MO_oNyMan

Detective needs a firearm as a self-defense tool. He deals with potential criminals alone and officers are not always there to babysit you. Now why would a detective need a lethal firearm? Because it adds consequences to his action thus discouraging detectives from using his gun unless the situation really calls for it and at the same time discourages people from messing with the detective making it serve as a deterrant. Giving the detective rubber bullets will encourage more frivolous use of the gun and be less of a deterant for people thinking to get a drop on the investigator. The logic of it makes perfect sense. Detectives using their guns on antags is not really a problem since that's what it's for - to use it in emergency situations. Now the detectives purposfully seeking a shootout is entirely another issue and rather than taking tools from the detective i'd suggest adressing it with more strict enforcement of "detective is an investigator first" policy. By "chalking up" such incidents you encourage this behaviour so don't do that. Stick manslaughter to them, stick murder to them, order them to stay out of the frey when they can. Taking away the gun is too radical of a "fuck it" solution. The anecdote with an assistant getting lit up contributes nothing to the point of removing the revolver. Detective's life was in danger - he responded with tools at hand, perfectly fine. Assistant was killed by his own stupidity. If you want to keep your attackers alive - control your fire or order rubber speedloaders. -1 to the whole thing

if having or not having them makes zero difference why not keep things clean instead of polluting mechanics and lore with redundant features? Either clean it up or change it slightly to make more sense

the point of death needing to be final is where we agreed from the beginning. The difference manifesting in an argument originated from the misconception about that first point where you seem to have thought that me saying "i don't like time and resource consuming revival" means that i support non-time/resource consuming revival which is not really what i meant. What i was trying to say is that the main obstacle on "revival" should be whether you can keep someone alive not whether you can collect enough stuff to bring a guy back whenever. That whole discussionf might also have to do with the fact that i'm currently dying and need to get some sleep since i can't fully understand what i'm trying to say myself

If you can override implant given a good RP reason why do they exist in the first place? Isn't it the way all characters should work? You follow common sense and the desire to keep your job by following NT orders (since NT are your employers) but can go out of the way with the circumstances are just right. LIs are not really needed to follow this guideline. And the position of captain or HoS should naturally be handed out to people who are loyal to NT. People get appointed because they have loyalty, not people are given loyalty because they were appointed. In the current version implant offers basically nothing apart from the ability to magically convert baddies to NT religion so i don't see why wouldn't we either remove it or replace it with mindshield (to protect already loyal personnel from malicious external influence, which would make more sense)

The weight and consequence in this case is losing the character with the inability to play him this round. I don't think we need to further punish death by making players hang out as a ghost for 15+ minutes hoping for someone to gather enough resources for a revival and possibly failing (if the guy gets stopped/prioritises some other dead dude/the power goes out). As for defibs and how they work I guess if we wanted to get technical we could treat a certain period after "death" as crit (in brainmed brain is still alive some time after, for example, your heart has stopped, allowing you to be brought back. Getting over a certain brain damage threshold is what stops you from being defibbed back to life) I disagree with that though. I have 7 characters. With what you are suggesting, I could spend over an hour doing stupid stuff in rapid succession and getting killed, only to move on to the next character. And with a limit of 30 characters? There should be a defining punishment. Maybe if there were a limit of how many characters you COULD play each round, but you get say, 3. Three characters die, then you're done for the round. If a character dies, that CHARACTER is done for the round. Think before you act, and you'll never die. Hell I have died once in like... the last month of playing. I've been injured a few times, but I also don't arm up and fight antags, I run away like a normal person would in these weird scenarios. With a short time of revival you can switch to the other character knowing for sure you're not getting resurrected. With a long one you can spend a stupid amount of time waiting for revival which may or may not ever happen. There's a 20 minute cooldown on respawn currently so on a generic round you can skip through about 6 character trying to die as fast as you can and hanging out in the lobby the entire time. That and the fact that you don't invest into or care about your characters enough to make an effort to preserve them is a sufficient enough punishment

Those are conflicting thoughts in my opinion. For something to have weight to it, it NEEDS to have a chance of failure, a long delay, a punishment for dying as it were. That IS the weight. If you feel like you can be brought back always at any time, there's no weight to death, so knowing that you will have to wait a while for a CHANCE to be brought back... THAT makes death feel more heavy. Frankly I'm of the camp that this is how it should work: Defib takes you out of crit for a while. Like, you go critical, defib removes you from critical for 60 seconds, but also does a little bit of burn damage. This allows for a way to keep people conscious without having to use injections/pills, but at the cost of temporarily hurting them. Now should the victim ALSO be receiving treatment, the burn damage will not be a problem to mitigate, and you can save a life. That's more on par with how defibs really work. Once a person dies, that (to me) should be it. You died? Guess you can come back as a different character for the round, but that guy is DEAD. The Odin (which admittedly lore wise has MUCH more sophisticated equipment, will revive you. Victims of death will be cremated on station to avoid 'clone syndrome', and the 'dna genome' that the Odin has will be used to form the clone. That way you never run the risk of running into your own body. From an OOC standpoint, you CAN always join as another character, so the punishment isn't that you can't play. But if you were working on something as Character A and did something stupid that got you killed, you'll have to try working on that the next round, because now you're Character B, or a pAI, or a mouse, or a myriad of other things ghosts can become. At the end of the day, cloning serves no benefit to a story that is based on high expectations of RP. The weight and consequence in this case is losing the character with the inability to play him this round. I don't think we need to further punish death by making players hang out as a ghost for 15+ minutes hoping for someone to gather enough resources for a revival and possibly failing (if the guy gets stopped/prioritises some other dead dude/the power goes out). As for defibs and how they work I guess if we wanted to get technical we could treat a certain period after "death" as crit (in brainmed brain is still alive some time after, for example, your heart has stopped, allowing you to be brought back. Getting over a certain brain damage threshold is what stops you from being defibbed back to life)

How is or different from cloning? The problem of cloning is not the post-cloning syndrome. It's the lack of weight behind the death itself which is instated by allowing anyone to be brought back at any time. From what i read: Tsao machine is absolutely the same thing, requiring the somewhat intact body remains + some tech and replacing mental issues with physical pain (which is even worse since it takes from psyhologists' plate). And Lazarus Rejuvenator trades the same thing (post cloning syndrome) for the need to gather chemicals and materials (again, taking from psychologists). Both of them leave the concept of cloning (using the old body to revive a guy regardless of how badly he was robusted) unchanged. Defibrilating on the other hand removes the psychological part as well, however it trades it with the fix to the main problem - the lack of consequences to death. Although instead of using the caps of brute damage, i would suggest moving to an already existing and pretty cool system which is brainmed (as was suggested a couple of times before), where death and healing system in general revolves around the brain and its activity. Defib is a cheap and straightforward thing that can still be used to get players back into the round and it makes slightly more sense to have defibs on board of a research station or (hopefully) a trading hub than [insert elaborate technology name] setup. It's pretty weird to have [insert elaborate revival technology name] considering we have specialised medical stations for that (which can lore-wise still have cloning if you want to make it a part of your character). What is even weirder is that fact that every crewmember seems to have a cloning insurance (that i assume should be a pretty costly process) including (oh god, why) visitors Moreover i think that making reviving extremely time/resource-consuming will not benefit the players as they will be stuck as a ghost, unsure of whether someone will get to bringing them back or not and whether something will happen throughout the process that will fuck up their revival and waster their time, while with defibbing on a timer you can be sure to hit that respawn button/accept a pAI pop-up/etc. when you see a medic declare your death and move your body to the morgue. Now this raises the concern of medical doing stupid shit in an attempt to save someone's life before they die "completely" and yes that is likely to happen (they already do it a lot), however a clear policy on such interactions should be able to negate this issue (or at the very least not make it worse). tl;dr Brainmed is the way

Yeah, fuck synthetics. Skrell have this technology for sure, time to share with humanity

If you're going to change the layout to fix the new map's failures at least keep the new map's successes. Switching the lobby and paramedics' staging area back again is a horrible idea

the problem is not as much in the fact that the frame in which spectrometer can be used is too short but rather in the fact that it just doesn't detect anything but direct injections

So what is the problem with mass spectrometers? I'll tell what is the problem. They detect only reagents that were injected directly into the bloodstream. - Most malicious poison injections will most likely wear off before the subject's death rendering mass spectrometer useless - Most common helpful drugs can be detected by a handheld health analyzer for some obscure reason rendering mass spectrometer useless - Some chemicals are applied in pills not injections rendering mass spectrometer useless - Drugs and alcohol intoxication are ingested in 99% of the time making it virtually impossible to detect drug or alcohol abuse (and also rendering mass spectrometer useless) Although this item is issued to medbay and forensics it collects dust since there's no situation it could be applied (in almost a year of playing i don't think i ever saw it being used ever). I was told that this was intended to encourage use of poison by antags which is kind of weird and i don't see antags poisoning crew too much either. So what i'm suggesting is to allow mass spectrometer to detect chemicals not only in the bloodstream but also in respiratory systems and stomach allowing it to serve as sobriety/drug test. How would it be done? I would suggest a system in which chemcals in respiratory system and stomach would transfer to bloodstream with a certain efficiency ratio For example: Dylovene has a metabolsim rate of 0.2u/tick So a dylovene injection will make use of 1 unit of dylovene in 5 seconds, healing 4 points of toxin and giving other benefits But a dylovene pill will use this metabolsim rate to transfer into a blood stream with a ratio of (for example) 0.8. So in one second 0.18 units of dylovene will be transfered from the stomach to the bloodstream and will start to metabolise there in order to benefit the subject, 0,04 units of dylovene will be wasted. Same with chemicals applied via cigarettes. A good idea would also be applying a chemical residue so that chems that wear off would still be detectable although not affecting the subject but that might be a topic for a separate suggestion. This would bring mass spectrometers to life. It's a shame their potential is currently wasted. alternatively just let them detect chems in stomach and respiratory system via a blood teast. It would make slightly less sense but would work just as well

Reporting Personnel: Liam Coulson Rank of Reporting Personnel: Detective Game ID: bTT-cl4l Personnel Involved: - I-AN, CSI (main offender) - Edward Sholl, Warden (secondary offender) - Ikaseo Resskair, Security Officer (secondary offender) - Ali Holmes, CMO (witness) - Faysal Al-Shennawi (witness) Time of Incident: Real time: approx 1730 BST Location of Incident: Forensics Lab, starboard primary hallway Nature of Incident: []Workplace Hazard []Accident/Injury []Destruction of Property [x]Neglect of Duty []Harassment []Assault [x]Misconduct []Other _____ Overview of the Incident: Along the course of the shift i was notified that an engineer died in research maint. I donned a softsuit and went to check on it. Upon locating the body of the engineer, looking around the scene and finding nothing of notice I decided to wrap it up and haul the body to medical for a cloning attempt. While I was handling the body the main offender (CSI I-AN) told me to make sure to give the body to him first and not to medical. I pointed out that the standard procedure dictates that the body should be cloned first before any post-mortem procedures are done. He stated that it's not the case and that the body can be contaminated with prints during cloning which would impede the investigation. This obvious mistake was actively indulged by the secondary offenders officer Resskair and warden Sholl. The situation culminated in the CSI I-AN taking the body off my hands in the middle of a hallway and hauling it off to forensics lab. Not wishing to escalate the conflict on the spot due to the lack of non-lethal tools at hand I tried to contact present heads of staff to adress the issue. The CE was preoccupied, as was the CMO. So upon explaining the issue to the HoP due to the time it took me to prove that the standard procedure indeed dictated to perform a cloning attempt prior to autopsy the main offender went to cryostorage. The HoP then adviced me to file an incident report. Collecting evidence relevant to the issue I asked the CMO to acknowledge the incisions on the dead body of the engineer which he did and so he's listed as a witness. Did you report it to a Head of Department or IAA? If so, who?: Ali Holmes (CMO) and Faysal Al-Shennawi (HoP) were contacted about this incident Actions taken: The main offender cryod before action could be taken and HoP Al-Shennawi adviced me to file an incident report Additional Notes: While it's not imperative for head of personnel, officers or warden to know the standard protocol of death investigations the lack of such knowledge from a crime scene investigator is unacceptable. The main argument of advocates of this mistake is that "cloning can contaminate the body with prints of handling personnel" which is completely irrelevant since lifting a fingerprint off of human skin is a very difficult process and the station lacks the equipment to do so. No exceptional circumstances to justify doing an autopsy prior to cloning were present

Considering every role that can authorise warrants is whitelisted except for the warden (which is a singular slot) makes the absense of all of those not so unrealistic. In fact it's pretty common for a deadshift to have an offcier or a cadet, some scientists and a bunch of civilians. Can the power in absense of command be abused? Yes it can. But so can guns, tasers, flashes and cuffs. We already have means to punish it and they apply in this situation too as clarified in Berry's post. And this is true for the opposite: the lack of security powers in absense of command can be abused by crew. Would it destroy antag rounds? No, i don't think it would. Antags are usually up there in the range of red violations which already warrants security action. Low-level infractions is usually interaction of security with normal crewmembers. And if antag decides to lay low with sneaky yellow infractions, there would be no means to use forensics or interviews to catch him on that, depriving the conflict of one of the opposing forces. Is it defeating of a warrant system to allow officers to conduct searches and arrest in absense of command? Not really since there is no warrant system at that point. It is reinstated whenever anyone who can put warrant system in motion appears and all searches and arrests are reviewed then. Are people using warrants to take action when all they have is suspicion? Sometimes if we're speaking about suscon and search warrants. But as a rule - no. The end result of any investigation is obtaining a warrant. Investigators work off of the acquired information to be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a certain crewmember commited a certain infraction. Evidence can be very solid but there's no immediate danger to the station in that infraction and no officer witnessed it so warrant is still required. Yet it can not be obtained even with concrete evidence because there's noone to sign it off and the prequisites for warantless arrest are not met.

I don't really see the current death consequences as a gameplay problem. - We already have respawn (on a 20 minute timer which is pretty reasonable) - We have some amount of post-death roles (very small amount but they're there) As for how to make death more interesting there was a suggestion to allow ghosts occupy clones (https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=10367) For another concept i think the more IC standpoint on ghost would be interesting to try (lifeweb-esque)

They can?

The initial version of my draft was called Impersonation and covered posing as another person in general. However the nature of IPCs and tagging is rather specific and their social status is different from the status of other species. So i ditched the general regulation in favour of regulation covering synthetics specifically to reflect the unique nature of the issue and booted it up to red infraction to reflect the lower status of IPCs and also warrant HuT. It is reasonable for NT to HuT stray IPCs to pass them to Biesel law enforcement however the same punishment for a guy who stole an ID and wore it with a mask seems a bit excessive to me. Also can someone elaborate on as to why aren't non-shells tagged in our code?

So, we know that security needs a warrant to search or arrest someone on code green (unless they witnessed the infraction themselves). Warrants can be issued by either captain (or acting captain), head of security, warden or IAA. If the code is raised to blue or red security can bypass the need for warrants. The code can be raised by command staff. So what is security supposed to do when there's no command staff or warden aboard the station? Let's consult the official sources and So that's all security has to work with without command. Do your best and act if there's immediate danger. However that means that petty crime (all yellow infractions and some amber infractions) goes completely unpunished and there's nothing that can be done about it since it doesn't pose immediate danger to the crew or the station. Crewmembers can harbor criminals and refuse to comply with searches and would technically be in the right (if there's no immediate harm coming out of it). This also renders investigators pretty much useless since the results they come up with and that would normally be used to obtain a warrant are moot since there's noone to sign off on that warrant. All in all it seems very much like a gaping hole in NT security protocols. Considering all of the above i would suggest to do the following: allow security officers to use their own discretion when conducting arrests and/or searches in the absense of command staff/warden/IAA. All searches and arreast are subject to immediate review by the command members/warden/IAA should they arrive or CCIA if no command arrives and the crewmembr still feels he has been wronged with resulting punishment for illegal detainment/illegal search/neglect of duty applied if an arrest or search is deemed invalid.

I was looking all around forums for any information on legal status of tagged and untagged IPCs in Biesel. There's really very little. Lore devs will have to step in and clarify it all but it's all very customisable and the final version may differ. As for tag removal, i know it's possible to do in round without effectively killing yourself especially if you have someone helping you and i know that once you remove the tag you can then spawn without it if certain conditions are met. Or at least so shell players told me

The premise is the same as the premise of most of other ss13 servers. The lore is different. Our universe is different from other universes, our species' lore is different from other servers' lore. Even such trivial and omnipresent things like ERT are reworked and tailored to suit our universe. General idea of what the guy looks like =/= lore. "Skrell don't like synthetics because their race was enslaved for about 2 centuries by a rogue AI which they themselves invented since they're an advanced race. The species as a whole are defined by that nowadays. You can read and learn about it on wiki." That's lore. "This guy is a wizard just like medieval wizards and stuff. It's not written anywhere but you guys get the idea." That's not lore. Why do we call it wizard? Because he has magical powers that can't be explained by science. That's pretty much it. The fact that one of the images of wizards that we have IRL includes wearing pointy hats and carrying staves does not automatically mean that wizards in any other fictional universe adopt that.

I think it's rather important for our day to day station life to reflect the lore of our universe. Namely there's a topic i would like to adress which is Biesel laws regarding IPCs. Due to tention between organics and IPCs all shells are required to wear a tag which distinctly designates them as an IPC. Not wearing a tag or attempting to remove it is a serious crime and is punished by Biesel law. Yet it is not reflected in any way in Aurora's regulations. If security happens to stumble upon a tagless shell they can't really do anything with it. Not wearing a tag is not covered by any regulation we currently have so all we can do to fight the synthetic threat is to report it to a head of staff and ask him to do something. And the head of staff can say "fuck it" effectively commiting a crime. So that's basically a big "fuck you" from NT to Biesel which feels pretty weird considering the regulations themselves are mostly rules that Biesel makes NT enforce on their stations. To fix this i'm suggestion to implement a new regulation reflecting this side of Biesel laws. i310 - Impersonation of Organic Species This regulation has multiple benefits including allowing investigators to get busy on quiet shifts by looking for a stray tagless shell bladerunner style (your empty records are finally going to bite you in the ass) and more immersive regulations reflecting current universe lore. The relevancy of this regulation will increase with that cool suggestion about a new IPC model being implemented (see https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=10816) as identifying a tagless shell will become difficult as ever resulting in a spike of paranoia and requiring actual effort to identify a shell (as opposed to passing by with a handheld health analyzer).

Gameplay-wise sure we can adapt to a questionable wording and assume that fraud in terms of regulations means getting money illegally. However the confusion of its wording unnecessarily creates a bump on the curve of understanding regulations (which both seasoned officers and newcomers already have some troubles with). So cleaning up the regs and making them as intuitive as possible would benefit the crew in terms of shortening the integration time into security operations and decreasing the leeway that can be used to argue about the wording and intended meaning of the regulation.

It should be like this but it's not. Description of Fraud indicates that pretty clearly by using the word "steal" along with "use deliberate deception to obtain" and suggesting to switch the charge for theft when it comes to stealing items not money. That being said I wouldn't be opposed to changing the wording of Fraud to indicate that it's used to punish only cases of tricking someone into giving you something (be it money or items) but I think that having a separate regulation for it is somewhat excessive and covering it with theft is a beter option.

Quiet some time ago there was an update on regulations introducing a new reg called Fraud. Which basically covered the theft of money. The exact wording of Fraud, Grand Theft and Petty Theft can be found in the spoilers below i220 - Fraud i102 - Petty Theft i215 - Grand Theft There are several problems with this regulation. First of all i think i haven't seen it applied once since its implementation. Besides that, the sudden distinction between credits and items of equivalent worth, the fact there is no such distinction for yellow infractions and the meaning of the words "fraud" and "theft" (fraud generally means tricking someone into giving you something. Including regular theft in it and making it only applicable to money is weird and disorienting) makes it overall confusing. And finally the regulation that doesn't serve its purpose just crowds the list of regs which is a bad thing. I don't really understand why the regulation was implemented in the first place (i can see a couple of reasons but for none of them implementation of Fraud as a separate regulation is the optimal solution). So I would suggest getting rid of i220 merging it with Petty Theft and Grand Theft for the sake of clarity and simplicity. Here's an updated version of i102 and i215 (presuming i220 is removed) i102 - Petty Theft i215 - Grand Theft

the wizard mode is almost as old as ss13 itself. Changing the clothes of the antag does not affect its nature in the slightest I very much hope that we don't patch the holes in our lore with the lore of servers we branch our code from. If it's really so than we shouldn't, the concept of it is plain bad. The suggestion is not to remove the wizard's clothes but to let it change. If it's a wizard why wouldn't he be able to change the looks of his clothes. That's doesn't mean they should wear goofy clothes all the time There is no lore on wizards. Noone knows they exist, noone ever met them, noone is familiar with their powers or how they get them, their lore doesn't get updated. Literally all we know about wizards is that it's a guy that can do stuff. Their quote on quote "lore" is non-existant and almost every single thing in it is explained by "well, he's a wizard so it's magic". I understand the sentiment over the throwing out the wizard's garb as it's iconic to the ss13 culture. But so was the clown. If you want to move forward and allow for better stories and interactions, giving wizards more flexibility in their gimmicks is the way to go

what radical lore changes are you talking about? There's nothing in our current lore about the wizard federation and what it is apart from "they must be existing some place far away". Changing the wizard's attire will have zero impact on our lore Antags are supposed to create interesting stories and interactions. And for that they need to have a certain amount of flexibility (that's why we don't have set antag goals i presume). The wizard concept by itself is outdated. It's not healthy practice to limit wizard antags with "you're the magic guy coming from a wizard federation" setup. Instead the only limit placed on wizard antags should ideally be "you're a guy with unexplained powers" letting people come up with stories and gimmicks based on it on their own, which would make it interesting for both antag players and crew. So yeah, i don't think an obligation to wear goofy clothes at all times benefits the game mode. There are loads of types of wizards (ranging from Merlin-esque old-fashioned traditional wizards to mysterious strangers like in booth at the end). If people want to step away from generic wizard image and try something new and interesting - more power to them +1 to the suggestion