Skull132

I would be cautious with this train of thought. First off, let it be know that I completely hate the rule quoted above. Second, if the antagonist has to put his own enjoyment of the game wayside for the sake of others, then so should everyone else. If this understanding is not respected, you will end with (one could argue that some have already tossed in their bag with this!) the antagonists not playing antagonists anymore, and the game becoming highschool simulator 2458. The general idea with using this loophole is: if the antag's being an arse and doing stupid ass shit, and you can use it, then sure. But if he's actually trying, then maybe help him and go along with it? Otherwise, it's just another case of an antagonist who's legitimately trying being quickly hunted down by sec, and then probably not touching the role again. Oh, and do try to remember this: you willingly picked a role which is subject to such shenaniganry. If you do not like the idea of laws forcing you to do shit you don't like, then don't play cyborg/AI.

OS and background systems (the SQL server). Game updates do not require the machine, or even dreamdaemon, restart. You can thank the TGstation's host for the tricks required to make that possible.

Relying on his now-waning stoneskin spell, Ervas would try to take control of the assailant's dagger with his gloved off-hand, while attempting to plung his sword into the nord's chest.

It's not a bug. Allow me to explain the code. First, you are right in saying that there is no check in bonegel code to see if the bone is actually broken or not. There doesn't really need to be, you should be aware of the patient's status. Instead, the check for whether or not bonegel can be used is this: affected.open >= 2 && affected.stage == 0 This will return a boolean value (True or False). True is returned if the target limb "affected" is cut open enough, at stage 2 or higher, and if the target limb "affected" is at the right surgery stage, 0. False otherwise. Ergo, it only checks whether or not you have access to the bone in order to apply the gel, which makes sense. EDIT: and no, you shouldn't be alerted whether or not you're gelling a broken or not broken bone. Fractures and breaks are not super easy to spot, even when you're hand deep in flesh. If you're not paying attention to what the shit you're doing, then you should be punished for it. There is also a very stupid silly easy way to actually figure out if someone's bone is broken/fractured/whatever that works instantly, and is accessible to any medical doctor. Use it. Second, and this apparently is what you consider bugged. if (affected.status & ORGAN_BROKEN) user.visible_message("\blue [user] sets the bone in [target]'s [affected.display_name] in place with \the [tool].", \ "\blue You set the bone in [target]'s [affected.display_name] in place with \the [tool].") affected.stage = 2 else user.visible_message("\blue [user] sets the bone in [target]'s [affected.display_name]\red in the WRONG place with \the [tool].", \ "\blue You set the bone in [target]'s [affected.display_name]\red in the WRONG place with \the [tool].") affected.fracture() Allow me to condense this into English. If the targeted bone (called affected) is broken, we execute the first condition and fix the bone by setting it. We also escalate to op stage 2, etcetera. Now, the else condition: if the targeted bone (called affected) is not broken, we execute the else condition and break it. This is because you cannot "set" a good bone, you will break it. So, what most likely happened: your plan was to execute three cycles of "gel, set, gel". After successfully executing two cycles, the bone was either completely healed, or healed to the point where the first "gel" of the third "gel, set, gel" cycle fixed it fully. At this point, your third attempt to set it simply broke the bone. You weren't paying attention, and that's what happened.

It is slowly starting to dawn on Ervas that this may not have been the best of ideas. His head quickly turns to allow his gaze to alternate between the three foes. After a short moment of thought, he drains his fire ball scroll and tosses the hot ball of flames at the leader-looking figure, hoping to scare him off by lighting his clothes on fire.

Without hesitation, Ervas would cast the spell he had conjured up. Finding himself a little too close to unsheathe his sword, he would take a step back, arm himself, and then lunge at the closest nord, attempting to stab him.

During the exchange, Ervas would try to discreetly tap a scroll of stoneskin and prepare it for casting. "You can find those three hundred drakes elsewhere, nords," he says, the spell prepared for casting in his sword hand, which is still rested on his abdomen. Ervas then adds: "A local Breton can help out with that. The s'wit is around here, somewhere."

The fact that there are delaminations doesn't mean that the rule is not enforced. Not only can delaminations be the result of accidents/non-antag circumstance (at which point, we won't really stop it), but if you adminhelp it, and we deem it to be good RP for you to sabotage the engine, we'll grant you permission.

As it stands, the only thing lacking from current rev to make it mutiny are the directives. I honestly would not mind bringing back the directives as a mechanic, however.

Meta-reference: Ervas mulls for a moment, thinking. "What is the debt?" he asks, before adding on another question: "and is it just?" He looks past the Nords, at the Dunmer, as if expecting him to answer the last question.

If you're using NVidia, then I heard that one of their latest drivers had really bad issues. But there's a beta version to fix it. You'd have to google to find exactly which version was sour. As far as the issues themselves, I honestly haven't got a clue. Your card may also be pepsi. If you've ruled out software issues, then yanking out your present video card and using a temporary replacement would be the next step in troubleshooting it.

All the while there exist a dozen or more cases where LOOC has been used to perpetuate a metagrudge. Simplest reference case: Plahunter.

Ya, support. Because forum butts: it'll be done at some point.

Also, now that it's not 3 AM, some insight as to why we're swapping out for continuous recruitment as opposed to doing cycles. The first point is to address the large amount of applicants that get binned purely because they applied at a point where we had already gotten the desired amount of new moderators. With cyclical recruitment, there is always the expectation for the cycle to end, and a limited timeframe. It has been a consistent issue where we simply cannot tend to all applications in that amount of time, so we have to hedge our bets on cherry picking. This, obviously, is not the most ideal way to manage it, specially considering that we have also been relatively withdrawn in actually putting what I described as a reason for denying applications. With continuous applications, once we're past the initial wave, we won't have to tend to a massive cluster of applications and can, instead, roll with a (hopefully) semi-regular stream of them and thus give everyone a fair amount of attention. We're also hoping that this will make the process a little more relaxed for all sides. While it removes the driving motivator of, "If I don't apply now, I might have to wait 3 more months before the next chance," it'll also remove the same thing as a barrier. You can apply whenever you feel ready for it, and can talk to mods and admins about it whenever and get tended to, on that count. It will also make dealing with applications a less of an all-consuming task for current mods and admins, as we don't expect to have literal bucketfuls of them past the initial opening wave. (Though, please do try to prove me wrong on that count; it would be a pleasant surprise.) So yah, those are our main reasons for this swap.

UM, here's my question. How does not showing the ckey actually affect your ability to talk to the other player? I can sort of see the argument of, "I dunno who they are, they might be abusing the character name," slightly, but I will argue back that it is a fear that's "out there". Our community might be full of arseholes, but I don't think anyone is enough of a butt to pretend to be someone else. Plus, for that strategy of fuckery to work, you'd need to actually talk to someone who knows the character you're pretending to be, at which point, checking up on it is easier. Basically, I am confident in that the initial fear presented is not exactly tangible. As for actually whether or not we want to display ckeys in LOOC, after thinking on it, I'm inclined to agree with players who are against it. I don't necessarily want folks to know who my characters are, I am perfectly fine with them being unknowns. Ya, I could stealthmin, but on deadhour I'd still like to be visible on the staffwho page. It is very neat to know that just your character name is displayed, at least from my perspective. This discussion seems to come down to two sides: folks who have a reason or a want to hide their ckeys over LOOC for whatever reason (all reasons presented in this thread thus far have been relatively legitimate, even the most simple of: I just want to play and not worry about potential metagrudging.); folks who have no such reason, and just want to know who the fuck they're talking to. My question is, what other benefits are there to displaying the ckey, outside of the very edge case of, "He might pretend to be someone else"? Oh, and any argument of player vigilance or whatever the hell is invalid. It is not the player's job to adjust their IC behaviour based on whose ckey shows up on LOOC, and because this mindset is displayed here, I'm actually even more inclined to just let it stay as is.

"He is my kin," Ervas replies, now shifting his gaze to focus on the Nord facing him. "It is my business, brute." He looks around the tavern for a moment, attempting to gauge how many people are around and paying attention to the scene.

Well, this is interesting. I'm not seeing any bans from your account on the database. What other ckeys have you been using?

((Apologies about the absence, parties are hard ;-; )) Upon hearing of the plan to go trudging around the sewers, Ervas would shift his attention to the already brewing pot of trouble. He walks up to the three Nords and lone Dunmer, his hand pulling back the traveller's cloak to reveal a bandoleer equipped with 5 scrolls going across his chest. "What's the matter?" he asks, looking past the Nord and focusing on the Dunmer is distress.

Okay, as per a discussion had with the moderators and admins today, we are no longer doing cyclical recruitment of moderators. The recruitment of moderators will be continuous, which means the board will now only be closed whenever we literally have too many mods. Which is never! Anyways. Same deal as before. Read the prerequisites. Read them, understand them, yadda. Then, go and make an application on the boards here! As always, if you have any questions, feel free to post them or ask them from staff either ingame or out of game!

I'll go over your notes and make sure there's nothing else there. If it all checks out, I'll lift it.

It is porn. It's basically a fancier singularity engine. A giant ball of electricity instead of a black hole. I'm curious as to how many folks actually want it, as, despite the jump in catastrophe count while people were learning it, the SM received a good share of praise for actually being engaging.

Generally speaking, with the shenanigans that have kicked up around the Unathi ambassador in specific, some heightened form of security should be set up around them. Whether it be by an escort selected from the station's redshirts or an actual ERT officer I don't really care. I do believe the rest is pleasantly governed by the doctrine Gollee and Kekboot wrote up in the heads of staff area.

It's an easy enough change. Do you folks want it or not? At this point, what's also the opinion on how deadchat and its obfuscation/not-obfuscation of ckeys works?

Initial complaint read and acknowledged, the discussion ensuing not read. I'll get around to reading through everything once time permits, probably over the course of the next 3 days. Until such a time, please see if you are able to resolve this amongst yourselves, and in a civil manner.

Into command bar, type this: "remov", press spacebar, press enter. It should automatically finish it as "remove-id". If it doesn't, then add two more key presses between pressing spacebar and pressing enter. This will eject the ID form your PDA, as long as your PDA is not contained in your ruck/satchel/whatever. The PDA doesn't even have to be on your person, it can be on the ground as well. Once you're done with your ID, just click the PDA again and voila.