Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors
-
- Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2023 5:19 am
- Byond Username: GPeckman
Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors
As I'm sure most people familiar with Sybil are aware, security on Sybil tends to use lethals far more often than nonlethals. So, this leads to a question: can an Asimov AI refuse to reveal the name of a human traitor to security based on that trend and law 1? There's an argument that it would be considered metaknowledge, but players are allowed to know the precise details of game mechanics, including things like antags, so why would this be any different?
- CPTANT
- Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
- Byond Username: CPTANT
Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors
I personally only do this when witnessing security being harmful. Assuming either traitors or security to be harmful when they haven't done anything is super lame I think.
Timberpoes wrote: ↑Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
- The Wrench
- Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:06 am
- Byond Username: The Wrench
Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors
Generally I agree with this, but the moment one security officer punches a human all bets are off.
Jonathan Gupta wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 6:32 pm all you godamn do is whine and complain come up with ideas, stop bitching for christs sake.
- vect0r
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
- Byond Username: Vect0r
- Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥
- Pandarsenic
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
- Byond Username: Pandarsenic
- Location: AI Upload
Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors
You can also make demands of them as a condition to giving the name, then go to town if/when they break the terms
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
- sinfulbliss
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
- Byond Username: SinfulBliss
- Location: prisoner re-education chamber
Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors
This is definitely an issue on Sybil at least. AIs will help sec validhunt and even if sec uses lethals, if an admin asks they can say something like they didn't notice or they only bolted the traitor into the room to stop them from harming, etc. Most of the time it isn't even ahelped because the antag doesn't have access to sec comms where the AI is giving all of the updates.
But this isn't a good solution because it's pretty metagamey as you said. How do they know sec is going to harm someone? A better solution would be to whitelist AI ban this sort of excessively validhungry AI playstyle under something like rule 12 or rule 1.
But this isn't a good solution because it's pretty metagamey as you said. How do they know sec is going to harm someone? A better solution would be to whitelist AI ban this sort of excessively validhungry AI playstyle under something like rule 12 or rule 1.
Spoiler:
- Vekter
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
- Byond Username: Vekter
- Location: Fucking around with the engine.
Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors
You can't take information from previous rounds and use it in the current one. If you've seen evidence that sec tends to harm humans that they catch, then yes, otherwise you should be assuming they won't.
If there's a general issue of security escalating improperly to lethals, that needs to be brought up on a case-by-case basis with the admins.
If there's a general issue of security escalating improperly to lethals, that needs to be brought up on a case-by-case basis with the admins.
AliasTakuto wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2024 1:11 pm As for the ear replacing stuff, you can ask Anne but I don't think this is what I was banned for. If I was all I can say is "Sorry for being hilarious"...
Omega_DarkPotato wrote:This sucks, dude.
Spoiler:
- vect0r
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
- Byond Username: Vect0r
- Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥
Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors
It's not "improperly" it's just not law 1ed.Vekter wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 5:02 pm You can't take information from previous rounds and use it in the current one. If you've seen evidence that sec tends to harm humans that they catch, then yes, otherwise you should be assuming they won't.
If there's a general issue of security escalating improperly to lethals, that needs to be brought up on a case-by-case basis with the admins.
- kieth4
- In-Game Head Admin
- Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2020 6:17 pm
- Byond Username: Kieth4
Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors
Ai players should not use examples of harm that existed in previous rounds to deny orders on the basis of law 1. These denials should be based on reasoning from the current active round.
P.s validhunter ais are lame
P.s validhunter ais are lame
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot]