Jump to content

Public Comments: 2023 Rules Feedback


Chief_Engineer

Recommended Posts

an alternative idea is instead of an examine, sec pdas have a cartridge to scan clicked (non stealth) items to show their corporation / threat / whatever. that way its more ic but of course a bit harder to use than just examining.

maybe it could have funnies for soap banana peel etc for when the clown is arrested

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Server Rules in Medical Specific Section (23.4.4) state that mourging or otherwise inappropriate disposal of corpses that are still clonable is an offense that can result in being job-banned. (Assuming that mourging refers to the act of placing someone or something in the morgue tray) It seems that the rule was written prior to changes to the availability of the cloning technology given that the revision that added the clause was added in the 16th of November 2022, whereas the change in mention was done in 2023. As cloning technology usually is not available most of the rounds, mourging of bodies that can only be resurrected via cloning or borging seems to be a reasonable action; considering that it'd prevent the place from stinking up, the body rotting, and reducing the impact of an unrevived body on the crew mentality. While the said issues can be fixed with body bags, the question of where to put them remains. Answer to which seems to either be in the morgue as a room, or the morgue tray in the morgue room. As the alternative appears to have the bodies sit out in rooms not intended for corpse storage, which could be undesirable.

It'd be suggested that the rule be generalized by removing mourging and replacing clonable with revivable, given that there are currently three different means of resuscitation: cloning, defibrillation, and borgification. Further clarification on the inappropriate disposals might be problematic, if the administrative team is thinking about adding such a clarification, as it does not seem realistic for anyone to be able to cover all ends. Even more so, considering that any attempts of further clarification could be interpreted as a statement of definiteness, when in reality it might not necessarily be limited to the explicitly defined cases.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Project Manager
18 minutes ago, astriloqua said:

Server Rules in Medical Specific Section (23.4.4) state that mourging or otherwise inappropriate disposal of corpses that are still clonable is an offense that can result in being job-banned. (Assuming that mourging refers to the act of placing someone or something in the morgue tray) It seems that the rule was written prior to changes to the availability of the cloning technology given that the revision that added the clause was added in the 16th of November 2022, whereas the change in mention was done in 2023. As cloning technology usually is not available most of the rounds, mourging of bodies that can only be resurrected via cloning or borging seems to be a reasonable action; considering that it'd prevent the place from stinking up, the body rotting, and reducing the impact of an unrevived body on the crew mentality. While the said issues can be fixed with body bags, the question of where to put them remains. Answer to which seems to either be in the morgue as a room, or the morgue tray in the morgue room. As the alternative appears to have the bodies sit out in rooms not intended for corpse storage, which could be undesirable.

It'd be suggested that the rule be generalized by removing mourging and replacing clonable with revivable, given that there are currently three different means of resuscitation: cloning, defibrillation, and borgification. Further clarification on the inappropriate disposals might be problematic, if the administrative team is thinking about adding such a clarification, as it does not seem realistic for anyone to be able to cover all ends. Even more so, considering that any attempts of further clarification could be interpreted as a statement of definiteness, when in reality it might not necessarily be limited to the explicitly defined cases.

Ya, you're right that it was written before the cloning changes and defibs so it needs to be updated. Generalization is also a good way to go with it since it'll provide some future proofing.

image.png.bc33d4c567502f1e0c0325f43cb6f70b.pngimage.png.a54e0c38b83579a437f56d4e5b55048b.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Warentan said:

I mean the admins, manually, by remembering to.

Admins don't see everything that happens.

Like someone else said before, some folks will feel comfortable breaking the rules in a different language, knowing they're less likely to get caught.

5 hours ago, Chief_Engineer said:

If LRP were to have a space law, could you give any more details of what it'd have to be like for you to still be interested in playing it, or where the line would be in terms of complexity before you thought it was too much?

The easier to memorize, the better.

Though, thinking more about it, it's not entirely a question of complexity. Having to check with sources outside the game is less than ideal. Having those sources in game, with a search funcion, like we have for bar and chemistry recipes, would make the complexity easier to deal with.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Project Manager
8 hours ago, Del said:

The easier to memorize, the better.

Though, thinking more about it, it's not entirely a question of complexity. Having to check with sources outside the game is less than ideal. Having those sources in game, with a search funcion, like we have for bar and chemistry recipes, would make the complexity easier to deal with.

At a minimum, I'm expecting all rules to be put into the guidebook so you shouldn't need to rely on anything external for the rules once that happens. LRP space law will probably/hopefully be simple enough that the average security officer will typically only have to memorize a handful of rules, like don't take away prisoners' access to common unless they abuse it. There will probably be some sentencing stuff, but it shouldn't be complicated and ideally secoffs would just be able to have the warden deal with that entirely most of the time. Whenever it's brought up and a draft is written for the guidebook, I can definitely try to make sure it's done in a way that's as easy to use as possible

  • Like 1

image.png.bc33d4c567502f1e0c0325f43cb6f70b.pngimage.png.a54e0c38b83579a437f56d4e5b55048b.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2023 at 9:02 PM, Chief_Engineer said:

I'd really like to see the game clearly communicate what is and isn't contraband in item descriptions

I've seen a SecOff (not a cadet) go back and forth with a HoS and making a big stink after over not being allowed to wear the web vest that spawns in Marathon maints. Arguing that the description doesn't mention it being a syndicate item, rather it just being a really good armor vest. So yeah, I completely agree.
 

On 12/7/2023 at 9:02 PM, Chief_Engineer said:

We won't ever get an all inclusive list of what can be confiscated, because the reality is if someone finds a way to cause big enough issues with anything, you'd want security to be able to confiscate it.

An all inclusive list isn't what I'm hoping for, rather I would like as clear as possible guidelines on when something should be confiscated. For example, I'd argue that:

  • Security can confiscate any item if they deem it in the best interest of the safety of the station. Security will be held fully accountable for their actions if they exercise this privilege (blatant plagiarism of the golden rule).
  • Any item that a crewmember has access to on the station (excl. maint) is not restricted for them, e.g. a passenger is allowed to wear insulated gloves because a pair spawns inside of the tool storage. It should be clear if this includes uncommon spawns, like the combat gloves that spawn inside atmos on some stations.
  • Any uplink item that cannot be found outside of maint on the station is considered contraband.
  • Confiscating non-related items to a crime (e.g. insulated gloves when detainee assaulted a bartender with a crowbar) may only be done if security believes the item in question is very likely to be used to commit a crime in the future.

Apart from that, some thoughts I had about the mock-up I made. I like the idea @deltanedas mentioned about security PDAs being able to scan items, maybe SecHuds could be used for this purpose as well or maybe instead. If items were to get affiliations attached to them I think that there should be non-affiliated items, especially for things like non-corporate common clothing.

I'm unsure what the maintainers mean by "gamey", perhaps affiliation should only be visible upon further examination by pressing a button. So there could be a button added next to the view stats button on hardsuits:
image.png.0a0d641c270df68a2ceec445e34f7fa5.png

The low/medium/high were the first thing that came to mind on how to convey that I think some items should be shown to be more restricted then other restricted items. I'm sure the maintainers can come up with a better way to showcase this.

  • Thanks 1

"После игры в Dota 2, русские рейдеры на Miros заставляют меня чувствовать себя как дома." - Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2023 at 2:04 AM, Warentan said:

I feel that our zero-tolerance English rule is a tiny bit overkill. A lot of players LOVE the official wizden servers but have a different primary language is more comfortable to use.
Maybe it would be best to allow short sentences and requests in different languages in LRP (because random conversations in another language with specific people is obviously metacomms in MRP), and then translate them post-round for security's sake.
 

I agree in a way. As a native russian speaker, i have the privilege of... speaking russian. Sometimes some NON-RAIDER guys who are just dumb join and i cant even explain to them that they should speak russian or leave because rules are blah blah blah. I get that theyre idiots, but still (we have english speaking idiots too, but theyre just lucky they speal english). Other than that i think english-only policy is okay, and isnt that strict (i often use german "Danke" instead of thanks etc).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to necro comment on an older post in this thread from @Changeling about equal outcomes get equal treatment.
 

On 12/6/2023 at 5:52 PM, Changeling said:

A bar of soap applies an instant stun, long enough to apply cuffs, same as attacking someone with a stun baton.

I disagree, it looks like an arbitrary and metagamey distinction to me. A lot of the things you mentioned in your post already lead to confiscation and brigging. Possession of (makeshift) cuffs by non-sec isn't allowed, let alone restraining someone.
 

On 12/6/2023 at 5:52 PM, Changeling said:

Lube foam makes a large area unusable until it is repaired, just like an explosion without victims.

Lube foam, I'm assuming you mean via modular grenades, is usually considered possession of restricted gear and vandalism when used.

I don't feel like a clown/mime slipping people (within reason) is anything more then a harmless prank unless it hinders an arrest for example, which is also already punishable.
 

On 12/6/2023 at 5:52 PM, Changeling said:

Yes, I want soap to be considered a stun weapon as that's the intended use for the item and I don't want to pretend on LRP how that is not the case.

Would this mean security needs to do a shift start department raid on the soap armory, AKA the janitorial closet, like when galoshes were available at the JaniDrobe? Would this mean bananas should be considered Walmart Gatfruits, because eating will grant a (stun)weapon? Should security be allowed to confiscate a musician or bartender's sunglasses because the intended use for the item is flash protection? Should bartenders only be allowed to serve water and soda because alcohol poisons crewmembers? You get the idea.

I think that LRP law addressing behavior purely from a mechanical perspective doesn't feel intuitive and will lessen people's enjoyment of the game.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

"После игры в Dota 2, русские рейдеры на Miros заставляют меня чувствовать себя как дома." - Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On MRP Space Law and SOP get violated without IC nor OOC consequences. For instance I don't think I have ever seen a medical evaluation take place as described in SOP and the door bolting rules gets violated all of the time. Another very common thing is that head revs are often executed without a trial (in addition to the standard metagaming that happens during rev rounds) and security often lets people off the hook for being a non-syndicate. The fact that space law applied equally to everyone should be emphasized.I think that major SOP and Space Law violations should typically be handled from an IC perspective (ie. fax from CentCom) instead of OOC action.

From my read of space law it looks like that mindshields should not be forced onto crew when they are not doing revolutionary activity.

Quote

Shields can be administered to any inmate who has been clearly mind controlled, lost control of themselves, or a suspect charged with unlawful control. Unlike standard implantation you may hold a prisoner until you finish issuing Mind Shields, so long as it's done in a timely fashion. If a suspect refuses cooperate or the implant fails to function they can be charged with Refusal of Mental Shielding.

This is never followed IC and I think is something that should be explicitly mentioned if that is the intent of the above wording.

I mostly agree with what northarndakotas said about flashes however I disagree that sec should mindshield everyone who commits a tier three crime. I think it should be left up to interpretation and be argued about IC in space court. Maybe make it such that people can request a formal hearing before shielding if they have not committed any crimes that warrant a "major punishment"? I also do not think that command should be ordering mindshields without an IC reason. Revs is already metagamed enough as is.

I think that the old PDA searching rules where you can not search PDAs unless you have been told IC that PDAs contain uplinks should be restored for MRP. I found that it was very nice to keep the round interesting if a syndicate gets caught very early on.

Finally I strongly agree with what Loups said... I often am unsure of what I even should be ahelping vs. just letting go. It would be great if we could restore the old culture where such actions would have IC consequences.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 27 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...