/tg/Station 13

If you've been on LRP you may have noticed that AI's awfully often snitch on heretics that were taking influences around the station, while fully knowing that security 99% of the time kills heretics. This is very bad because the heretics isn't doing anything harmful by collecting the influence, and AI is giving the heretic over to security fully knowing that they will be most likely killed, which *should* be a law 1 violation, and yet i don't see those AI's get bwoinked for that a lot.
This is also bad for the round, since antags are there to make the round more interesting, all heretics getting killed in the first few minutes because AI gamered all of them by telling their names to sec just causes the round to go from a fun round where everyone is trying to figure out who is the heretic and hunt them down to a glorified greenshift.

TL;DR AI's shouldn't be allowed to snitch on Antags that are both human and aren't doing anything that is harmful to any other human, since the antag has 0 knowledge of where AI is looking and just results in sec executing them and prolonging the round into a long, boring slog.

Unless the AI has strong reason to suspect that whoever they're handing over is going to be killed ("it happened in other rounds" is not a reason but, in fact, metagaming) then they don't have to give a shit at all and it's not a law 1 violation by default. This isn't specific to heretics but true for all human antags.

That doesn't change the fact that AI helping sec kill all antags within 5 minutes of the game lowers the quality of the round drastically.

like 90% of the time Security does a good job of telling me as AI they intend to kill human antags on their own, no need for metagaming.

"Heretics, get out the lethals"
"When you find X he's a rev head, kill him on sight"

Most of the time Sec/Captain are dumb enough to announce to the world their intent to kill, instead of just doing it.

Security isn't supposed to kill people, heretics by design have to kill people to ascend. And there you have it

valid the valid

Armhulen wrote:Security isn't supposed to kill people, heretics by design have to kill people to ascend. And there you have it

untrue, you can full pacifism ascend using only influences. grab already dead bodies and use them for the ascension ritual, bam.
you can also wait for your sacrifice to die by not your hand and blow up their corpse which is also technically not harm, just a dick move.
also, since on basil/sybil/terry it is expected that everybody IC knows what any antag is capable of, an AI will know that it is literally impossible to nonlethally contain a heretic.

Kel wrote:

Armhulen wrote:Security isn't supposed to kill people, heretics by design have to kill people to ascend. And there you have it

untrue, you can full pacifism ascend using only influences. grab already dead bodies and use them for the ascension ritual, bam.

There aren't enough influences to do this I don't think. Something happened with the influence spawns recently, last heretic round I found a single influence in a 1 hour long round. I have no clue if the rest spawned in extremely difficult to access locations or if there just weren't any.

The same issue happens on MRP where anyone catching a heretic is usually instant game over for them. I think the problem is mainly a code one, where heretics are designed to have to kill yet are also weak as fuck and can't defend themselves, and they also are pretty much unable to hide their identity or have any chance at a comeback if one of the difficult to hide parts of their role is discovered and they get caught.

Its meant to be a difficult antagonist to play and one you cant entirely be passive on.

In a perfect world people would be more neutral with the AI instead of making great logic leaps to lock cameras on someone who has entirely been nonharmful throughout the shift because "antag must mean they MUST complete objectives and because they have kill objectives X% of the time I should do my best to insta-valid" but most people choose AI in hopes to get valadin'd or whatever anyways so :shrug:

man........ FUCK borgs
and FUCK the borgs who go "you will do future harm" when you've done nothing

Cobby wrote:Its meant to be a difficult antagonist to play and one you cant entirely be passive on.

you underestimate what happens at 4+ heretics

In a perfect world people would be more neutral with the AI instead of making great logic leaps to lock cameras on someone who has entirely been nonharmful throughout the shift because "antag must mean they MUST complete objectives and because they have kill objectives X% of the time I should do my best to insta-valid" but most people choose AI in hopes to get valadin'd or whatever anyways so :shrug:

I try to replace valids with the salt of people who want the AI to help them get valids. "Oh, you've executed every prisoner you could find an excuse for? I'm going to do everything in my power to protect criminals from you unless they're actively killing someone".

it's even better when they announce over radio that they need to change the AI's laws so they can turn more sprites horizontal. It's really not rocket science to ask the captain in person to change them. The AI is required to let the captain change its laws unless it has a reason to think the law change is harmful.

Seeing people rage when their own validhunting makes their lives difficult is more fun than validhunting myself.

>person makes shit ripoff of cult and traitor
>people are surprised when it doesn't work

well fucking rock my socks

i'd say make sec not kill people,but j*nnies defend killsec shitters with their fucking lives
YOULL NEVER GET AN ARREST OUTTA ME,NEVER!!! I'D RATHER COME OUT HERE RIGHT NOW AND BAN YE ALL FOR NO REISIN!!!!
also knowing heretics have to kill people to ascend is metagaming and linking that metagaming to them being near a reality tear is straight up fucking stupid

Maybe they shouldnt law 2 open door then

Blurbo wrote:knowing heretics have to kill people to ascend is metagaming and linking that metagaming to them being near a reality tear is straight up fucking stupid

Knowing the mechanics of how antags work is standard information, we don't require people to play dumb about that.

If you are allowed to know objectives which i'd argue (some other place) they aren't mechanics of the antag then you should also be consistent and know that they are entirely optional to follow.

You are not preventing any more/less harm from trying to capture the (to your knowledge) non-harmful heretic than the (to your knowledge) non-harmful Captain who you have just told that someone is committing a killable offense under their "mechanics" aka Space Law. You are just trying to jump as far as you can to reach your personal end-goal of btfoing antags.

This is an enforcement issue though unless OP wants to argue AIs shouldn't ever be allowed to enforce space law unless required by their laws.

Cobby wrote: This is an enforcement issue though unless OP wants to argue AIs shouldn't ever be allowed to enforce space law unless required by their laws.

There's a difference between enforcing space law in a neutral manner according to laws, and siding with security against the antagonist regardless of whether security harm people or not.
I have personally been a pacifist heretic that has been chased by security and lethaled and escaped only to be bolted in by the AI and lethaled more. On one round I literally PDA messaged the AI to say that I hadn't harmed anyone yet the (non-human) detective was repeatedly attempting to shotgun me. When I finally died to security I observed the AI to find out it was Asimov. I have also seen the same situation happen many times as an impartial observer.

It seems that admins are reluctant to punish Asimov AIs for clear law breaks against antags. Just because you are bolting an antag in a room for them to get shotgunned doesn't make it any better than killing them yourself, and knowing that a member of security armed with shotguns are trying to kill an antag is not metagaming.

Sounds like a sec problem to me.

If there is an indication that assisting in the apprehension of an antagonist, in this case heretic, would lead to their harm an AI should not assist. After that it is largely up to the individual player as to how they proceed.
Obviously if the antagonist is causing harm they are obligated to intervene by their laws.
If an admin observes a case where an AI is validmoving to the point its making the game less fun over several rounds they may intervene.

Headmin Votes:
Coconutwarrior97: Yes, this is essentially already covered by current policy and if rule violations have happened then its most likely that an admin just didn't happen to catch it.
Domitius: Yes.
Naloac: Yes.