Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill now ft. 2.0: You Will (Not) Sabotage

Ask and discuss policy about game conduct and rules.
Forum rules
Read these board rules before posting or you'll get reprimanded.
Threads without replies for 30 days will be automatically locked.
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Head Admin
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill now ft. 2.0: You Will (Not) Sabotage

Post by Timberpoes » #637679

Part 1 in a series of new RP-rules focused policy posts aiming to re-assess the RP rules in light of changes to the codebase such as nu-Heretics, Prog Traitors and a change in how players, coders and admins approach round progress.

https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Rules

It is often said that the codebase targets MRP, while our [MRP is HRP] and our [LRP is NRP].
A big part of [MRP is HRP] comes from the way our RP rules restrict and restrain players. Forming the eye of that storm are our murderboning rules.

I would disagree with a blanket notion that our MRP server is HRP. To me, our MRP servers are just the LRP servers with many player freedoms removed. But you won't find ideas such as pain RP being enforced administratively, nor any higher quality RP than on the LRP servers. Playing Sybil and Manuel back-to-back will make that fact plainly obvious.

Afterall, the goal of the RP rules is to create more scenarios where players are drawn into person-to-person interactions with eachother.
The idea is that conflict and RP naturally follows on from players with differing and often opposing goals being brought together to interact.

All of the RP rules try and work together to create an enviornment where the above can be accomplished. That means that antags are restricted (by murderbone rules) to allow for the standard valid/not valid binary thinking that tends to be a barrier to RP to also be set aside (antags must be treated in proportion to their crimes).

Despite that, non-murderbone antags which cannot be safely contained (old heretics, changelings) are still valid for instant round removal.

Antags that can justify killing and even round removal en masse (prog traitors, regardless of kill objective caps) may seek pacifistic methods to greentext in order to rely on the protections in place that prevent them being removed from the shift so they can safely antag.

Meanwhile players sometimes rely on the anti-murderbone provisions to explicitly give antags no valid reason to kill them, rendering them effectively safe and removing a lot of the paranoia of playing SS13. However, this also works hand-in-hand with anti-powergaming provisions since the crew has no OOC reason to be armed up except for metagaming purposes since antags are less able to kill them for no reason, and any given player requires an IC reason that goes beyond "this is SS13, there's probably at least one antag out there" to create an arms race. Arms races often restrict antag freedoms and force them to compete on a similar level.

There's far more about how the RP rules work together to make certain things possible, restricting both sides to allow for better expression of "storytelling, pacing and sportsmanship" as previous headmin RaveRadbury would say. I have these concepts strongly in mind when I think about the RP rules and the purpose of them.

That being said, I'm opening up a broad discussion on the murderboning rules and killing on the MRP servers in general.

Here's some food-for-thought opening concepts to get people thinking and discussing.

1. Murderbone as a word has lost its common-sense meaning.

The rules define a single "random" kill as murderbone, but racking up 6 kills following your greentext as perfectly fine.

This is a bit deeper than it seems at first. Because the next question is:
Did we choose the wrong word, or the wrong meaning?

Should the RP rules create servers where you are not allowed to kill for no/poor reasons, but can kill as many as you like with good reason?
Or should they create servers where you are allowed to kill people for no/poor reasons, but should not kill in excess beyond any arbitrary limit even with good reason?

Or should it try and combine aspects of both? Of course making things more fuzzy will create differing rulings between differing admins - For example allowing a set number of "because I'm an antag" kills and allowing only "with good reason/cause" kills after that point is likely to create scenarios where kill-happy admins like myself will give an antag more freedom than kill-averse admins.

Can we take the best of both worlds and have it work in practice? Should we? How?

2. Our RP server turns to turn greentexting into a commandment as opposed to a suggestion.

Because the murderbone rules are tied to an antag's objectives, our MRP servers put a higher focus on players obtaining greentext to be safe from bwoinking than the LRP servers, where players are free to ignore their objectives in favour of the freedom to go do whatever.

Previously an antag was always restricted by their static, non-changing objectives.

Sometimes this didn't work out, as in the case of old heretics where their goal of ascending afforded them an almost unilateral pass to kill indiscriminately because their final objective was open-ended and could be accomplished with sacrifices. In the modern tg, progression traitors also pose an interesting question because players can now actively select their objectives. Depending on the objective, it may justify a kill. Steal objectives included.

Is sticking to greentext as the decider of whether a player is killing too much or not still a good pattern to follow with Prog Traitors? Was it ever a good pattern? Could it be improved? How?

3. There's no paranoia, no fear and players are just too safe.

This plays into long rounds where nothing happens. Those exceptionally long rounds also punish players who get removed from the shift, leading to a meta of prioritising personal safety to avoid missing out.

The extension to the rules that allows for IC slights/insults to give antags a reason to kill someone was an improvement in my eyes. Despite that, players who are polite, conscientous and help all those in need tend to have effective plot armour.

Are players too safe on MRP? Do the murderbone rules go too far in restricting the ability for an antag to kill anyone at any time for any reason or no reason? Does this cause shifts that are too long, too safe and too punishing for dying? Can this be improved? How?
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Admin/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022 Host Vote Headmin
User avatar
Cobby
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Cobby » #637683

You could probably make the bone rules more vague but you’re going to get To a point where you’re having to choose how to fairly quantify to a player that they’re approaching what most admins would consider no-goes. I don’t think this would benefit from making it so vague it’s admin tossup since by nature of the thread we obviously fall in different areas of what we find acceptable.

When I made them they were written to give people a lot of power as long as they could remotely justify it with one of the three scenarios, the problem came in when admins took the racking up kills scenario ti be more liberal than intended while also making the allowable reasons to kill more strict.

For instance it seems like bombs are wholesale off the table because “You could have picked a more targeted response” despite bombs being almost explicitly allowed under the collateral section.

If they wanted to do a gimmick outside of it, then they’re free to F1 (or you the admin are free to retroactively justify it). The “problem” if your success metric is chaos is that neither player nor admin utilize this frequently enough. That is a byproduct of the player base the server has been groomed towards. You are not going to fix that outside of going on and being mischievous urself.

As for the actual rule just call it antag rdming or something, it’s pretty pedantic considering if you read the first line of the rule it explains what the rule is calling murderbone. Unless the person outright doesn’t read the rp rules I think getting tripped up on this is really minor in any actual discussion (if it was not defined then I’d understand a bit more).

Finally, obv I’m biased but I think the boning rules are fine as a concept. If I’m playing on manuel I’m expecting a lot less of the Wild West I experienced on the LRP servers, and I think the better “fix” if we want more chaos is to put additional objectives in that encourage more trouble than to expect players to generate the adminwho based-cringe tier list and hope they fall in the admins acceptable range, and even more realistically, that changing the rule is going to somehow make the very passive community suddenly aggro against each other.
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
Itseasytosee2me
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2021 1:14 am
Byond Username: Rectification
Location: Where the north wind blows

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Itseasytosee2me » #637690

I agree with the sentiments Timber gave.
Our muderboning rules to not properly define what murderboning is. The solution to most of the problems presented would require changing that rule.
Lets look at some other Servers rules on murderboning:

Goonstation
Goonstation wrote: You do NOT have to act in a nefarious or evil way, but you are not allowed to just go on a silent rampage and eliminate all the players in a power trip. It is the experience of everyone that matters, not just your own.
Baystation
Baystation wrote: You must invent a reasonable story, even if simple, that explains your actions.
You may seek to kill others, so long as it is justified by your story or circumstance.
~ You do not need to give a victim an extensive or meaningful interaction to justify this.
~ You may not go on killing sprees for the sake of body count.
Paradise Station
Paradise Station wrote: Murderboning: Excessive Killing - A player who excessively kills everyone in his path not because he has to but rather he wants to do so.
Yogstation (This one is pretty much just our rules, yet I would argue, still less restrictive)
Yogstation wrote:
Do not kill random people for no reason. For individual antagonists (traitors, changelings, Nanotrasen ninjas) murder is allowed if you can justify your actions with a connection to your objectives, which you must explain in detail if questioned. Nuclear teams, wizards, blobs, Syndicate ninjas, traitors with hijack, ascended heretics, and ascended darkspawn are exempt from most of the rule; however, do not spawnkill/convert at Arrivals or render it uninhabitable. For antagonists with the Die a Glorious Death objective, they may do whatever they wish so long as their actions kill them. They should not just murder in the hopes of getting killed by others. Traitor and IAA AIs are subject to this rule unless they actually have hijack or have been caught by the crew and have no other choice.
Beestation (Bee has a super long table of pretty much anyone that you might get into a conflict with, and gives a one or two sentence guideline on how you generally deal with them)
Beestation wrote:Murderboning is not permitted unless approved by an admin directly (Murderboning is defined as the indiscriminate killing of multiple parties who are not a threat)
Intentionally creating additional witnesses as an excuse to kill them will be considered murderboning.
Isolated killings and kills that reasonably assist with your objectives are not murderboning.
Security may be considered a threat and may be pre-emptively eliminated without provocation, but low-collateral methods must be used to eliminate them. Bombing the security wing is not considered low-collateral.
Crew inside a department in which you must complete an objective may be considered a threat and pre-emptively eliminated without provocation.
Some roles are granted an exception to this rule, please consult the Species and Faction Escalation table on the escalations page for more information.
CEV Eris (They have a very nice looking wiki page https://wiki.cev-eris.com/Rules_ErisEn)
Eris wrote: When you have an antag role - you are allowed to kill people as much as you need, provided they are not your allies. But you don't need to be asshole about it, don't murder whole server on low population, for example. It's totally not fun for others.
All of these are better examples of anti-murderboning rules than what we have. It is evidence enough that many of these servers encourage a high level of roleplay, have less restrictive and more concise rules, and still function well.
A more vague list would indeed require more judgement on the admin's behalf, but it would certainly be worth the tradeoff.
Apart from the conversation at hand, I would encourage others too look into the rules of other servers (as well as play on them) in order to give better perspective of our own situation.
Last edited by Itseasytosee2me on Mon Apr 18, 2022 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Sincerely itseasytosee
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
Sylphet
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:35 am
Byond Username: Sylphet
Location: Rent free ~

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Sylphet » #637696

Our problem is that we feel the need to outline literally every single instance where you can kill. We are pretty much on the level of -
Heretics may kill people unrelated to their objectives but only on a Tuesday when Mercury is in decline, it is currently the Year of the Dragon, and the third letter of the current round's AI's name is Q.
Every time I have to handle an ahelp with someone crying about "being murderboned" by an antag who has them as an objective and has killed no one else that round is an absolute unmitigated failure of our rules. The way things are has a chilling effect on RP. We see only the most peaceful, lowest common denominator play. People silently going along with objectives, never stepping outside of it. Nonantags quietly watching it happen.

Personally, I think the way this should be handled for MRP is by taking Bay's rule in place of our entire policy. Literally nothing of what we have is remotely salvageable and we need to start over.
You must invent a reasonable story, even if simple, that explains your actions.
You may seek to kill others, so long as it is justified by your story or circumstance.
~ You do not need to give a victim an extensive or meaningful interaction to justify this.
~ You may not go on killing sprees for the sake of body count.
If you are playing on Manuel, you should not be safe. You should not be protected from dying in a sudden way. You are not entitled to a 20 minute monologue from the antag before they're able to kill you. The rules should not in any way revolve around the individual. On MRP, the antag's only obligation is to add conflict, tension and narrative to the shift. An antag needs only to be able to tell an admin literally any reason for why they killed you if we ask. Maybe you're a witness. Maybe you insulted them. Maybe you're an objective.

Some people are going to be quiet and assassinate people with a makarov. Some people are going to be loud and run through your department blasting people with a shotgun. Some people are going to kill you with a plasma cigar, some are going to put a reverse beartrap on your head and take you hostage. None of these situations are things that we see. All of these should be acceptable, and players should feel empowered to do it. These are things that we *should* be seeing, and the only solution is to stop strangling good faith player freedom.
Tell me how much you think that I should be thrown out of the nearest airlock !
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 37&t=27175
User avatar
iwishforducks
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 4:48 pm
Byond Username: Iwishforducks

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by iwishforducks » #637697

I think the worst part about our current murderboning rules is that it makes innocent bystanders untouchable- who are very well aware of this protection. People will just sit and watch you do something, but then snitch the moment they're able to get to safety. It makes this horrible dynamic where the anti-murderboning rules punish antags who follow them. Also I've legit never felt that paranoid. If there's an antagonist like space ninja (who can't kill) then I sincerely don't care. I've also never seen a single plasmaflood in my entire 660 hours playing on Manuel.
im gay (and also play the moth “bugger”)

Image
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Head Admin
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Timberpoes » #637698

Dangerous sabotage is intrinsically linked to the murderbone policy.

The aspect that restricts your ability to perform dangerous sabotage isn't explicit in the rules, but the implication that any dangerous enough sabotage could directly or indirectly kill people and almost no objectives warrant dangerous sabotage. The result is that dangerous sabotage is a large grey area where it's technically not possible and admins have to okay it via the "Mother, my I?" ahelp procedure.

I've seen players use delams as a distraction to try and accomplish their objectives. A classic of disabling pumps or screwing with pipes to pull people to the SM room so they can break in elsewhere in engineering. I've also seen the same player then shit a brick when the SM actually explodes due to the raw incompetence of the engineering crew, terrified they'll come down with a case of the terminal bannies from their antagonistic actions as they only wanted a distraction, not the actual delamination.

If there is not an overall solution to the question of murderbone that adequately enables for things like plasma floods and SM delams, then you can expect "Rebuild of RP Restrictions 2.0: You Will (Not) Sabotage" to follow along where we'll look into sabotage more deeply and work out a better approach to this aspect of MRP.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Admin/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022 Host Vote Headmin
bastardblaster
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:57 am
Byond Username: BastardBlaster

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by bastardblaster » #637699

Sylphet wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:11 pm snip
completely agree. if there's no meaningful conflict, roleplay suffers as a result. MRP should just mean that players should make more of an effort to act like characters, not just file off every rough edge of the game
User avatar
UristMcTerrible
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2021 5:37 am
Byond Username: WhataTerribleUserName

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by UristMcTerrible » #637702

I believe what it boils down to is that a lot of the rulings on Manuel regarding murderbone are so shakily enforced, combined with the fact that the definition of murderbone has drastically shifted into restrictive absurdity, has created an incredibly watered down environment where only pale imitations of what the game normally is.

Sadly, the real big issue with our murderbone rules is that it makes antagonists scared to try anything outside of their objectives. Administrators have a thousand different interpretations for Manuel's rules, with murderbone being the worst offender. I have seen entire swathes of the station wiped out by a traitor on one day without any admin intervention, and then on the next, there's an admin that's breathing down your neck because you killed 1-2 with a bomb. And so generally when you want to try and do something as the antagonist of the round, without fear of getting banned for doing something antagonistic, you generally have to ahelp about it. And while this is dandy, there's a serious issue with the rules if you have to sit and twiddle with your thumbs for 5 minutes waiting for an admin to respond so you can do something bad as one of the main villains of the round.

And ultimately, this creates an environment that ironically becomes anti-roleplay in the end. As without any conflict affecting the majority of the crew, a lot of the scenarios that the departments are meant to deal with just never occur. Antags rarely interact with the crew unless it relates to their objectives, or if Sec is trying to get involved, and the Security/Antag dynamic is a whole discussion unto itself. Ultimately, this leads to a lot of stagnation in the rounds, and the stifling of a lot of the organic roleplay that naturally occurs due to the dynamic the antags and crew had, and thus we have 3 hour rounds on Manuel that end not because the station is in disarray, but because of sheer boredom.

This is an incredibly dangerous issue regarding Manuel, and if it's not properly handled it will continue to hurt the server as time goes on. If you want a better Manuel, I sincerely hope that the rulings get a serious and extensively thought out rework, or we're getting nowhere as a server.
User avatar
Drag
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:16 am
Byond Username: Thedragmeme

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Drag » #637708

Sylphet wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:11 pm Snip!
I agree with the above, being a friendly antag isn't even allowed on MRP. An antags job is to add conflict. If we suddenly put up a bunch of red tape and stipulations being that conflict is not fun.

From my personal experience people take dying on MRP almost personally, make the murderbone rule more vauge. Drill in the fact people might die for a small reason. I personally am against round removal with little interaction, but at the same time shit happens. All I genuinely care about as an admin is if you have a reason above "I can because I'm an antagonist".
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by terranaut » #637711

Sylphet wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:11 pm text
Yes
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by terranaut » #637712

Timberpoes wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:42 pm If there is not an overall solution to the question of murderbone that adequately enables for things like plasma floods and SM delams, then you can expect "Rebuild of RP Restrictions 2.0: You Will (Not) Sabotage" to follow along where we'll look into sabotage more deeply and work out a better approach to this aspect of MRP.
This sounds like it's going to result in more rules, which is 99% of the time a net deficit in playability and accessibility
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
User avatar
YBS
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:54 am
Byond Username: YBS

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by YBS » #637714

Sylphet wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:11 pm This
Couldn't agree more. I am in the camp that more loose, subjective rules give admins and players more flexibility to act on good faith. Bay policy in particular is effective at doing this, since instead of detailing and compartmentalizing acceptable actions, it just says explicitly: "Story first."

If someone wants to bad-faith justify "well im a sicko society man so I maxcapped evac" then I think the current admin team can agree that that's very obviously bad faith. When that behavior's observed, admin can reserve the right to say "We both know you just wanted to be a dick. [Insert punitive action]." Without it turning into an appeals battle of hyper-linking clauses from someone obviously trying to worm their way out of being punished as a shitter.

Having these conditions removed also serves the playerbase directly, at making expectations more intangible, elevating what they can expect/fear from a round.
Image
User avatar
Pandarsenic
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Pandarsenic » #637716

I'll have some other thoughts on previous talk later but right now I want to take a moment to challenge the notion that all, most, or the best RP is conflict driven, and why. In other systems (esp TTRPGs) that may be the case, but on SS13/TG, these crises are rarely revelatory. You don't learn anything about yourself or others; you don't make hard choices or decide what you'll give up to pursue your goals or what prices are too far. At most, you might see this RP in the aftermath of destruction. In the moment, it's guns out - live or die by your APM and game knowledge (and Ping).

You don't get stuff like RP Ops, where they take members of the crew hostage and offer an exchange them back the disk and the nuke, with an assurance of safe passage to the shuttle for the crew. You don't get cultists or revs trying to communicate anything to you fluffwise but the barest minimum of VIVA memes. You don't get the traitor holding the RD up with the revolver for their ID. You don't get the revolutionaries capturing the heads of staff alive for a group execution, or even sending the last one alive to Gulag exile.

And yeah, I'll say it, part of this is a lack of typing indicators; most of the rest is people with a lack of regard for their own lives because rounds are so short; and what remains is wanting to Win because winning feels good. Most people would rather fight back tooth and claw when they have no realistic chance of winning or just gun their target down in an ambush, rather than stoop to negotiating with their Valid. The more time you take to Communicate, the less likely you are to Win.

I think, other than saying "Sylphet is 100% right"
(And Sylphet IS 100% right)

We need to take a moment to pause and ask "What do we mean when we say RP?"

Not all RP is words spoken to each other. Sometimes RP is the security officer silently breaking off pursuit of a DEsword murderboner with the Sith Lord kit (RIP) to epipen someone who got badly wounded in the hallways during the fighting, then lift another person and bring them to medical. I think that is a much more compelling piece of Roleplaying than humans and Felinids yelling slurs at each other in the bar or over the radio. This situation, furthermore, was intrinsically linked to the violence of letting someone rampage the halls but was not the rampage itself.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
datorangebottle
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:53 am
Byond Username: Datorangebottle

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by datorangebottle » #637718

I honestly avoid playing on Manuel because of what I perceive as heavy restrictions on antagonist freedom. I don't mean that I want to murderbone every round I get antagonist, but that I can't place down a bomb somewhere or kill a single person with little justification other than 'he pissed me off'. It's got a similar feeling to when I played on Baystation; every antag round makes me feel like an admin is breathing down my neck because of the rules that are in place regarding antagonist behavior. It makes it feel like there is one way to complete my objectives; by being a stealthy, efficient machine that makes no mistakes and whose crimes barely get noticed.
This isn't what I want to do, all the time. Sometimes? Yes. But sometimes I want to be messy. Leave a few holes in the station, maybe leave behind some fingerprints to spark a manhunt. A fugitive is way more entertaining than a ghost, for everyone involved.
Also, I feel like the current rules having a table of who can/can't murderbone in what situations is a complete failure. Requiring me to tab out of the game to see if I can kill someone for annoying me(or the other way around) is obnoxious.
sinfulbliss wrote:i would like to add onto this - i believe women should be removed from the game as well.
User avatar
Shadowflame909
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Byond Username: Shadowflame909
Reddit Username: Shadowmist909
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Shadowflame909 » #637720

I just hope it gets retooled and soon! The longer these rules stay like this, the more acclimated and accustomed to it the playerbase gets. And it has definitely created a suitable and preferred playerbase for it...even though it completely dulls and nullifies a major part of the game.
► Show Spoiler
thgvr
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2021 1:43 pm
Byond Username: Thgvr

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by thgvr » #637728

1. Murderbone as a word has lost its common-sense meaning.
Personally, I don't think the word ever had meaning. It's always been "x has killed more people than I am comfortable with." A player, antagonist or not, should have a defining reason for ending another's life, temporarily or not. If RP rules state you should be playing a believable character, murder shouldn't be taken lightly. Objectives, IC conflict, and personal slights could all be considered "defining reasons". Another problem I've encountered personally is traitors opting to ignore the spirit of calling card objectives, and find ways to delete your body/remove the card to leave no evidence. This could be considered ignoring a "defining reason" to me, as you completely forsake the IC reason you'd have for killing someone in lieu of easier aquisition of TC so you can have more toys.

An antagonist with a "good reason" to wipe the station would be something such as, someone calling in the battlecruiser card and quite literally turning themselves into a nuclear operative. On much, much less moderated servers I have experienced, where death is even more meaningful, do not administratively accept killing others without a real, tangible reason your character would have for killing them. Example being "I killed someone because I was starving and needed their money." versus "I killed them because I like killing people" or "I killed them because it's fun why not". I don't think an interesting story can be made from a player gearing up and deciding "I want to kill everyone". (nukeops need not apply)

I think a good solution would be a wide-spread reminder and rule update that the story of a shift should always come before "winning" or surviving, or racking up kill counts. You won't remember the shifts, especially not fondly, where John Desword killed everyone again.
2. Our RP server turns to turn greentexting into a commandment as opposed to a suggestion.
This was never the case before progression traitors, but has been exacerbated by the code shoe-horning players into objectives they can do the entire round. It feels like it punishes creativity and I hope I am not alone in this sentiment. you can still choose to not interact with the progression system or objectives in the same way you could choose to ignore "Steal the McGuffin" before, but you will not be rewarded for it.

Another huge, huge, huge point about this that it seems every other post has failed to identify is the way security players treat antagonists, and the protections security are granted to treat players essentially however they want. Security has the strongest gear, metaprotections, and teamwork of any role in the game, and are told to hunt down antagonists. If you're found out, it's only a matter of time until several officers with stun batons come and cuff you to end your round. This, in my eyes, is why a lot of players don't do anything active or interesting as antagonists, the game's design actively punishes them for it and Security players exploit this. This is further compounded that the ONLY guideline or rule security players have to follow is "Punish according to crime" which can be interpreted in any way, with newer players reading Space Law on the wiki, seeing Enemy of the Corporation and immediately executing the offending antagonist. Also, it is the burden of the one being arrested to ahelp security stepping out of line.

On Heretics, I believe they function quite well with the state of their rework, and successfully create a "serial killer with magic" story that doesn't involve wanton murder (until the final steps) which I have emulated several times. Even in ascension, they are not unimaginably unstoppable unless of course they powergamed to ensure they are not.

Greentext has always been an optional thing that most likely would not generate a more interesting round. If anything, things were less interesting before, because an antagonist would simply do their single steal objective and nothing else for however long a round would go on. Custom objectives used by rp-oriented servers would be a good solution in my eyes, but I don't see that being possible with progression traitors unless they are separated into a different antagonist wholesale.

Antagonists should be encouraged to spice up rounds and make things more interesting, but are currently mechanically unencouraged by the carrot-on-a-stick and quite frankly boring objectives Progression Traitors offer. If a traitor is given several objectives to kill people, that would be reason enough. Traitors should be encouraged to make it more interesting than "I killed you because I get TC."
3. There's no paranoia, no fear and players are just too safe.
Rounds where "nothing happens" are not explicitly an antagonist's fault. Players antagonist or not are allowed and should be encouraged to create conflict and interactions in-character within reason. Players are not forced to work nothing but their jobs for 3 hours if they do not roll antagonist. Players feeling "too safe" will be the same players sitting in their dept ad nauseam, feeling "too safe" could also be a byproduct of players having too much experience. Things are not scary when you know all about them, and people don't want to pretend otherwise for the sake of RP. I have to disagree with "players who are polite, conscientious and help all those in need tend to have effective plot armor". One of my character slots fills this role you detail, and I can say this is definitely not the case. If anything, people will use your helpfulness as a way to make you vulnerable.

Players aren't "too safe" on Manuel, I feel this is completely blown out of proportion by people not familiar with the server. There are a lot of antagonists as well as midrounds that ensure such will not be true. If people are complaining it's "too safe and nothing happens" they are most likely sequestered away in a part of the station with no other people such as atmospherics, virology, xenobiology, etc. I think a lot of people's perspectives are skewed on what good "danger" levels are from how Dynamic is tuned on Sybil or Terry.
Off Topic
Everything I posted is from my own experiences playing Manuel, and I will clarify anything if needed as I suck at putting thoughts together.
User avatar
Pandarsenic
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Pandarsenic » #637729

thgvr wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 10:39 pm
1. Murderbone as a word has lost its common-sense meaning.
Personally, I don't think the word ever had meaning. It's always been "x has killed more people than I am comfortable with."
Sure it did. Specifically, it meant someone deliberately going out of their way to find, engage, and kill everyone they could - especially breaking into departments to kill people sheltering, hunting down fleeing people, etc.

A common way it was referred to was trying to get a "high score" for body count, with no regard for what sort of characters you're killing or why.

Specifically, what I think defined murderboners traditionally was active pursuit of people trying to get out of your way.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
Sylphet
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:35 am
Byond Username: Sylphet
Location: Rent free ~

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Sylphet » #637749

thgvr wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 10:39 pm Players aren't "too safe" on Manuel, I feel this is completely blown out of proportion by people not familiar with the server. There are a lot of antagonists as well as midrounds that ensure such will not be true. If people are complaining it's "too safe and nothing happens" they are most likely sequestered away in a part of the station with no other people such as atmospherics, virology, xenobiology, etc. I think a lot of people's perspectives are skewed on what good "danger" levels are from how Dynamic is tuned on Sybil or Terry.
This is very much not a case of the mean stinky LRPers trying to ruin Manuel. Several of the posts in this thread are from MRP focused admins. Consensus among Manuelmins, both old and new, is that we don't like how peaceful it is. That's not to say that everyone agrees with my burn it all the fuck down and start over stance, but we almost universally see an issue. Personally, I've been on Manuel since its launch day, and I've adminned it for a majority of its life. My perspective is that of an observer and a med/sec player, not some viro who shuts off their radio roundstart. My opinions are not those of an uninformed Bagilmin who expects Terry-level violence, and neither are the opinions of the other Manuel admins.
Pandarsenic wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 7:32 pm Not all RP is words spoken to each other. Sometimes RP is the security officer silently breaking off pursuit of a DEsword murderboner with the Sith Lord kit (RIP) to epipen someone who got badly wounded in the hallways during the fighting, then lift another person and bring them to medical. I think that is a much more compelling piece of Roleplaying than humans and Felinids yelling slurs at each other in the bar or over the radio. This situation, furthermore, was intrinsically linked to the violence of letting someone rampage the halls but was not the rampage itself.
This is something I've tried to explain so many times and never done a very good job of it, thank you for posting this ! Even if a player gets killed without some massive monologue from the antag, this is not inherently bad for RP, though it's going to seem like it from the victim's perspective. Security can launch an investigation, gathering casings into bags and building up a case file. They can have Medical perform an autopsy and determine cause of death. Engineering can install cameras in the area where the killing took place. A death aboard the station is going to be a shocking thing for most characters - so even your dumb stinky LRP cross server Terry Bagil Sybil no words murderer who should be banned from Manuel™, is providing at the very least a prompt for other characters on station to start RP of their own, to change how they act. RP is a collective thing and it takes a lot more forms than two people chatting on the bar.
Tell me how much you think that I should be thrown out of the nearest airlock !
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 37&t=27175
User avatar
Cobby
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Cobby » #637752

Am I missing something,

What rule prevents you from killing if the scenario aligns with:

Self defense (including witnesses)
Collateral
Pursuit of objectives
Someone slighted you

What scenario falls out of that in which you want people to undertake?

Is it just the sheer word count throwing people off or is the issue the written rules are “fine” but the enforcement is needed to be reevaluated?

It seems like the tangible fix is to just maybe edit the clause about racking up kills so admins are, outside of general rule 12, forced to accept scenarios they don’t like but fall under the categories, which would obv give people a lot more freedom.

I don’t know if I trust other people to make the same calls as me particularly because they read a rule I wrote and make it extremely more limiting than how I feel I’ve wrote it. These same people are going to take whatever rule we replace and make it just as limiting but with less clear items a player can go to and point to say “um ackshually I’m allowed to do it literally here”
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
Itseasytosee2me
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2021 1:14 am
Byond Username: Rectification
Location: Where the north wind blows

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Itseasytosee2me » #637758

Cobby wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 1:10 pm Am I missing something,

What rule prevents you from killing if the scenario aligns with:

Self defense (including witnesses)
Collateral
Pursuit of objectives
Someone slighted you
The big difference between that and bay's rules is the importance of objectives, which is completely absent from bay's murderbone policy. I don't think our current rules are good.
- Sincerely itseasytosee
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
datorangebottle
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:53 am
Byond Username: Datorangebottle

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by datorangebottle » #637760

iwishforducks wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:20 pm I think the worst part about our current murderboning rules is that it makes innocent bystanders untouchable- who are very well aware of this protection. People will just sit and watch you do something, but then snitch the moment they're able to get to safety. It makes this horrible dynamic where the anti-murderboning rules punish antags who follow them. Also I've legit never felt that paranoid. If there's an antagonist like space ninja (who can't kill) then I sincerely don't care. I've also never seen a single plasmaflood in my entire 660 hours playing on Manuel.
Rereading the thread, I feel like almost any antagonist(barring the ones that don't have normal rule 4 protections) should be able to just fucking kill you if you witness them doing something suspicious and they made a good-faith effort to be stealthy. A space ninja has all this lethal gear and weaponry; they shouldn't just have to sit there and take it if you happen to find them while they were cloaked and doing something else. They should also be able to hunt you down and revenge kill you if they gave you mercy but you rat them out to security anyway.
sinfulbliss wrote:i would like to add onto this - i believe women should be removed from the game as well.
User avatar
Cobby
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Cobby » #637770

Itseasytosee2me wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 4:30 pm
Cobby wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 1:10 pm Am I missing something,

What rule prevents you from killing if the scenario aligns with:

Self defense (including witnesses)
Collateral
Pursuit of objectives
Someone slighted you
The big difference between that and bay's rules is the importance of objectives, which is completely absent from bay's murderbone policy. I don't think our current rules are good.
Yeah that seems nice, im just curious/worried about what would be agreed upon as an interesting story in lieu of objectives. If your story involved a irrational hatred of the crew at large i would imagine an admin would say you need to revise it to be more targeted to a department/individual (which at that point you would try to abide by the above + "Pursuit of Story" exception).

I would be down for trying to revise the rule with objectives interchangeable with a custom backstory.
datorangebottle wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 4:39 pm
iwishforducks wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:20 pm I think the worst part about our current murderboning rules is that it makes innocent bystanders untouchable- who are very well aware of this protection. People will just sit and watch you do something, but then snitch the moment they're able to get to safety. It makes this horrible dynamic where the anti-murderboning rules punish antags who follow them. Also I've legit never felt that paranoid. If there's an antagonist like space ninja (who can't kill) then I sincerely don't care. I've also never seen a single plasmaflood in my entire 660 hours playing on Manuel.
Rereading the thread, I feel like almost any antagonist(barring the ones that don't have normal rule 4 protections) should be able to just fucking kill you if you witness them doing something suspicious and they made a good-faith effort to be stealthy. A space ninja has all this lethal gear and weaponry; they shouldn't just have to sit there and take it if you happen to find them while they were cloaked and doing something else. They should also be able to hunt you down and revenge kill you if they gave you mercy but you rat them out to security anyway.
The premises of both these posts are built on a false narrative that could be fixed by viewing the bulleted points on the boning rules.

Image
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
Pandarsenic
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Pandarsenic » #637772

Cobby wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 1:10 pm What rule prevents you from killing if the scenario aligns with:

Self defense (including witnesses)
Collateral
Pursuit of objectives
Someone slighted you

Is it just the sheer word count throwing people off or is the issue the written rules are “fine” but the enforcement is needed to be reevaluated?
I think inconsistent administration, especially about eliminating witnesses, is the biggest one here.

That in particular, plus lately the thing of "Follow your objectives" maybe, makes people afraid to go to town on people who just insulted them and rubbed them the wrong way and such.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
BrianBackslide
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2020 10:43 am
Byond Username: BrianBackslide

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by BrianBackslide » #637783

Even after playing on Manuel exclusively since it started, I don't think I've ever really felt tense or paranoid about a situation during my time there.

When I see someone with Traitor gear, I don't think "Fuck, they're up to something that might get me killed." I start thinking "Oh well, not my problem." Because it really isn't. I have no reason to be concerned as, so long as I am not in the wrong place at the wrong time, I have blanket protection from the tot going after me. Likewise, I don't feel any need to stop them because, again, they can't do anything that indirectly endangers me, short of cutting power or venting a portion of the station, and the rules forbid me from putting up more than a passing effort to involve myself in whatever conflict might arise.

Biddle Traitors has only exasperated the situation by reducing what they can/can't do if they want to ignore their objectives and do something fun. Now we're all playing a waiting game, ticking down timers until someone gets bored and calls the shuttle. It's not like they have to take assassinate objectives. In fact, they reduced the amount of assassination objectives that pop up for fear of "encouraging murderbone". I'm much more concerned about a Heretic than a Traitor as they are much more unpredictable and lose their restrictions if they manage to ascend.

I recall, back when I played on Bagil, that there were times of genuine concern when someone could break into the department and kill you at any time, when you could Plasma/N2O flood until the hallways were white-hot, when Tesloose and Lord Singuloth tore gaping holes through the station, when the CE passed through and everyone collapsed from radiation poisoning. Then I look at Manuel dchat and see people call killing a single person murderbone and I wonder where we went wrong.

The game's danger has been neutered and I fear MRP rules are to blame.
cybersaber101
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 1:30 am
Byond Username: Cybersaber101
Location: Canada, eh?

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by cybersaber101 » #637799

BrianBackslide wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 1:14 am Even after playing on Manuel exclusively since it started, I don't think I've ever really felt tense or paranoid about a situation during my time there.

When I see someone with Traitor gear, I don't think "Fuck, they're up to something that might get me killed." I start thinking "Oh well, not my problem." Because it really isn't. I have no reason to be concerned as, so long as I am not in the wrong place at the wrong time, I have blanket protection from the tot going after me. Likewise, I don't feel any need to stop them because, again, they can't do anything that indirectly endangers me, short of cutting power or venting a portion of the station, and the rules forbid me from putting up more than a passing effort to involve myself in whatever conflict might arise.

Biddle Traitors has only exasperated the situation by reducing what they can/can't do if they want to ignore their objectives and do something fun. Now we're all playing a waiting game, ticking down timers until someone gets bored and calls the shuttle. It's not like they have to take assassinate objectives. In fact, they reduced the amount of assassination objectives that pop up for fear of "encouraging murderbone". I'm much more concerned about a Heretic than a Traitor as they are much more unpredictable and lose their restrictions if they manage to ascend.

I recall, back when I played on Bagil, that there were times of genuine concern when someone could break into the department and kill you at any time, when you could Plasma/N2O flood until the hallways were white-hot, when Tesloose and Lord Singuloth tore gaping holes through the station, when the CE passed through and everyone collapsed from radiation poisoning. Then I look at Manuel dchat and see people call killing a single person murderbone and I wonder where we went wrong.

The game's danger has been neutered and I fear MRP rules are to blame.
I am calling bs on that one champ, Mnauel hasn't had the same rules since the start and rules on who you could kill and why were much looser before. I vividly remember the plasma floods, hijacks and very aggressive traitors.
The same poster, over and over and over and over and over and-
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by sinfulbliss » #637805

1. It makes more sense for you to be able to kill as many as you like with SOME reason, as opposed to having some "magic" number of total random kills you can make. The reason should probably be as relaxed as possible. Like if someone sees you doing traitorous acts, if they don't give you something you want - this maximizes the interactions crew can have with antags and avoids the whole "bubble of polite protection" you spoke about. Restrictions against massive blanket-killing, like putting a syndiebomb in medbay, plasmaflooding, releasing a singulo, etc. would still separate this from LRP antagonist interactions and preserve the longer rounds with less chaos where RP is easier to do.

Preserving both of the proposed murderbone definitions will lead to a very confusing ruleset. You might get bwoinked after a few kills for less-than-stellar reasons, you might not, there's no clear rule to follow and it's entirely up to how the admin feels. That's a valid way to handle rules but it will mean antags will simply choose the safest option (i.e., where even the most hardline admin wouldn't bwoink them), and will effectively act as the strictest rule in practice, especially among MRP players.

2. Objectives should be what traitors use as guidance for what paths to take and how to insert themselves into the round in a way that drives conflict. Prog tot complicates things because murder objectives are incredibly low-TC (usually around 2) compared to easier steal and bug objectives. This makes it a little odd to argue "they were forced to murder because of greentexting," and in all likelihood if there is an issue with a lack of paranoia and safety, it's due to traitors and antags choosing lower impact paths, so any rules that force them further into their objectives will probably only serve to restrict them further and encourage this more.

3. This is where you'd need to poll the MRP playerbase. Do MRP players enjoy this sort of safety, lack of paranoia, longer rounds? If they do then there might not be really anything to fix or change. If they don't then the rules should be softened in an impactful way, such that all admins are given a new murderbone ruleset to enforce, as opposed to just leaving things up to discretion (as I mentioned earlier this will devolve into a "strictest-approach" interpretation for the player who is actually playing antag and doesn't want to be bwoinked by an admin that may or may not be taking the strictest approach).
Spoiler:
Image
User avatar
Pandarsenic
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Pandarsenic » #637808

While we're on an adjacent topic, a weird convergence of the rules that I recently noticed is that roles that need to Escape Alive always have an IC reason to cause problems for greentext (they need the shuttle called so they can leave) but progtraitor, now lacking that, doesn't have that justification.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
massa
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2021 6:20 am
Byond Username: Massa100

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by massa » #637844

I believe that MRP would benefit from rule 4 as it is on LRP.

Allow lone antagonists to do what they want. I don't think you would see any sort of significant uptick of murderbones, but you might see a release of a lot of tension. Where people don't have to think about rules and their details, and can more easily relax into their characters. People are on MRP to avoid that vibe, so culturally it should insulate itself. The tide community can't infect an MRP server because their baseline behavior is too abhorrent to not get banned. Even on MRP with its myriad restrictions, a lynch mob can form in response to a mass murderer.

Maybe this has been trial ran before, I don't know. If it hasn't it couldn't hurt to see what blossoms.
violence
thgvr
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2021 1:43 pm
Byond Username: Thgvr

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by thgvr » #637881

Sylphet wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 7:45 am
thgvr wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 10:39 pm Players aren't "too safe" on Manuel, I feel this is completely blown out of proportion by people not familiar with the server. There are a lot of antagonists as well as midrounds that ensure such will not be true. If people are complaining it's "too safe and nothing happens" they are most likely sequestered away in a part of the station with no other people such as atmospherics, virology, xenobiology, etc. I think a lot of people's perspectives are skewed on what good "danger" levels are from how Dynamic is tuned on Sybil or Terry.
This is very much not a case of the mean stinky LRPers trying to ruin Manuel. Several of the posts in this thread are from MRP focused admins. Consensus among Manuelmins, both old and new, is that we don't like how peaceful it is. That's not to say that everyone agrees with my burn it all the fuck down and start over stance, but we almost universally see an issue. Personally, I've been on Manuel since its launch day, and I've adminned it for a majority of its life. My perspective is that of an observer and a med/sec player, not some viro who shuts off their radio roundstart. My opinions are not those of an uninformed Bagilmin who expects Terry-level violence, and neither are the opinions of the other Manuel admins.
Really disingenuous of you to not read my whole post, and respond to me like i'm a child by saying "Mean stinky LRPers cant hurt you!" and only say "Consensus among Manuelmins" with absolutely no verifiable source. My perspective is purely a player who mainly plays AI and observer, which gives a pretty good overview of any given round. On the perspectives bit, I did not mean specifically admins, I meant the players who are posting in even this very thread. Sorry you took it another way. As for "Several of the posts in this thread are from MRP focused admins", it's just you, Drag and perhaps Timberpoes. The others don't touch Manuel little if at all. I don't really think continuing this will add anything to the OP, so this is my last post.

I would really not like my opinions to be lessened to "scared of mean stinky lrp players killing manuel", thank you.
User avatar
Jonathan Gupta
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2021 10:16 pm
Byond Username: BallastMonsterGnarGnar
Location: The Corner

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Jonathan Gupta » #637900

Im always paranoid, just me?
Need to contact me? PM me or post in the Gupta Corner
User avatar
Itseasytosee2me
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2021 1:14 am
Byond Username: Rectification
Location: Where the north wind blows

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Itseasytosee2me » #638011

I personally would go as far as to say that isolated killings couldn't ever be considered murderboning by the common definition, and that it should probably be allowed. Wondering other peoples thoughts on this though.
- Sincerely itseasytosee
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf
Location: We're all going on an, admin holiday

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Not-Dorsidarf » #638128

I'll agree with literally any new RP Restrictions policy as long as makes "Murderbone" no longer "One bad kill", its a term it has a meaning and that aint it. Invent a new word for "bad kill" or borrow one for somewhere else idc.
Image
Image
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
User avatar
Sylphet
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:35 am
Byond Username: Sylphet
Location: Rent free ~

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Sylphet » #638154

Itseasytosee2me wrote: Mon Apr 18, 2022 8:19 pm I personally would go as far as to say that isolated killings couldn't ever be considered murderboning by the common definition, and that it should probably be allowed. Wondering other peoples thoughts on this though.
This is pretty touchy. While I think because antag is a valid reason for isolated kills personally, isolated is a pretty vague term and allowing that is a genuinely slippery slope that would be taken advantage of more often than it would improve the round, and I don't think I'd support it being in policy regardless of my personal opinion.
Last edited by Sylphet on Tue Apr 19, 2022 7:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tell me how much you think that I should be thrown out of the nearest airlock !
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 37&t=27175
User avatar
Pandarsenic
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Pandarsenic » #638156

Pandarsenic wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 11:07 pm [Murderboner] meant someone deliberately going out of their way to find, engage, and kill everyone they could - especially breaking into departments to kill people sheltering, hunting down fleeing people, etc.

A common way it was referred to was trying to get a "high score" for body count, with no regard for what sort of characters you're killing or why.

Specifically, what I think defined murderboners traditionally was active pursuit of people trying to get out of your way.
I suppose I'll pop this up again to ask how people like the old definition.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
Tapubulu
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 9:36 pm
Byond Username: Tapubulu
Reddit Username: Robust-yo-ass

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Tapubulu » #638261

I definitely think that murderbone/antag killing rules should be relaxed in general. It's gotten to the point that with progression traitors, most antag killings are purely a result of objectives, which are completely random and without a true motive which makes the round more boring. I certainly believe that a lot of people would appreciate a more relaxed antag ruleset.
:revolver:
User avatar
Shadowflame909
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Byond Username: Shadowflame909
Reddit Username: Shadowmist909
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Shadowflame909 » #638263

Yeah on manuel. E-sword sounds just mean "Valid. Sec get that man" instead of "Oh my god traitor is killing people near me I should run before they kill me too!"

No real desire to get away from an antag, if you know they'll get banned for murdering you.
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
Jonathan Gupta
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2021 10:16 pm
Byond Username: BallastMonsterGnarGnar
Location: The Corner

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Jonathan Gupta » #638271

Shadowflame909 wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 12:28 pm Yeah on manuel. E-sword sounds just mean "Valid. Sec get that man" instead of "Oh my god traitor is killing people near me I should run before they kill me too!"

No real desire to get away from an antag, if you know they'll get banned for murdering you.
I run at people with a esword, why would I run away.
Need to contact me? PM me or post in the Gupta Corner
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by sinfulbliss » #639068

Shadowflame909 wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 12:28 pm No real desire to get away from an antag, if you know they'll get banned for murdering you.
And likewise you’ll get banned for attacking them. Essentially stifles any gameplay between crew and antags aside from targets.
Spoiler:
Image
User avatar
Misdoubtful
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2020 7:03 pm
Byond Username: Misdoubtful
Location: Delivering hugs!

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Misdoubtful » #639103

"It is often said that the codebase targets MRP, while our [MRP is HRP] and our [LRP is NRP]."

Who is actually saying this? Anyone? Have these people actually experienced HRP or NRP to any decent degree? TG ain't even close to either that's loaded feedback wherever its coming from.

If the intention is fleshing out round conflict in an easier to understand way:
Sylphet wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:11 pm Our problem is that we feel the need to outline literally every single instance where you can kill...

Personally, I think the way this should be handled for MRP is by taking Bay's rule in place of our entire policy. Literally nothing of what we have is remotely salvageable and we need to start over.
You must invent a reasonable story, even if simple, that explains your actions.
You may seek to kill others, so long as it is justified by your story or circumstance.
~ You do not need to give a victim an extensive or meaningful interaction to justify this.
~ You may not go on killing sprees for the sake of body count.
Truth, I very heavily fought against this kind of bloat on servers where rules where my own domain, and being a Bay player since forever myself the rule you listed there just works, its reworded but the sentiment is there. There was an original piece about antags existing to drive rounds forwards as well.

Other servers are not in any metric more successful because they dump more rules or more complicated rules into place for hyper specifics that people are not going to keep up with unless they keep the rules open while playing. Bloat, rather than focusing on a method of removing bad actors and poor behaviors that create the actual illusion of needing additional rules to keep them in check is not and has not been a viable long term solution.

Are policy changes really going to change a 'lack of fear'? It's a cultural thing.

The original Manuel RP rules were pulled from Goon RP, but have since changed over time that's something I agree with as well. Its unfortunate to be honest, mostly seeing as an understanding of how those rules were approached and what kind of environment they fostered didn't survive with them. These kinds of problems didn't happen over there with the same rules, because they weren't problems to begin with...

-----
Cobby wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 1:33 pm When I made them they were written to give people a lot of power as long as they could remotely justify it with one of the three scenarios, the problem came in when admins took the racking up kills scenario ti be more liberal than intended while also making the allowable reasons to kill more strict.

For instance it seems like bombs are wholesale off the table because “You could have picked a more targeted response” despite bombs being almost explicitly allowed under the collateral section.

If they wanted to do a gimmick outside of it, then they’re free to F1 (or you the admin are free to retroactively justify it). The “problem” if your success metric is chaos is that neither player nor admin utilize this frequently enough. That is a byproduct of the player base the server has been groomed towards. You are not going to fix that outside of going on and being mischievous urself.
UristMcTerrible wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:15 pm I believe what it boils down to is that a lot of the rulings on Manuel regarding murderbone are so shakily enforced, combined with the fact that the definition of murderbone has drastically shifted into restrictive absurdity, has created an incredibly watered down environment where only pale imitations of what the game normally is.
I've experienced this quite a lot in the past although I haven't been very present lately. The player-base has very much been groomed in a particular direction in regards to this stuff, probably not intentionally I'm sure, but this can only be happening at the 'admin level'. Is rewording the rules going to change those beliefs, or is this a miscommunication somewhere down the line?

-----
iwishforducks wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:20 pm I think the worst part about our current murderboning rules is that it makes innocent bystanders untouchable- who are very well aware of this protection. People will just sit and watch you do something, but then snitch the moment they're able to get to safety. It makes this horrible dynamic where the anti-murderboning rules punish antags who follow them. Also I've legit never felt that paranoid. If there's an antagonist like space ninja (who can't kill) then I sincerely don't care. I've also never seen a single plasmaflood in my entire 660 hours playing on Manuel.
Killing witnesses is permissible under the current rules:
Self-defense.
Someone actively trying to make it difficult for you to complete your objectives is fine to eliminate in pursuit of completing your objective. This would include witnesses.
-----
ardentarclight wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:46 pm
Sylphet wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:11 pm snip
completely agree. if there's no meaningful conflict, roleplay suffers as a result. MRP should just mean that players should make more of an effort to act like characters, not just file off every rough edge of the game
This is how the LRP, MRP, HRP dynamic got defined originally. It was higher degrees of staying in character, with HRP basically meaning playing a consistent developing character. The trio came about IN SS13, not any other game. One of the OG defining sources has died out but here is a blurb from Para which has roughly the same content:
Low-RP
LRP servers do not generally require any sort of roleplaying from the players, or if they do it's at a bare minimum. Even if players are required to speak and act in-character there are little to no restrictions on what they are allowed to know in-game, although metagaming is usually still against the rules.

Medium-RP
MRP servers tend to enforce the idea that your character acts like themselves and not as if they have a player controlling their actions. There are usually very loose restrictions on what your character might know in-game. Your character might be familiar with multiple different jobs and be capable of performing them with ease. Some MRP servers enforce the rule that your character can only know one or two jobs but are otherwise lenient about how you can act in-game.

High-RP
HRP servers take roleplaying quite seriously. Your character is expected to act consistently concerning past behaviour, to do their job with skill, and to not interfere with the jobs of other crew members without a good reason. As an example, if you choose to play a Botanist it is expected that you do not know how to set up the engine like an Engineer.
-----
YBS wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 7:14 pm Couldn't agree more. I am in the camp that more loose, subjective rules give admins and players more flexibility to act on good faith. Bay policy in particular is effective at doing this, since instead of detailing and compartmentalizing acceptable actions, it just says explicitly: "Story first."

If someone wants to bad-faith justify "well im a sicko society man so I maxcapped evac" then I think the current admin team can agree that that's very obviously bad faith. When that behavior's observed, admin can reserve the right to say "We both know you just wanted to be a dick. [Insert punitive action]." Without it turning into an appeals battle of hyper-linking clauses from someone obviously trying to worm their way out of being punished as a shitter.

Having these conditions removed also serves the playerbase directly, at making expectations more intangible, elevating what they can expect/fear from a round.
Preach baby, preach
Last edited by Misdoubtful on Sat Apr 30, 2022 11:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Hugs
User avatar
iwishforducks
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 4:48 pm
Byond Username: Iwishforducks

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by iwishforducks » #639164

Misdoubtful wrote: Fri Apr 29, 2022 5:57 pm
iwishforducks wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:20 pm I think the worst part about our current murderboning rules is that it makes innocent bystanders untouchable- who are very well aware of this protection. People will just sit and watch you do something, but then snitch the moment they're able to get to safety. It makes this horrible dynamic where the anti-murderboning rules punish antags who follow them. Also I've legit never felt that paranoid. If there's an antagonist like space ninja (who can't kill) then I sincerely don't care. I've also never seen a single plasmaflood in my entire 660 hours playing on Manuel.
Killing witnesses is permissible under the current rules:
Self-defense.
Someone actively trying to make it difficult for you to complete your objectives is fine to eliminate in pursuit of completing your objective. This would include witnesses.
No-where does it actually say that if you do a semi-public antagonist thing then it's protected. In short, if you're already a well known traitor with a d-sword walking around, then you can't kill someone because they simply saw you. The ruling is also so weak... "this includes witnesses"- How much does someone have to witness? Does it have to be an antagonistic thing in general or does it have to be something specifically in pursuit of your objectives?

Either way, my point is: I've never feared for my life as a witness of crime nor have I feared for my life when there's a traitor on the loose.
im gay (and also play the moth “bugger”)

Image
User avatar
Misdoubtful
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2020 7:03 pm
Byond Username: Misdoubtful
Location: Delivering hugs!

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Misdoubtful » #639174

iwishforducks wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 1:30 am
Misdoubtful wrote: Fri Apr 29, 2022 5:57 pm
iwishforducks wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:20 pm I think the worst part about our current murderboning rules is that it makes innocent bystanders untouchable- who are very well aware of this protection. People will just sit and watch you do something, but then snitch the moment they're able to get to safety. It makes this horrible dynamic where the anti-murderboning rules punish antags who follow them. Also I've legit never felt that paranoid. If there's an antagonist like space ninja (who can't kill) then I sincerely don't care. I've also never seen a single plasmaflood in my entire 660 hours playing on Manuel.
Killing witnesses is permissible under the current rules:
Self-defense.
Someone actively trying to make it difficult for you to complete your objectives is fine to eliminate in pursuit of completing your objective. This would include witnesses.
No-where does it actually say that if you do a semi-public antagonist thing then it's protected. In short, if you're already a well known traitor with a d-sword walking around, then you can't kill someone because they simply saw you. The ruling is also so weak... "this includes witnesses"- How much does someone have to witness? Does it have to be an antagonistic thing in general or does it have to be something specifically in pursuit of your objectives?

Either way, my point is: I've never feared for my life as a witness of crime nor have I feared for my life when there's a traitor on the loose.
I'm not quite sure I understand here. Could you shed some insight on the whole untouchable thing? Is this through policy, through thoughts as a player, or through thoughts through a character?

If they want to sit and then run away and report it without having an in-character sense of fear that is really their choice I'm not about to judge peoples RP decisions. As much as it is also the antag's choice to decide if Joe Smith seeing them with a d-sword is maint is worth tracking down now or later, or at all. What would their coherent believable character do? We don't actually have to feel paranoid ourselves here, MRP and HRP are ideally where characters act like themselves, and not player driven. Maybe the rules failed to capture what MRP and HRP are, and I and others have brought up a lack of definition of RP in the past. Saying we 'want a space for people to act out characters and RP' without some kind of defined level playing ground and expectation was bound to result in this it was only a matter of time. Some people go hard, some don't try at all. Some expect things like fear RP, some expect it being a chat room. The only constant is that we are telling a story. Paradise defines it; Aurora defines it, Baystation defines it, Fulp defines it, Bee defines it, CM SS13 defines it, Yog defines it, Goon has a section on it, etc. We don't.

So if you decide that your character doesn't feel any paranoia about a space ninja that can't kill is that your actual characters issue, or your issue with the knowledge that you have?

I can remember the last time I memorably saw a plasma flood during a rev round at least a year ago. I'm sure a few more have happened, but you get the idea.

If people are playing with protections in mind rather than their characters and RPing in mind, maybe we need to try and encourage an environment that swaps that, and policy all by itself would just generate some kind of fake half-hearted compliance, an agreed upon understanding of what players and admins would like to see out of Manuel will reach the mark though. Efforts to create the kind of environment and stories we want to see ourselves will.

There is nothing wrong with where we are now if we want to leave that all up to fluid decision making IC and OOC, but peoples expectations are all over the place with it, and have been for a long time. It falls on people to foster the kind of environment they would actually like to see right now. It is up to people to decide if their characters would be feeling paranoid right now.

This thread misses that mark in general by targeting players feeling too safe instead of characters, and there is a very serious misunderstanding of what roleplay is if that's the case.
Hugs
cybersaber101
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 1:30 am
Byond Username: Cybersaber101
Location: Canada, eh?

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by cybersaber101 » #639902

I agree with changing the rules to move away from 'murderbone' and into something easier to define for players and admins to draw from but otherwise I'm not sure quite the point on the rest of the discussion around 'paranoia'.

"Paranoia" it's lauded as a great part of ss13 and quintessential to it's round to round progress when in reality for most players it's what creates the most notable issues of *not* interacting with other players, preparing for potential threats before they appear and kill on sight for valid antagonists. A new player may be able to feel a true sense of it as many mechanics and features are unknown but more experienced players(as greater percentage in the mrp servers) Will naturally feel less no matter as they become familiar. The unknowns simply become obstacles you fill your bag with goodies to defeat on LRP and in MRP the same applies generally the same. Polite players and players ignoring traitors isn't because they feel much safer it's because they've either been drilled repeatedly to 'interact meaningfully' and a kill or be killed mentality prevents this or because 'they don't want to be bonked for valid hunting/seen as a valid hunter'.

There's my thoughts on atleast some of this, I hope it made some sense, maybe.
The same poster, over and over and over and over and over and-
User avatar
WarbossLincoln
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:14 pm
Byond Username: WarbossLincoln

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by WarbossLincoln » #640764

What happened to death on the server? Half the time on manuel there's 1 hour + rounds that end with only 2-3 people dead. I remember when cloning was removed because it was too easy to bring dead people back and now it seems like anyone can be bandaged back together and revived no matter what happens to them. I came back to the game a couple months ago after being gone for about a year and it feels like a hugbox where no one ever stays dead.
--Crocodillo

Image
User avatar
Jonathan Gupta
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2021 10:16 pm
Byond Username: BallastMonsterGnarGnar
Location: The Corner

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Jonathan Gupta » #640823

WarbossLincoln wrote: Fri May 13, 2022 6:15 am What happened to death on the server? Half the time on manuel there's 1 hour + rounds that end with only 2-3 people dead. I remember when cloning was removed because it was too easy to bring dead people back and now it seems like anyone can be bandaged back together and revived no matter what happens to them. I came back to the game a couple months ago after being gone for about a year and it feels like a hugbox where no one ever stays dead.
people stay dead, you just gotta kill them well and take steps to do it, also you are playing on manuel.
Need to contact me? PM me or post in the Gupta Corner
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Head Admin
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Timberpoes » #640919

https://tgstation13.org/wiki/User:Timberpoes

This is the very first very brutally rough re-draft. It's probably too wordy and can be cut down in areas.

But I feel it's workable enough to enter public scrutiny/discussion. Once there's a decent overall happiness with it, I'll put it forward to the other two headmins for them to vote on. For now, this is just my own solo work.

I've already got the admin team discussing the draft and initial reception seemed positive from those who cared enough to comment.
Timberpoes wrote:The goal of these changes is to allow more freedom for antagonists to antagonise on the RP servers.

This freedom is not absolute and comes at a price. That price is roleplaying, antagonists whom wish to cause death and destruction would, if questioned by an admin, simply need to offer an IC roleplaying reason for their actions.

The intent is that admins don't need to jump in and question every random kill. They can assume the odd kill here and there is fine, even if some FNR kills may slip through the cracks. They only need to step in when things get a little but wild or sus and can make sure that some form of roleplay is still happening. On the roleplay server.
Admins seemed to think this policy would be easier to enforce, simply finding the IC justification for antag actions when things seemed excessive. There was appreciation for the examples I imagined up, since they're somewhat common scenarios.

They have relaxed escalation with room for more antagonistic reasons for escalating, including for players being overly polite, kind and helpful to them. I felt this was a spicy addition.

I've incorporated a VERY BASIC reading of viewtopic.php?f=33&t=31546 into it, allowing mass sabotage in general.

Finally, under this draft malf AI is now unrestricted instead of needing delta. They would be the genuine threat that a malfunctioning AI should be.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Admin/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022 Host Vote Headmin
User avatar
Vekter
In-Game Admin
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
Byond Username: Vekter
Location: Fucking around with the engine.

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Vekter » #640924

This all reads perfectly fine to me. Hell, honestly? I'm perfectly fine with antags getting a little mass sabotage as a treat sometimes, as long as it's not a constant thing every round. People don't die enough on MRP as it is. There's a loss of tension because you know the odds of you finding yourself dead at someone's hands are pretty low. I don't want to be on tenterhooks all the time, constantly worried about whether or not I'm going to be introduced to hard vacuum in the next few seconds, but if I'm running around by myself, I should be a little concerned.

I'm not 100% sure how I feel about malf AIs not needing to be delta, but we can test that for a while and see how it works out.
Image
Image
Spoiler:
Reply PM from-REDACTED/(REDACTED): i tried to remove the bruises by changing her gender

PM: Bluespace->Delaron: Nobody wants a mime's asscheeks farting on their brig windows.

PM: REDACTED->HotelBravoLima: Oh come on, knowing that these are hostile aliens is metagaming

[17:43] <Aranclanos> any other question ping me again
[17:43] <Vekter> Aranclanos for nicest coder 2015
[17:44] <Aranclanos> fuck you
User avatar
Shadowflame909
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Byond Username: Shadowflame909
Reddit Username: Shadowmist909
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill

Post by Shadowflame909 » #640925

I like those rules! Adds some madness with reason. Maybe the serial killer isn't sane, but they are at least a person with a purpose. It might be collecting the hands of every black haired player, but it's fun to argue fruitlessly about how your hair is actually just dark grey and doesn't qualify. Or go to the mirror and shave yourself bald so you don't fit the criteria.
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
Dax Dupont
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:07 pm
Byond Username: DaxYeen
Github Username: DaxDupont
Location: Belgium

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill now ft. 2.0: You Will (Not) Sabotage

Post by Dax Dupont » #640951

Playing on Manuel is less stressful than the other servers due to less of a chance of getting randomly killed. It's more fun to explore other aspects of the game
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Head Admin
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill now ft. 2.0: You Will (Not) Sabotage

Post by Timberpoes » #640957

The goal of Manuel was to create a server with more player-to-player interactions.

The current RP rules are designed and intended to draw players together more often through restricting player freedoms to singleplayer/"everyone else is an NPC" through the shift (powergaming restrictions, antag validity changes, chain of command importance, lane rules) and that through those interactions we get conflict.

The idea is that if you want something from someone, you try asking for it first. If you need something doing, you ask the person whose role it is to do that thing. If they refuse or suck ass at their jobs, you have the basis for conflict. Minor and petty conflict, yes - But minor and petty conflict is the bread and butter of SS13 as a social deduction multiplayer roleplaying game.

My goal is to support that petty moment-to-moment conflict with a greater overarching conflict. I want antags to be gifted with more freedoms to react antagonistically to the events of the shift.

Is someone incredibly polite and helpful to you, to a fault? Are they treating you with respect even as you try to run roughshod over their rights and freedoms? Cut off their arms and legs, see how helpful they are after that! The weak should fear the strong.

Did a group of players decide to create a maint sofa fort and snubbed you when you wanted to join in too? Rude as fuck. Bomb their sofa fort and display their heads on pikes outside as a warning to anyone stupid enough to try it again.

I want to push player decisions and choices towards mattering more, providing antagonists with the freedom to react to your choices to approach Manuel like a less stressful server where you can explore other aspects of the game. They can choose to disrupt it because you refused to include them, or because your plans conflict with theirs, or because other crew members are helping you and not helping them. They won't need objectives to do that, just an in-character roleplaying reason to justify their choices.

All this is, to me, the purest expression of SS13 antagonism within a roleplaying context. Antagonists empowered not just to greentext, but to also react to the events of the shift around them - driving the story and narrative forward in a more natural and organic way.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Admin/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022 Host Vote Headmin
User avatar
Vekter
In-Game Admin
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
Byond Username: Vekter
Location: Fucking around with the engine.

Re: Rebuild of RP Restrictions 1.0: You Will (Not) Kill now ft. 2.0: You Will (Not) Sabotage

Post by Vekter » #640974

Timberpoes wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 3:48 pm Did a group of players decide to create a maint sofa fort and snubbed you when you wanted to join in too? Rude as fuck. Bomb their sofa fort and display their heads on pikes outside as a warning to anyone stupid enough to try it again.
This is why I voted for you.
Image
Image
Spoiler:
Reply PM from-REDACTED/(REDACTED): i tried to remove the bruises by changing her gender

PM: Bluespace->Delaron: Nobody wants a mime's asscheeks farting on their brig windows.

PM: REDACTED->HotelBravoLima: Oh come on, knowing that these are hostile aliens is metagaming

[17:43] <Aranclanos> any other question ping me again
[17:43] <Vekter> Aranclanos for nicest coder 2015
[17:44] <Aranclanos> fuck you
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users