/tg/Station 13

Posted: **Sat Apr 16, 2022 11:28 pm**

Replaces the murderbone policy in current rules (it is no longer called murderboning or even mentions boning).

Notable differences:

Clarifies some issues presented based on feedback
Removes the word murderboning, murderboning-enabled antagonists are now just called "BBG" as per epic tabletop lingo (this is /tg/ right?)
Allows for normal antagonists to select a gimmick/backstory in addition to their objectives that allows them a lot more flexibility in their antag capabilities admin-wise.

https://hackmd.io/@CobbertCChemicals/r16xriOE9

I hate wiki editing so i did it in hackmd where i know how to format stuff.

It is not 2 sentences therefore bad

It is written with the idea someone completely removed from roleplay-heavy servers can digest to an appropriate MRP standard while also being vague enough for people to take creative liberties. It is also written with the idea players can point to specific parts and go "I meet this so im probably good".

If you just look at the 3 bullets at the top along with the table you're likely good in most aspects if you're being good-faithed.

Specific line-by-line feedback is recommended to go in the comments of hackmd, general comments welcomed here.

► Show Spoiler

Code: Select all

# Antag Killing Policy

Antags exist to act as a foil to the current crew to provide unique stories.

* Do not try to rack up kills solely for the purpose of body count leaderboarding.

* Amount of kills **do not** matter. The purpose behind those kills **does** matter.

* Administrators are an antag's best friend! Press F1 if you want to deviate from this policy OR you want some assistance in helping you create a fun story for everyone!

++Quick Reference++

| Role | [Escalation](https://hackmd.io/-UlPorneQeuY7Ms260AUGA?view#Escalation-and-Objectives) | [Objective Kills](https://hackmd.io/-UlPorneQeuY7Ms260AUGA?view#Escalation-and-Objectives) | [*Lethal* Backstory/Gimmick](https://hackmd.io/-UlPorneQeuY7Ms260AUGA?view#Lethal-BackstoryGimmick) |
| :--------: | :--------: | :--------: |:--------:|
| [BBGs](https://hackmd.io/-UlPorneQeuY7Ms260AUGA?view#BBGs) | No Escalation Needed | Optional |Optional|
| [Side Antags](https://hackmd.io/-UlPorneQeuY7Ms260AUGA?view#Side-Antags) | Relaxed, Thief - Normal  | Optional, Thief - No |No|
| [Antags](https://hackmd.io/-UlPorneQeuY7Ms260AUGA?view#Antags) | Relaxed | Optional | Needed to kill outside Escalation/Objective |


## BBGs

BBGs are naturally and chaotically evil. They have no restrictions on how they should proceed and can act freely as per lone/team antagonists in rule 4 (normal rulelist).

You **may** still choose to add a lethal gimmick/backstory to these roles, but it is ++not++ required to kill outside of pursuing your objectives.

|Role | Conditions |
| :--------: | :--------: |
| Heretic | Post-Ascension Only |
| Nuclear Operatives |---|
| Wizards |---|
| Blood Cult / Revolutionary |Only as needed to accomplish goals|
| Nightmare |---|
| Malfunctioning AI |Only after going DELTA|
| Revenant |---|
| Blob |---|
| Xenomorphs |---|
| Ashwalkers |Nest should remain defended|
| Lavaland Elites |---|


## Side Antags

Side Antags are meant to act as a foil to crew with objectives in mind. Unlike BBGs and "main" antagonists, they are ++not++ allowed to add a *lethal* gimmick/backstory in addition to their objective driven motives.

You **may** still choose to add a gimmick/backstory to these roles, but they **must** not be used to justify killings.

You **may** still choose to kill in pursuit of completing your objectives.

|Role | Conditions |
| :--------: | :--------: |
| Thief | **must** be non-lethal or otherwise follow normal escalation policy.|
| Abductors |---|
| Obsessed |---|


## Antags

If your role is not listed in the above two tables, you are an antag.

### Escalation and Objectives

In addition to relaxed escalation (meaning you can go lethal earlier in situations where you would be unable to if you weren't an antagonist but not lethal on intiation) you are free to kill under any of the following conditions:

* Self Defense and Preservation
    * Risk of being exposed or otherwise having to "lay down and take it", such as witnesses, falls here
* Collateral Damage
* Pursuit of Objectives
    * Creating a distraction to complete your objective
    * Killing someone who has access to a place you need to go
    * Killing someone who has an item you need and cannot reasonably attain elsewhere
* Pursuit of creating a unique, lethal gimmick/backstory

### Lethal Backstory/Gimmick

You **may** choose a backstory or gimmick **in addition to** killing in pursuit of your objectives that's lethal in nature. It **must** be consistent once established unless the situation would broaden or limit the scope based on the IC evolution of the round. 
:::success
A third party assists your enemies while you're trying to kill your original marks, they would therefore also able to be killed under pursuing your backstory.
:::
If running both alethal gimmick and a backstory simultaneously, they **must** be overlapping
:::danger
You cannot kill everyone but science with a gimmick then freekill science as you see fit because of your backstory.
:::

You **must** be prepared to explain the backstory or gimmick upon administrator request (recommended to use the memories/notes feature under IC tab). You **must** be prepared to explain any deviations. The gimmick or backstory **may** be as elaborate as your heart desires (admins may ask you for a reader's digest though).

++Backstories++ that allow you to kill **must** be specific to a set group of individuals **or** otherwise not appear as if you're trying to rack up kills in a noninteresting way. 

The backstory **may** be completely fictional and not related to any previous round events. You **may** inform the relevant parties, it is not required.

++Gimmicks++ that allow you to kill should be a creative limitation on the way you perform (random) killings that create a unique story. 

You **may** ignore these limitations during lethal scenarios where you're already allowed to kill the individual, such as pursuit of your objectives or self defense.

:::success
Acceptable Examples:
* I hate anyone who talks positively about NT.
* The Heads of Staff did not consider me in a recent promotion to head of my department, so I want revenge.
* I create death-puzzles and put whoever I can into them for my amusement.
* I leave a calling card on everyone I kill.
* I leave a clue to my true identity at the murder scene.
* I found out my pet cat was used for xenobiology experiments so I have a hatred for all of science.
:::

:::danger
Poor Examples:
* I work for the death syndicate company so i kill everyone.
* I am insane so I kill everyone
* I limit myself to only using the latest cheese strat everytime i'm traitor.
:::

*[may]: Optional, Not Required
*[must]: Not Optional, Required

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 12:05 am**

This is too complicated and has far too many words.

Overly complicated wording makes the MRP servers inaccessible to antags compared to the LRP servers. This has more words than many HRP servers dedicate to the subject matter.

Instead of focusing on what the antags can do, cut ALL of that crap out and focus exclusively on what antags cannot do, then add the following sentence: "Rule 4 applies as normal to antags on MRP except:"

Bonus points if we do not rely on admins okaying gimmicks, because as we see with TC trades all too often admins don't want to take the risk. If admins are under no obligation to okay antag gimmicks, then as a general approach most admins will default to choosing not to.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 2:12 am**

It really isnt complicated though, its easy enough theres a 4x4 table.

Antags can kill under

- Self Defense and Preservation
- Collateral Damage
- Pursuit of Objectives
- Pursuit of creating a unique, lethal gimmick/backstory

3/4 already exist in rules

For Backstory/Gimmicks you have
- Stick to a single lethal gimmick/backstory
- Keep it consistent throughout the round
- Be Ready to Explain it

Its framed as what you can do because that avoids unnecessary complication of admin expectation of what you can't which is the secret rulelist of "well you CAN'T do this, but actually in some lights you can with reason" which leaves one feeling frustrated and being a result of someone else receiving preferential treatment. personally speaking I prefer having things I can point to as a player (and as an admin guiding a player) that let me know i'm on the right track rather than things that let me know i'm off track but not actually help me get back.

Mind you this is a pov from Low to Medium RP, So you generally want to explain where ur leading vs. where youre going off the tracks like you would coming from High down to Medium.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 4:04 am**

i dont understand what this changes. admins can already give the greenlight for gimmicks in where they can tell how far an antag is able to kill, and players are actively told to ask admins to ask about this.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 6:35 am**

iwishforducks wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 4:04 am i dont understand what this changes. admins can already give the greenlight for gimmicks in where they can tell how far an antag is able to kill, and players are actively told to ask admins to ask about this.

I don't play MRP, so this is a bit outside my area of expertise, but isn't antagonists not being able to know easily if they're allowed to do actions without first checking with online admins for fear of getting bwoinked kind of the issue in the first place, leading to what other posts have pointed out of there being little to no conflict, stagnation, and boredom?

Like, who the hell wants to be the cool traitor role but then has to get a thumbs up from the admemes for every little thing they do? It's no wonder you guys ran into this issue and us needing this thread if this is your viewpoint...

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 7:04 am**

The first and second bullet seem to contradict the table for BBGs. The bullets suggest all antags need a purpose behind their kills, and can't kill indiscriminately as many as possible. The table states BBGs have no escalation rules and therefore can kill for no reason. This might be a misinterpretation but that's how it read to me.

I like it a lot though, the table and bullets are simple and accessible and no more complicated than the current table which is on the wiki for murderbone rules. The part where I think Timber is right in that it's too complicated/wordy is the "lethal backstory/gimmick" area. This should be simply left at, "ahelp an admin if you have a gimmick that may need to violate these rules." Needing to form a cohesive gimmick, and putting it in the ruleset that now you can be bwoinked based on how closely you stay to your gimmick, is commonsense. Instantiating it in rules in this fleshed-out way is structured and nice, but it will probably serve to discourage it in the end.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 7:18 am**

I feel like there's some massive overthinking on this, and that most of it can be reduced to "You have to engage in the minimum actual roleplay of being the antagonist type assigned to you. Revolutionaries should be able to kill anyone who gets in their way but probably leave people who don't fight back alone. I'm tempted to say they should be forced to accept surrenders if they have the means to imprison/exile those people unless a Head Rev says otherwise, but I'm keeping my aims realistic). Nuclear Operatives can do whatever they want because they're a syndicate assault team, not because they're rated BBG. Blobs just kill whatever stops them from growing.

But consider: Changelings should absolutely be free to cull any lesser beings they choose to, if they believe in Changeling Supremacy. A malfunctioning AI, if we ever actually got one, should have free reign to slaughter organics. Wizards... who knows what the fuck they have going on? Heretics still have only the thinnest actual levels of lore, so pretty much same. Cultists always benefit from, if not converting people, kill+shard+construct, and their ultimate goal kills everyone and everything on the station anyway.

Blood Brothers... honestly I thought they weren't even enabled right now, but then I pulled one recently. No idea what their lore deal is either.

Anyway. Yeah. The point is, established charts and tables of who can do what is just Not As Good as establishing "This is your antag type's Thing. If you kill someone in the course of doing what comes naturally, pay at least the lip service to the notion of IC consequences outside the round" (e.g. killing someone as a thief is a great way to lose your job, at the very least, but risking murder is probably better than being outed as a gunrunner or organ harvester)

(Another realization I had, while playing Blood Brother with an instead SSD partner, is that the removal of "Escape alive" means traitors don't have an IC or OOC incentive to cause enough problems to force the shuttle call.)

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 12:56 pm**

im gonna say this again because i buried the lede in my first post

this proposal is literally the exact same as our current rules. right now our rules don’t care about how many you kill. it only matters that you can explain each kill. you can also kill in self defense, kill for collateral, and obviously in pursuit of your objectives. you can do this all already. the only difference is that, instead of encouraging players to ahelp before doing gimmicks that require killing, we encourage admins to bwoink and interrogate.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 1:21 pm**

iwishforducks wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 12:56 pm the only difference is that, instead of encouraging players to ahelp before doing gimmicks that require killing, we encourage admins to bwoink and interrogate.

Honestly from a bit of observing, it should be easy to see how someone limits their kills. By who they ignore or what sets them off, and even what tools they're using. So I'd prefer admins investigating instead of the antag just fetch questing their round away and not interacting with the players

It should be really easy too! Considering admins can check who are the antags and all that.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 1:40 pm**

Rules bloat is one of the biggest issues with MRP and seeking to define every interaction is just going to make it worse.

The problem with the murderbone rules atm is that killing even one person outside your objectives gets you bwoinked. Even if admins deem the kill valid the numbing effect on antag behavior comes from the PM itself, not the outcome. No one wants to speak to admins. That's why people don't ahelp for gimmicks and that's why they don't kill outside objectives (or even pick kill objectives).

This dosen't fix that. It's just going to drag out admin pms even longer while admins search through a table followed be one of two outcomes;
1. You didn't break any rules.
2. You failed to check section 1, paragraph B, addendum 1 regarding optional escalation so now I am gonna note you.

tldr; We need less rules not more.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 3:29 pm**

I respect what you went for here, and there are facets of this that I like that should be more publicized and encouraged amongst the playerbase such as:

Encouraging players to drum up gimmicks and plotlines with admins.
The best rounds in recent memory that I've had the wheel on all had this factor: an antagonist working with the admin team to flavor up the experience for everyone beyond: TC TRADE PLS

That being said, I think putting players under the gun to be ready to explain themselves to admins might be asking too much from some players (even in MRP). This reads as more reactive instead of proactive, and as you can see from the thread responses, a more tightly written ruleset usually ends in people picking it apart.

I believe that you would be better served taking this and reducing it to maybe three-five ideological policy sentences, tops. In this case, vague is better, because it gives the admin team the flexibility to enforce good faith play and serves as more of a proactive and positive guidepost for players looking to antag in MRP.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 3:42 pm**

We already have too much

The best murderbone policy is going to be a list of things that we can't do, rather than a list of things we can.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 3:49 pm**

Pandarsenic wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 7:18 am I feel like there's some massive overthinking on this, and that most of it can be reduced to "You have to engage in the minimum actual roleplay of being the antagonist type assigned to you. Revolutionaries should be able to kill anyone who gets in their way but probably leave people who don't fight back alone. I'm tempted to say they should be forced to accept surrenders if they have the means to imprison/exile those people unless a Head Rev says otherwise, but I'm keeping my aims realistic). Nuclear Operatives can do whatever they want because they're a syndicate assault team, not because they're rated BBG. Blobs just kill whatever stops them from growing.

But consider: Changelings should absolutely be free to cull any lesser beings they choose to, if they believe in Changeling Supremacy. A malfunctioning AI, if we ever actually got one, should have free reign to slaughter organics. Wizards... who knows what the fuck they have going on? Heretics still have only the thinnest actual levels of lore, so pretty much same. Cultists always benefit from, if not converting people, kill+shard+construct, and their ultimate goal kills everyone and everything on the station anyway.

Blood Brothers... honestly I thought they weren't even enabled right now, but then I pulled one recently. No idea what their lore deal is either.

Anyway. Yeah. The point is, established charts and tables of who can do what is just Not As Good as establishing "This is your antag type's Thing. If you kill someone in the course of doing what comes naturally, pay at least the lip service to the notion of IC consequences outside the round" (e.g. killing someone as a thief is a great way to lose your job, at the very least, but risking murder is probably better than being outed as a gunrunner or organ harvester)

(Another realization I had, while playing Blood Brother with an instead SSD partner, is that the removal of "Escape alive" means traitors don't have an IC or OOC incentive to cause enough problems to force the shuttle call.)

This is a very apt statement, we have forsaken intuition and lore in exchange for piles of rules and clarifications.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 4:14 pm**

My biggest complaint about current MRP murderbone policy isn't that it calls out murderbone by name. It's that it has a big-ass table that specifically outlines who can and can't just kill people. This rewrite exacerbates that problem by turning it into three(technically four) tables, making it harder to read.

ED: You can mention, "Hey, thieves, abductors, and obsessed really shouldn't kill people outside of their objectives." without adding tables I have to reference every time I get an antagonist.
That said, I really like basically everything past the 'antags' section. It feels like it adds a lot more freedom to antagonists, and supplies them with ideas in case they're lacking. It also reminds them that yes, you can just kill the guy who saw you do the thing.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 5:07 pm**

The core issue I have with this rewrite can be seen in the section on thieves, abductors and obsessed.

Thieves, abductors and obsessed are side-antags on LRP. All the restrictions already apply to them globally, on all our servers. It doesn't need to be there and it sparks of someone writing policy as if it were a game design document.

This rewrite is too long, too complex, too exhaustive and tries to codify too much. I do not expect players to memorise so much just to play antags. I also do not expect admins to have to do the same either; our LRP admins should not struggle to come to the RP servers and enforce the rules. Where the MRP rules create this divide is simply a failure in drafting them to be sensible and logical.

We now have well over 2 years of Manuel behind us. We have a core of precedent and rulings and approaches. We can start relying on those past experiences to augment the rules over just writing more longer rules. The antag policy should be short and sweet, setting out the main areas where Rule 4 doesn't apply on the MRP servers and keeping prose to a bare minimum.

The MRP servers should be as pick-up-and-play as possible. An LRP player should be able to go over to MRP and play with a bare minimum of fuss. The same with LRP admins. Antags as the core contributors to round progression should not have to reference the antag equivalent of silicon policy before their every action.

These are the core ideas that should underpin MRP's antag policy and I will die on that hill.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 5:38 pm**

I am not going to read this because anything this long has already missed the point

Stop trying to "solve" interactions like this. The best outcome assuming you had an omniscient ability to craft flawless rules is that you script every future interaction between people and punish them for going off script. It doesn't work.

Posted: **Sun Apr 17, 2022 6:37 pm**

Off Topic

I did have something lined up to write about this, but after peanut pinging cobby on discord i realised i was wrong about my original statment and understanding of the issue, what i did learn however from discussion from that is that BBG's are correctly applied on the attached document. So much thanks for other people on the thread and cobby in discord re-chewing the points into cud i can understand.

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 7:04 am The first and second bullet seem to contradict the table for BBGs. The bullets suggest all antags need a purpose behind their kills, and can't kill indiscriminately as many as possible. The table states BBGs have no escalation rules and therefore can kill for no reason. This might be a misinterpretation but that's how it read to me.

I mean practically, rule 1 precedents already cover the concept of a "poor excuse" for conflict, taking rule 4 as very literal to the application of BBG's (now knowing the doc is intended to reinforce that) it would have been narratively easier i would argue to wedge it into a rule 1 extension sub-point by just giving all non-BBG but still antags a similar "good structured motivation" argument that shifts where they are on RP.

Posted: **Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:24 pm**

We have a rewrite of a lot of MRP specific stuff planned, especially regarding powergaming/murderboning/what have you. We are not going to be taking this as is at this time, but will likely be hosting a broad discussion thread on our changes when we get closer to finalizing them.

/tg/Station 13

[MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

[MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal

Re: [MRP] Murderbone Rules revision actual proposal