/tg/Station 13

Hii I want to ask about a rule 2 precedent.

Similar to how characters are allowed to know everything about in-game mechanics or antagonists under rule 2, characters are allowed to have persistent knowledge/relationships/friendships with the caveat that knowledge of a character being an antagonist from a previous round is not used.

Particularly the forget when antag part. Why is that there? Many times I and others use antag as a way to progress our own story line. For example: Stealing nuke cores for a spooky device, or RPing being hired by internal affairs to get information out of somebody.

Does all char involved forget the round?
Or do they still remember round events but forget that they were antag?

It would SUCK if I try to use antag to advance characters stories but have it be retconned by the rules.

Here is an example:

Let's say my character remembered that the person they interacted with was controlled by the mansus. (Say they reveal their heretic antag status during that round) and then I talk to the player again the next round asking about how it felt.

Would that be allowed?

EDIT:Changed a word for clarification.

I think it's pretty much just a Rule of Thumb. Obviously different people can say different between themselves, but it's best to just have it in the rules so people don't use it to metagrudge "YOU TRIED TO KILL ME AS A HERETIC LAST ROUND, DIE"

Would be good to clarify exactly what it means.

Can my character be scared of a particular character for a short bit after an antag round? Are there exceptions to this?

Would be good to know exactly what is expected of this rule. I don't want to be bwoinked for acting as my character. I need to know what is supposed to be not cannon for my own sanity!

And I thought that was covered by the metagrudge rule?

EDIT: I can't seem to find what I was talking about at the end here in the rules, so I guess it's needed to stop grudges just because of antag. Is that the only thing it is trying to stop?

one time i was searched and arrested with the reason being "you sometimes do crazy shit" or something like that.

Im assuming it was about a prior antagonistic round otherwise idk.


Also didnt livrah/boris literally eat a ban for max capping a group of seccies that literally made up in their own minds that him refining a bunch of bluespace anomaly cores to give out bags of holding was actually just to boh bomb everyone because "thats something he would do" then basically griefed him for a third of the round.

1. They assumed he was refining a bunch of blue space anomaly cores in order to boh bomb people since "its something he would do"

2. They wordlessly tried to baton him and then made him spend the next several minutes (i think it was over 10-15 minutes it was awhile ago) trying to avoid capture while he repeatedly asked for explanation on radio. (The time you force someone to waste by making them avoid you is text book grief)

those seccies apparently still held meta protection despite ganging up on him to grief him over meta knowledge that he does stuff as antagonist

It's there so that you can't do things like "Stunlocker Weldspace acts like a shithead when he's an antag and he's being suspicious this round so I'm going to treat him like an antag despite having no confirmation that he is one".

It also doesn't make sense from an RP standpoint for someone's antag status to follow them from round-to-round because why would NT re-hire someone who nuked one of their stations?

Basically, RPing in reference to it is fine as long as you're not dicking someone over about it

I think the clause needs to be reworded to have it make a bit more sense and be very clear on what it is trying to stop.

I am unsure on what it should be reworded to, but something to do with grudges for antag actions would be a starting point.

I had a round where my character became obsessed and killed someone by dunking them into a fryer repeatedly. I ended up getting harassed ingame by someone else bringing it up EVERY. SINGLE. ROUND. The precedent could be reworded, but please don't gut it entirely.

BrianBackslide wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2023 7:17 am I had a round where my character became obsessed and killed someone by dunking them into a fryer repeatedly. I ended up getting harassed ingame by someone else bringing it up EVERY. SINGLE. ROUND. The precedent could be reworded, but please don't gut it entirely.

Wait, the same person brought up a valid kill you did every single round?

BrianBackslide wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2023 7:17 am I had a round where my character became obsessed and killed someone by dunking them into a fryer repeatedly. I ended up getting harassed ingame by someone else bringing it up EVERY. SINGLE. ROUND. The precedent could be reworded, but please don't gut it entirely.

From the information you gave, that sounds a lot like metagrudging and this clause in specific would not be the main rule applied for that

I wouldn’t want someone to nonconsensually refer to me being an antag in the previous round especially if it becomes a sort of legalized metagrudge.

If I opened the door then it’s fine to refer to my “dark past”, but I wouldn’t really want people to choose to behave poorly against me the following round because “they are just RPing”.

The reason so people don't wind up being """""""ICly"""""" metagrudged for playing the damn game. Most places handle it with forced-amnesia because even if it is benign, there's always that one dipshit that listens in on the conversation and starts shouting "URIST MCPOSSESSED IS A HERETIC HE ADMITTED IT"

Personally I think it's funny to have people openly state they work for other companies. NT obviously doesn't have the best hiring practices even from a lore pov

The rule primarily exists to prevent metagrudging. We collectively don't want to see people running around talking about how 'Bob Bobson is always a traitor so we might as well search like them always'.

If someone wants to RP that they were in a cult thats fine and dandy but they open themselves up to whatever that RP brings within reason.

As such we are adjusting the precedent from:

Similar to how characters are allowed to know everything about in-game mechanics or antagonists under rule 2, characters are allowed to have persistent knowledge/relationships/friendships with the caveat that knowledge of a character being an antagonist from a previous round is not used.

To:

Similar to how characters are allowed to know everything about in-game mechanics or antagonists under rule 2, characters are allowed to have persistent knowledge/relationships/friendships with the caveat that knowledge of a character being an antagonist from a previous round is not used maliciously.