Carver

Are you telling me they nerfed hiding the ID under donuts? Goddamnit.

Unfortunately, this is how it has been and likely will always be.

As I've noted in previous applications of his: he's an adept writer who creates varied and interesting characters/stories. Not only that, but he's improved upon my previous criticisms commented in his Command whitelist application. Creative, accepts criticism, always pleasant to play with. +1

No sweater-vest variant?

Could simply require that, if using an on-station name, it has to be incorporated into their greater plan. Whilst forbidding those who simply throw their names on for giggles/laziness.

I'm not against this, as in the end it may encourage other people to try antag roles. Solves itself quite cleanly and reduces the repetition/annoyance of 'X is always an antag'.

Near-every off-station antag gets a free Agent ID. They still steal the spare anyways. Even with how trivial it is to also just make a new ID with the spare, you still see on-station antags stealing it anyways. Disagree on the sole basis of the Captain-level access being more or less required to do interesting things with the comms console. If said console was made easier to unlock all functions on (mostly for antags who want to e-mag it to contact the syndicate, partially for command who may also want to use said console's extra features), then I'd say 'sure why not'.

I stand by that the correct solution will always be "never let someone roll antag two rounds in a row, and especially not in the same round (on different characters)". Would overall solve most 'Officer Doe is always an antag' problems.

The only time I encountered one of these I thought it was some antag's half-assed bombing attempt. A very strange feature overall.

I'm not sure how this solves the gank issue but I suppose it's an 'objective improvement' from the current version of parapens.

Unique, and generally more professional than the old one. I like it, still would like the red suit to remain in a locker as an alternative perhaps (though I suppose it will survive through the loadout anyways).

Red to match the old suit, and have the sweater instead be an alternate option rather than the default for librarians who wish to look more formal.

Anyone who dies fast with the equipment available to that antag type is terrible, especially seeing as traitors operate solo with less equipment and generally worse options. I'm not for or against this, but I'm interested in seeing how the discussion goes.

My point remains. Let it be hackable with semi-common tools for those who seek illicit access.

The librarian matches the gardeners. Not sure that's a good thing.

I quite like this counter-suggestion. Exceptions can be interesting if done well, better not to rule them out entirely so much as keep it from being a common occurrence.

+1. I remember I used to do this 6 years ago when I was a far less experienced writer, and I don't look back on those memories without cringing a slight. Though it did once allow for an interesting set-up of pretending to be kidnapped, it's rare to see anyone utilize it creatively like that. If it's abused, then it's time for it to go.

In a strange way, this makes me want more jewelry. Can I make a crown of gold and set one of these stones into it? Will they have a function beyond selling, and hopefully a function that doesn't involve research (since mining and research are already too closely tied imo)?

I'd say the lore's fine, divisiveness makes for an excellent starter to any sort of antagonistic story, people just need to instead learn how to be a bit more self-serving in a clever way. Betraying the other side constantly in deals is, amusingly, not this, seeing as it often just results in more damages/deaths on your own side. Encourage people instead to cut more deals with antags, to accept bribes and be overall more corrupt and personally antagonistic. Then perhaps we might see more co-ordination between crew and antagonists, as well as less binary 'my side v. your side' forms of betrayal.

In regard to Christian relics/items, I'd say they can have multiple options depending on their denomination/sect. There's no reason to only give them a singular choice in that regard. Snake's suggestion was neat enough that I'd see it fitting even as just one of said options.

And I complained when the Captain got a fucking fox of all things too, as it's not thematic and just seemed downright inappropriate and nonsensical. 'Cute' is not an excuse for adding a departmental pet, I.M.O. As I said earlier, if the RD should get anything, let it be a lab rat.

From what I recall, you have 5 per cultist at the most (this was far less when converts didn't get a free paper). Unlimited only if an artificer is produced. The main purpose, is presenting a way for the sacrifice rune to not entirely take someone out of the round, as regardless of whether this suggestion goes through it will likely continue to see use by people (despite merely being a vestigial mechanic of Cult having objectives to sacrifice specific crew). This suggestion is predominantly for the scenario of if it's not removed, giving it a genuine value beyond permanently killing someone for no particular benefit.

As per the title: An idle thought and band-aid solution, but I couldn't think of anything else to give said rune actual purpose beyond permanently killing people (that isn't already covered by other, existing runes).

Because remove label didn't exist when it was removed, and not for quite some time after it was removed.

The same 'you' that you used, a generalized 'person in said situation'.