselves by turning their tools to create this conflict on other creators. What you end up with is not only a person who is NOT providing the conflict they're supposed to, but actively stopping the other conflict creators from doing so. This creates a defacto extended which sucks. People who do this need a harsher antag ban than those who murderbone on Manuel.

saprasam wrote:thought: the reason there's so many friendly antags on manuel is because manuel players are afraid of the boink from having to kill multiple people to complete an objective

Exactly, people are used to the idea of hrp servers where dickhead admins will "idedreeee" ban you because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I literally remember a ban appeal (not tg) for some guy who killed an 'afk' borg that just happened to park itself at the toxin lab window where he was making weapons (apparently that's murderbone).

XivilaiAnaxes wrote:

saprasam wrote:thought: the reason there's so many friendly antags on manuel is because manuel players are afraid of the boink from having to kill multiple people to complete an objective

Exactly, people are used to the idea of hrp servers where dickhead admins will "idedreeee" ban you because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I literally remember a ban appeal (not tg) for some guy who killed an 'afk' borg that just happened to park itself at the toxin lab window where he was making weapons (apparently that's murderbone).

lmao how is silencing a witness not a reasonable thing for an antag to do, that's just how some murderbones start

some guy walks in on you hiding a body while you're not trying to go completely loud, well shit, now that's two bodies you gotta dispose of

Screemonster wrote:

XivilaiAnaxes wrote:

saprasam wrote:thought: the reason there's so many friendly antags on manuel is because manuel players are afraid of the boink from having to kill multiple people to complete an objective

Exactly, people are used to the idea of hrp servers where dickhead admins will "idedreeee" ban you because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I literally remember a ban appeal (not tg) for some guy who killed an 'afk' borg that just happened to park itself at the toxin lab window where he was making weapons (apparently that's murderbone).

lmao how is silencing a witness not a reasonable thing for an antag to do, that's just how some murderbones start

some guy walks in on you hiding a body while you're not trying to go completely loud, well shit, now that's two bodies you gotta dispose of

To add on to this fear,
Observed another player, a plasma man atmos tech traitor. Plasmaman traitor starts breaking plasma cans and making plasma fires in sci. he ran around making fire and killed about 4 people with his axe as he's walking thru science, so he goes to admin prison and has a chat with an admin.

I two days before that rolled traitor and was doing the an extremely similar, basically the same thing as the plasmaman was after a malf ai started to spread a plasma fire, so i broke cans and spread the flame. killing people in my way. I got no bwoink or admin intervention, now i'm terrified to start a fire of any kind now because someones gonna ahelp me and the wrong admin may be online.

thats what I am worried about - a lack of consistency between admins. I once was defending myself from sec by hiding in maint and putting up shocked grilles to kill them. Innocents ran into it and ahelped. Admin on at the time was cool but for all I know a different admin being on could have resulted in a ban.

You don't just have to read the rules to play Manuel, you also need to know the opinion of whatever admin is online.

how the fuck are you supposed to RP with a grille

cybersaber101 wrote:To add on to this fear,
a plasma man atmos tech traitor was breaking plasma cans and making plasma fires in sci. he ran around making fire and killed about 4 people with his axe as he's walking thru science, so he goes to admin prison and has a chat with an admin.

I myself two days before that as a traitor was doing the same thing after a malf ai started to spread a plasma fire, so i broke cans and spread the flame. killing people in my way. I got no bwoink or admin intervention, now i'm terrified to start a fire of any kind now because someones gonna ahelp me and the wrong admin may be online.

Um admin complain this shit lmao

NoxVS wrote:thats what I am worried about - a lack of consistency between admins. I once was defending myself from sec by hiding in maint and putting up shocked grilles to kill them. Innocents ran into it and ahelped. Admin on at the time was cool but for all I know a different admin being on could have resulted in a ban.

You don't just have to read the rules to play Manuel, you also need to know the opinion of whatever admin is online.

Based PKP (I think?) lmao

I wasn't the plasma man, and don't know all the details so a complaint on someone elses behalf that's ill informed would be unwise. I'll edit it to make that more clear but it just feeds into the "afraid to kill" mentality

XivilaiAnaxes wrote:

NoxVS wrote:thats what I am worried about - a lack of consistency between admins. I once was defending myself from sec by hiding in maint and putting up shocked grilles to kill them. Innocents ran into it and ahelped. Admin on at the time was cool but for all I know a different admin being on could have resulted in a ban.

You don't just have to read the rules to play Manuel, you also need to know the opinion of whatever admin is online.

Based PKP (I think?) lmao

Correct

I do actually agree with a lot of the previous posts, it does seem like it would be easier to just not play antag as antag by being friendly than play antag "wrong" and get banned. It's a shitty situation. That said, blatant friendlies as I've outlined in the OP would be shit regardless of said situation, so it has little bearing on the topic.

PKPenguin321 wrote:Correct

I do actually agree with a lot of the previous posts, it does seem like it would be easier to just not play antag as antag by being friendly than play antag "wrong" and get banned. It's a shitty situation. That said, blatant friendlies as I've outlined in the OP would be shit regardless of said situation, so it has little bearing on the topic.

I don't mean this as an agree/disagree with your points but I think it's worth pointing out that as admins we tend to lose perspective on how scary it can be as a player

the fact that a different admin could have a different reaction to something happening and you have no warning as to what that could be, while maybe sort of eye rolling in some context to admins, is an understandable fear for players

Yeah, I'd say PKp's first block of

Friendly antags who need to be thrown in the shitter:
- Antags who immediately hand their uplink to R&D/sec and say "yeah I'm a traitor but I think this makes us even" which is SHIT RP, it's SHIT
- Changelings that join sec within the first minute of the round and openly declare that they are a sec-ling
- Blatantly hostile/lethal antags (slaughter demons, space dragons) that opt to antag hunt instead of antagonize

Seems about right.

all very blatant with no interesting gimmick or anything really these players are just "haha why didn't I just ahelp my antag status away?" or "Gee wiz I sure do love valid hunting"

Although if you still wanted to do this, Ahelping first before should be definitely enforced, even a little.

Qbopper wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:Correct

I do actually agree with a lot of the previous posts, it does seem like it would be easier to just not play antag as antag by being friendly than play antag "wrong" and get banned. It's a shitty situation. That said, blatant friendlies as I've outlined in the OP would be shit regardless of said situation, so it has little bearing on the topic.

I don't mean this as an agree/disagree with your points but I think it's worth pointing out that as admins we tend to lose perspective on how scary it can be as a player

the fact that a different admin could have a different reaction to something happening and you have no warning as to what that could be, while maybe sort of eye rolling in some context to admins, is an understandable fear for players

Again, I agree, but it's off-topic to this thread

Seclings?
Well, if the sec is dumb enough to accept that kind of escalation, then it's all good innit?
Entire security is then infected with ling virus and must be gibbed or cremated.

Isn't that the whole roleplay approach to that?

friendly antags on manuel is stupid, all changelings are guilty of at least one murder, all wizards are wanted criminals.

Saw a round the other day where 10 minutes in a traitor goes friendly and gives the captain all codewords, slaps them with the codespeak book, and gives them some other goodies. Captain granted them immunity from the law and of course both of them complained when they both get tossed in perma by security.

The job of antagonists is to create conflict. You get significantly more freedom and cool gear in exchange for creating this conflict. If you don't want to do your job and be antagonistic, don't fucking roll for antag.

Antag bans need to start being given out for people who do friendly antag rounds. Why the fuck would the Syndicate hire someone who is just going to immediately backstab them and throw all the illegal stuff they got to security or not even make an attempt to accomplish any of the goals they were paid to do.

I love rounds where everyone realises the captain is really just an assistant with a god complex as opposed to someone actually remotely worth listening to and treats them accordingly.

I saw a friendly nightmare a couple of days ago, this thread is very relevant still.

am I still allowed to spend all my TC on briefcases full of cash and attempt to bribe my target into killing themself

Jimmius wrote:am I still allowed to spend all my TC on briefcases full of cash and attempt to bribe my target into killing themself

it doesn't matter if this is allowed because it's funny enough that any admin who would ban you for it is not worth having on the team

Qbopper wrote:

Jimmius wrote:am I still allowed to spend all my TC on briefcases full of cash and attempt to bribe my target into killing themself

it doesn't matter if this is allowed because it's funny enough that any admin who would ban you for it is not worth having on the team

Even if some soulless husk admin did try it, nothing prevents him from still trying to accomplish his antag objectives without 20 tc.

itt: why won't people roleplay the way I think they should

oranges wrote:itt: why won't people roleplay the way I think they should

hurr hurr i roleplay as insane murderrer so it ok for me to rdm <-- oranges says this rule is ok
hurr hurr i roleplay as cold blooded traitor wqho trained for years jk im actually giinvg guns to sec fnr <-- oranges says this rule is not ok

Agreed with this. People who pick limited jobs should do them. If they play HoS they should protect the station. If they play CE they shouldn't neglect the engine. And if they play an antagonist they should provide antagonism.

Friendly antags are annoying, but frankly the crew should be arresting any "friendly" antags. They're all criminal scum and you wouldnt expect sec to let off someone who killed someone because "he's just so chill man".


Dont think it needs direct admin intervention, just sec to be less tolerant of openly traitorous crew.

Not-Dorsidarf wrote:Friendly antags are annoying, but frankly the crew should be arresting any "friendly" antags. They're all criminal scum and you wouldnt expect sec to let off someone who killed someone because "he's just so chill man".


Dont think it needs direct admin intervention, just sec to be less tolerant of openly traitorous crew.

Like I said I just execute them because its the lamest shit ever.

as sec I feel the need to be somewhat tolerant of friendly antagonists due to the "be kind to antags" rule so I fear admin intervention if I touch them.

If you gonna codify Nightmare on Manuel being anything less than beelines-towards-light-sources-APCs-and-anyone-alive-to-destroy-them garbage being bannable, you might as well replace one with NPC that does just that. Leave the room for fun that's not based around killing those valids.

Gotta note that traitors/lings becoming fake sec is cancer. Stay neutral at most!

PKPenguin321 wrote:

oranges wrote:itt: why won't people roleplay the way I think they should

hurr hurr i roleplay as insane murderrer so it ok for me to rdm <-- oranges says this rule is ok
hurr hurr i roleplay as cold blooded traitor wqho trained for years jk im actually giinvg guns to sec fnr <-- oranges says this rule is not ok

if you project any harder imax will charge you licensing fees

oranges wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

oranges wrote:itt: why won't people roleplay the way I think they should

hurr hurr i roleplay as insane murderrer so it ok for me to rdm <-- oranges says this rule is ok
hurr hurr i roleplay as cold blooded traitor wqho trained for years jk im actually giinvg guns to sec fnr <-- oranges says this rule is not ok

if you project any harder imax will charge you licensing fees

cope

If there are admins on, and there should be at least one, then I don't see the problem.

Wizard is being friendly? Then create something else around that.
Off the top of my head: Spawn a squad of tunnel clowns with the objective of doing a hit on the wizard.

I had a round where admins solved a wizard being friendly and just... working in chemistry by spawning 6 more wizards, all of which had the objective to kill the first wizard but all of which failed. it felt like the station was being punished for not validing the friendly antag.

confused rock wrote:I had a round where admins solved a wizard being friendly and just... working in chemistry by spawning 6 more wizards, all of which had the objective to kill the first wizard but all of which failed. it felt like the station was being punished for not validing the friendly antag.

If the crew were so ballin they killed six of the most deadly solo antag in the game before they could get to their highly obvious and public target im impressed as fuck

no the wizards were just really bad the first one had a scrying orb so I ran to wherever the next wizard teleported to and I killed them

Just had an event on manuel where admins spawned a wizard with the objective "do not be friendly towards the crew." it was friendly and saved us from slaughter demons. we live in a society.

the reason manuel has such a friendly anteg problem is due to the culture of fear it's fostered.
everyone is either scared or angry on manuel. scared to make people angry, because when people get angry, bwoinkies occur. everyone is too scared to create conflict because, best case scenario, they get caustically torn apart in dchat or ooc, and worst case, admin gets on them with a poor interpretation of the already vague rules unique to the server.

as a side note, friendly wizards are a whole nother level of wretched because wiz is such a rare roll to get. people that want conflict just get a greenshift with some guy in a hat with a healing staff prancing around and everyone has to sit with the knowledge that their potential wiz roll was taken up by this fungus of an individual.

please, anyone who is reading this, don't be afraid as wizard. if you die quickly, you won't earn a bad rep or be metagrudged or anything. people might tease you but that's it. if you create a 2 hour greenshift as a staff of healing medbay camper though, nobody will have fun except that circlejerk of players who brag about how much they hate killing others so they look chill or whatever.

the rules aren't unique to the server reman, they're on two servers, manuel and the mrp goon server we stole them from with almost no edits.

confused rock wrote:the rules aren't unique to the server reman, they're on two servers, manuel and the mrp goon server we stole them from with almost no edits.

yeah, i heard that. that's not a very good idea, the differences between /tg/ and goon run deeper than just the code. as for the code, though, the different bases obviously focus on different things. goon's got more mechanical depth when /tg/ typically replies on its interaction more, but that interaction's bwoinkable half the time under these rules.

I agree with this policy being applied on Manuel. antagonists should be the moving force of the round and their responsability is making it interesting, specially in a place where rules are tighter and players aren't free to do that as non-antag. But as someone pointed out, just as murderboning is allowed in LRP, friendly antags should be too. It's that or neither. There's enough stuff happening in LRP without antags so rounds will usually have stuff going on anyway.
Let the antags do whatever they want in LRP, apply this policy in MRP

This is an issue that is extremely blatant on Manuel. The server already has some of the longest shift, and they are quite frankly boring for more than half the crew most of the time. Why ? Because the antagonists often just sits out and buy a .357 at ETA 02:00, quickly magdump their targets for that greentext and voila.

There NEEDS to be a rule / policy on Manuel that states antagonists have to actually do their "job" and antagonize the crew. I won't get into the whole "Friendly" antags debate because it's very vague but I think everyone can agree that people who don't actively provide drama and don't make an effort to drive the round forward should get at the very least bwoinked, at best an antag ban.

I think that this is a good solution to the problem that is Manuel rounds either lasting forever, having no conflict, or both. Antags should be encouraged to antag. Friendly antags can be done right, but a lot of the time it's just the antag acting like a normal crew member, which is bad. I think that "friendly" (more neutral) antags can work if they have some sort of gimmick that is able to drive the round forward, but that is a very hard thing to achieve. The thing that I EXTREMELY dislike is passive antags. These are the ones who either wait until the last 10 minutes of a 2 hour round to do their objectives, or don't do their objectives at all. This means that there are basically no antags at all in the round. My main point here is
Antags should always be working toward some type of goal.
They don't have to always be fighting sec and going for objectives, but they should almost always be working towards something to make the round more interesting.

Semi-regular Manuel player here.

Friendly antags are annoying as hell, yeah- functionally a hidden greenshift for everyone except the guy who gets to play changeling cop- and I agree with the last couple o' posters that antags should be required to antag.

That said.

Unless something is done about the rampant validhunting, the policy change will usher in a different problem of every shift being functionally green after 30 min. As it stands, even on the MRP server, any assistant is allowed to beat antags to death/perma with a toolbox at the first sign of an emag. I find the 2-hour-mark-magdump as annoying as everyone else, and with the higher expectations being put on antags, the least we could do is enforce some degree of being nice to antags. The lowest common denominator on an rp server brings everyone to their level- you won't see cool and engaging antag gimmicks if every greytider jumps them at the first sign of gamer gear.

once again, fucking jack anton playing as ling cop, and using his access to special ling chat against the other lings

this puts all the lings who actually want to be antagonists at a big disadvantage, since they can't use one of their most useful tools safely anymore

these people just want all the special cool powers that antags have, without any of the drawbacks and responsibilities

saprasam wrote:thought: the reason there's so many friendly antags on Manuel is because Manuel players are afraid of the bwoink from having to kill multiple people to complete an objective

Ding ding ding ding ding. Saprasam guessed correctly, and is tonight's big winner!

Having no idea if collateral damage will result in the admins yelling at you is why we have people never run the risk of getting caught. Your target shouldn't be thrown away as being an impossible objective because they don't walk into maint so you can silently kill them without witnesses. At the same time, you can't risk going loud, because God forbid you defend yourself from Security/Validhunters and run the risk of a murderbone bwoink. Having to wait for someone to engage you so you can call it "self-defense" doesn't work very well when you can end a conflict with a single shove.

Also, the numerous instances of "Here's a single anecdote to support what I'm saying" should be a pretty big indicator that stuff like this should be handled on a case-by-case basis. Friendly antags can be interesting, but more often than not they are not interesting. Ahelping for approval would be a good solution, in my eyes. If you ahelp and explain your super cool gimmick, it will likely be approved, but I doubt people would be willing to ahelp with "my gimmick is that I'm giving the codewords to security and giving them my uplink".

Rhials wrote:Having no idea if collateral damage will result in the admins yelling at you is why we have people never run the risk of getting caught. Your target shouldn't be thrown away as being an impossible objective because they don't walk into maint so you can silently kill them without witnesses. At the same time, you can't risk going loud, because God forbid you defend yourself from Security/Validhunters and run the risk of a murderbone bwoink. Having to wait for someone to engage you so you can call it "self-defense" doesn't work very well when you can end a conflict with a single shove.

People seem to think that if they repeat this often enough it will become true or something.
There is no evidence that "antags are impossible to play without getting bwoinked" on Manuel, and in seven months of operating there have been like... quite literally two or three controversial appeals regarding antags on Manuel in the FNR forums.
I stopped playing Manuel regularly some time ago, but I was there from round one, and I remain unconvinced this thinking is based on anything resembling fact. Sounds more like the delusion rhetoric of people mad they got told not to do blatant LRP griefy murderbone shit on the RP server.

annoyinggreencatgirl wrote:

Rhials wrote:Having no idea if collateral damage will result in the admins yelling at you is why we have people never run the risk of getting caught. Your target shouldn't be thrown away as being an impossible objective because they don't walk into maint so you can silently kill them without witnesses. At the same time, you can't risk going loud, because God forbid you defend yourself from Security/Validhunters and run the risk of a murderbone bwoink. Having to wait for someone to engage you so you can call it "self-defense" doesn't work very well when you can end a conflict with a single shove.

People seem to think that if they repeat this often enough it will become true or something.
There is no evidence that "antags are impossible to play without getting bwoinked" on Manuel, and in seven months of operating there have been like... quite literally two or three controversial appeals regarding antags on Manuel in the FNR forums.
I stopped playing Manuel regularly some time ago, but I was there from round one, and I remain unconvinced this thinking is based on anything resembling fact. Sounds more like the delusion rhetoric of people mad they got told not to do blatant LRP griefy murderbone shit on the RP server.

I usually play traitor in a very subtle way (since i have high ping and am unrobust af), so I cannot talk about the way admins treat traitors who must resort to lots of violence.

I do, however, agree that the friendly antag problem and this supposed bwoinking of traitors are unrelated. Someone who gets antag and is afraid of getting bwoinked for being overtly violent will just choose to play using stealth and deception, or not play antag at all.

I believe people play friendly antags for mainly two reasons:

• to try playing an antag in a different way (you can be antagonistic and friendly at the same time, but it is not an easy thing to do properly)
• wants to play as normal crew but with unique superpowers or gamer gear

The former, if done properly, should not be a problem. As someone suggested previously, ahelping and explaining to the admins what you want to do should be strongly advised, or even required.
The latter, however, should be reason for soft bans, since there is clearly no intent on playing the role you picked

We should have in mind that antags are often the driving force for most rounds, and in a way, are as important as having a captain or head of security. If you pick one of those limited roles and do not try to perform them at least to some extent, you're effectively making the round worse for everyone.

Space Panda wrote:

annoyinggreencatgirl wrote:

Rhials wrote:Having no idea if collateral damage will result in the admins yelling at you is why we have people never run the risk of getting caught. Your target shouldn't be thrown away as being an impossible objective because they don't walk into maint so you can silently kill them without witnesses. At the same time, you can't risk going loud, because God forbid you defend yourself from Security/Validhunters and run the risk of a murderbone bwoink. Having to wait for someone to engage you so you can call it "self-defense" doesn't work very well when you can end a conflict with a single shove.

People seem to think that if they repeat this often enough it will become true or something.
There is no evidence that "antags are impossible to play without getting bwoinked" on Manuel, and in seven months of operating there have been like... quite literally two or three controversial appeals regarding antags on Manuel in the FNR forums.
I stopped playing Manuel regularly some time ago, but I was there from round one, and I remain unconvinced this thinking is based on anything resembling fact. Sounds more like the delusion rhetoric of people mad they got told not to do blatant LRP griefy murderbone shit on the RP server.

I usually play traitor in a very subtle way (since i have high ping and am unrobust af), so I cannot talk about the way admins treat traitors who must resort to lots of violence.

I do, however, agree that the friendly antag problem and this supposed bwoinking of traitors are unrelated. Someone who gets antag and is afraid of getting bwoinked for being overtly violent will just choose to play using stealth and deception, or not play antag at all.

I believe people play friendly antags for mainly two reasons:

• to try playing an antag in a different way (you can be antagonistic and friendly at the same time, but it is not an easy thing to do properly)
• wants to play as normal crew but with unique superpowers or gamer gear

The former, if done properly, should not be a problem. As someone suggested previously, ahelping and explaining to the admins what you want to do should be strongly advised, or even required.
The latter, however, should be reason for soft bans, since there is clearly no intent on playing the role you picked

We should have in mind that antags are often the driving force for most rounds, and in a way, are as important as having a captain or head of security. If you pick one of those limited roles and do not try to perform them at least to some extent, you're effectively making the round worse for everyone.

I agree we're getting offtopic, but I just want to say I think the bolded part of what you said is completely true, and I'd further suggest this:
If I had to name something on Manuel that I thought would make people hesitant to be loud, violent, round-driving antagonists, it would not be fear of getting bwoinked, it would be marginally effective enforcement of RP rule four and to a lesser extent six.

Space Panda wrote:

annoyinggreencatgirl wrote:

Rhials wrote:Having no idea if collateral damage will result in the admins yelling at you is why we have people never run the risk of getting caught. Your target shouldn't be thrown away as being an impossible objective because they don't walk into maint so you can silently kill them without witnesses. At the same time, you can't risk going loud, because God forbid you defend yourself from Security/Validhunters and run the risk of a murderbone bwoink. Having to wait for someone to engage you so you can call it "self-defense" doesn't work very well when you can end a conflict with a single shove.

People seem to think that if they repeat this often enough it will become true or something.
There is no evidence that "antags are impossible to play without getting bwoinked" on Manuel, and in seven months of operating there have been like... quite literally two or three controversial appeals regarding antags on Manuel in the FNR forums.
I stopped playing Manuel regularly some time ago, but I was there from round one, and I remain unconvinced this thinking is based on anything resembling fact. Sounds more like the delusion rhetoric of people mad they got told not to do blatant LRP griefy murderbone shit on the RP server.

I usually play traitor in a very subtle way (since i have high ping and am unrobust af), so I cannot talk about the way admins treat traitors who must resort to lots of violence.

I do, however, agree that the friendly antag problem and this supposed bwoinking of traitors are unrelated. Someone who gets antag and is afraid of getting bwoinked for being overtly violent will just choose to play using stealth and deception, or not play antag at all.

I believe people play friendly antags for mainly two reasons:

• to try playing an antag in a different way (you can be antagonistic and friendly at the same time, but it is not an easy thing to do properly)
• wants to play as normal crew but with unique superpowers or gamer gear

The former, if done properly, should not be a problem. As someone suggested previously, ahelping and explaining to the admins what you want to do should be strongly advised, or even required.
The latter, however, should be reason for soft bans, since there is clearly no intent on playing the role you picked

We should have in mind that antags are often the driving force for most rounds, and in a way, are as important as having a captain or head of security. If you pick one of those limited roles and do not try to perform them at least to some extent, you're effectively making the round worse for everyone.

With this in mind, I propose the following roleplay rule:

11. Roles of Greater Responsibility
Roles such as Captain, heads of department, and antagonists have a major importance in the events and conflicts that happen each round, and are equipped with powerful unique tools because of that. While you are not expected to be competent at it or to do your job in a certain way, it is important that you at least try to perform your role somehow. Failure to do so might result in a temporary role ban.

I'm aware that there might be some grammar errors and it can be written in a better way, so feel free to correct it. English is not my native language.

Although I've already had my say in this thread I'd like to add that I REALLY REALLY don't want this to escalate into the amount of pressureantags on bay have, being an antag should be a reward and not a role were you have admins breathing down your neck prepared to slap you if you don't make it fun enough for everyone. The only measures I'd recommend are keeping an eye out towards players who as lings/traitors basically walk to sec/command and openly help them.

confused rock wrote:no the wizards were just really bad the first one had a scrying orb so I ran to wherever the next wizard teleported to and I killed them

Actually, I was not only in that round, I was the one responsible for why the wizard gave up. I literally shoved him in maint and stole his scrying orb and shoved him into a locker for being a nerd.

He wasn't there to be friendly. I just broke his will.

cybersaber101 wrote: being an antag should be a reward

There's actually been a lot of discussion about how antag /shouldn't/ be a reward because it results in antag rolling. This whole thread is about antag accountability, people want antags to be interesting, they do not place the antag's fun as their top priority.

I don't see how being an antag, if you're not actually acting like one, is supposed to be a reward. If you roll antagonist and you don't use your tools / status to make the round progress, you should be antag banned.