Bring back revival requirements from Old Escalation Policy

[SkeletalElite]

When the escalation policy was reworked, it was changed so that conflict instigators still have to be taken to medbay and revived if the defender kills them.

This should be changed back the old way, IMO. Requiring the instigator to be revived just empowers shitters looking for fights. If you would rather not get killed potentially for the rest of the round, don't instigate conflict with people. The defender is, of course, not allowed to go out of their way to get rid of the body (cremation/hiding/spacing).

[dessysalta]

Conflict isn't a one size fits all hypothetical, different issues will arise for different reasons. Are you saying that for every single instance that a conflict escalates to violence and ends in the other person's death that the individual should risk being round removed, even if the conflict isn't their fault or doesn't warrant round removal?

[SkeletalElite]

Conflict isn't a one size fits all hypothetical, different issues will arise for different reasons. Are you saying that for every single instance that a conflict escalates to violence and ends in the other person's death that the individual should risk being round removed, even if the conflict isn't their fault or doesn't warrant round removal?

For the instigator, yes.

If a conflict is not your fault, that means you were not the instigator of that conflict. Instigating conflict warrants a risk of round removal, not a gurantee. Like I said, the defender shouldn't go out of their way to prevent revival by hiding the body, dusting it, spacing it, gibbing it, or whatever else, but they also should not have a duty to attempt to get their attacker revived.

[sinfulbliss]

Big fat agree. If someone tries to kill you or beats you into red health, there is absolutely no understandable justification for why your character would then go out of his way to bring their corpse to med. Another issue is admins cling to this policy pretty hardcore. There are lots of instances where it doesn't apply due to commonsense, even when technically it should.

I think it's unintuitive for players, confusing for admins, and enables banbaiting type behavior.

[Archie700]

At the very least, make it so that the people who retaliate are allowed to send instigators to security for punishment after revival.

[Vekter]

I've tried to ponder on this for a while and really haven't come up with a good decision as to which side I'm on.

On one hand, it's better for the game in general if people are brought back after shit happens and the current rules support players not being allowed to start more shit after it's resolved.

On the other, it doesn't make a lot of sense that you'd take someone to medical if they just tried to bash your head in with a potted plant, plus escalation policy is a little messy at times because of it.

[Cobby]

It's only if you were the person causing trouble to begin with.

I think the bar could be much lower though, we have a dedicated job to pickup bodies so just saying on common "guy dead in X" should be fine.

If they come back for more and die again they can just take the L.

We dont enforce security to be a mediator in these issues so I think its fair for someone to escalate to violence when someone isnt playing nice, else all grievances go to the admin inbox and no one wants to deal with that.

[sinfulbliss]

It's only if you were the person causing trouble to begin with.

What do you mean by this?

I think its fair for someone to escalate to violence when someone isnt playing nice, else all grievances go to the admin inbox and no one wants to deal with that.

I don’t think this is what’s being called into question, of course escalating with violence is allowed

[Cobby]

What do you mean by this?

The Instigator. The defender should NOT have an OBLIGATION to take you to medical (different from saying they have permission to hide/destroy body, still would not be ok) if you were the problem.

I don’t think this is what’s being called into question, of course escalating with violence is allowed

Was more of a reply to the game in general thoughts vekter posted, we give into the gamey nature of letting people resort to violence because our ingame mediator does not have the expectation of actually mediating (security).

[MooCow12]

It depends

And the following is only if the instigator did instigate / grief to a point where you had to respond to them lethally in order to proceed with your round.

If the instigator happens to be a role that has authority, the defender unironically has a right to prevent revival just because jobs that have more authority tend to be the ones that can mobilize security over personal matters

Plus jobs that have more authority tend to be held to a higher standard from both an ic and ooc perspective, from the ic perspective you can assume that the person who is wronging you and has that much authority really shouldnt be allowed to use their position to wrong anyone ever again.

Regardless if the job has authority or not, if the instigator attempted to or successfully got a third party involved (depending on the context), you are not only entitled to not help revive them, you are entitled the ability to make their revival impossible because now you have to deal with that third party and it can escalate out of control from there. The main context that this would apply to is when someone calls help on radio to get security to get you after you started winning, basically if they are doing any sort of misleading that you are an antag or the escalator and you have no obvious way to prove thats false because you arnt security or something.

Speaking of third parties, people that LETHALLY!!! jump into existing conflicts on the side of the instigator without the instigator even calling for help, round remove.

If the instigator does something that sets you back anywhere more than 10 minutes and they clearly do it on purpose, gone, gib, 100% round remove in one shot if you have to get rid of them you have every right to if they are wasting double digits amount of your own time, this includes stealing your id/heirloom and making you chase them for it or forcing you to run from them constantly if it takes too much of your time.

Otherwise they get one free pass at an allowed revival and if they instigate again you round remove.

[Misdoubtful]

We believe that the current standard provides a healthy balance for the state of the game.

If a 'shitter' attempts to use the escalation clause to their benefit they are open to round removal upon returning to start a conflict with you a second time.

Conflict must have a valid reason, and people are expected to handle conflict non-lethally first and violently second.

That being said making an effort to treat the other doesn't mean that you specifically have to bring them to medical. Tossing them at a passing paramedic could suffice depending on the situation.