LordFowl

Genetics being gone is no more than a temporary byproduct of the code switch. It should be returning along with the new map.

Instead of removing it, rework it so that it just transforms the target into their simple mob counterpart, and increase its cost.

No. Completely waylay the emotive aspect. It adds nothing to the mechanical implementation and serves only to impede it's value. I agree that AIs should be more mobile, and be more involved, and that AI's should be more maintenance heavy. However, instead of creating an entirely new type of AI, why not just add these features to existing AIs?

Souls are a bunch of wish wash mumbo jumbo sentimentalisms devoid of any substance (Because having or not having a soul changes literally nothing in the game, and I really have no idea why the topic of souls comes up so much on these forums) that only make sense in specific contexts that are outside the scope of ss13, our server, and this discussion. That however does not change the other issues brought up, which sum up quite nicely to being: "What is the point of this suggestion?" This suggestion brings up some neat ideas to the table (Increased AI mobility, a more in-depth system of AI maintenance), but I'm afraid it takes on this issues from a rather poor platform in my books. I see absolutely no reason to make a specific AI role tailored for possessing emotion (Something AIs do nowadays anyways), but giving it a specific law to ignore its emotions.

Game mechanics that never accounted for IPCs in the first place is not proof enough to determine IPCs having souls. It would be interesting to see what official lore developments on these is, but to be quite frank I hold the idea of an IPC having a 'soul' to be ridiculous, although having souls at all in science fiction is just invitation to ridiculousness anyways.

A very neat concept, inhibited by the fact that computer's aren't all that common, especially as personal devices. I'd pack this idea into an idea that re-imagines how we use computers. (I'd also include electronic devices such as PDAs)

What are the actual mechanical implementations of this idea? Is it just an AI that can pop out of its core and get a cup of tea when its feeling a bit miffed? I don't see the point of making an AI specifically so it can have emotions. Heck, some AIs nowadays display pretty advanced emotions. Call that bad roleplay or good roleplay, I don't see the point of making an AI specifically to display emotions. I don't see the point of making an AI specifically so it can have emotions, then giving it a law to ignore those emotions. There are a lot of cool things you can change about the AI as it is now, but I don't think officially giving it the capacity to have emotions (Then telling it to ignore those emotions anyways), is particularly high on that list. That being said, enhanced mobility is a neat concept, and increased maintenance is definite yes. Right now the AI is a kind of self-perpetuating device. All it needs is power and then you can safely ignore it. If we added a more robust maintenance system to keep it running, keeping factors like temperature and such in mind, that'd be very cool.

I would assume bodybags would mitigate the effect, and morgue pods would cancel it out entirely. Also, delta, I think you're taking a rather personal stance against this idea. Show us where the Miasma hurt you, let your emotions run free.

The question is not whether NanoTrasen would allow sex change operations, but rather if there is a doctor aboard that knows how to do it. Implementing mechanics for a sex change operation would support the latter, not the former. I see no real reason to prevent the mechanic from being possible. Its a simple enough process and definitely mechanically viable.

Its pretty meta.

One might say that the AI lacks the authority to discern an emergency, only a threat. I would say setting it to code blue would be fine though. To be honest, I was pretty sure they had this feature, you just had to log onto the communications console to do it. Maybe I've just had an epidemic of Heads that forget to log out.

I disagree. Roleplay could very well improve if we add rotting corpses. It installs demonstrable benefit to dealing with corpses in a timely and safe fashion. Currently the only real reason to prioritize the cleaning of corpses is for aesthetic means. If people were so inclined, they could very well leave the scenes of grisly murder in the halls, as sometimes happens.

*Bashes an e-sword against his chest, cuts himself in half*

Anti-Vaurca supremacist groups got hold of a shipment of welding torches. It was slaughter from then on, punctuated by the smell of roasted chitin.

Basing toxic ingestables for each species based off of what their real-life 'counterpart' can't eat is an illogical notion. Most foodstuffs that are toxic for small lizards and felines is only so because they are small. Man-sized lizards and felines would not be affected by the toxins inside cherries, eggplants, and chocolate because the toxins within would be diluted heavily. In fact, most of the shit we humans eat is toxic to us in the very same way it is toxic to smaller animals, but we're large enough to not give a fuck until we're dying of a heart attack or cancer at the age of sixty.

Miasma strikes me more as a feature of Dorf Fortress than that of Lifeweb, but I guess Lifewebbers enjoy their features second-hand. It is not my place to judge the antics of inferior vidya gamers, however. On the more relevant topic, I agree that we probably shouldn't tamper with the atmospheric code to the degree you are suggesting. I doubt any miasmic cloud could reach an intense enough level to not be thoroughly diluted by the station's atmospheric systems. Burdening the already convoluted system for a mechanic of little gain hardly seems cost effective. I also do not condone the idea of food rot, for numerous reasons. Firstly, it would require implementation of constructable freezers, and would require moving any and all items that already start in lockers and crates to said freezers (Unless we want round-start miasmic clouds). This is easily justified by simply stating that NanoTrasen food-stuffs, including those produced by the cookery, are riddled with chemically intrusive and certainly unhealthy preservatives, able to keep a food ration arguably edible for up to one hundred years and through nuclear detonation. The issue of 'mechanic x is unfeasible because it doesn't occur in real life in y amount of unit of time' is ultimately disregardable. Already our codebase is filled with negative and positive modifiers that would not manifest themselves in two days, much less two hours. Hunger is the most prevalent one, but also infections and "necrosis" as we have it. While this would probably not cause people to pay more attention to corpses, I still think its a neat idea.

Let me just quote myself here, then, since we're quoting devilishly handsome and unquestionably influential people: No races are getting removed. Just because you personally dislike race A, and no matter how good your reasoning sounds, it's not getting removed. The simple fact of the matter is that people like the Unathi and the Tajara, and even the Skrell, probably more than any race we'd ever replace them with. Even if that race had literally infinite hand slots.

I think playable mobs with a hand count greater than two is among the more interesting changes possible, because it would significantly change the meta of play, being able to use three or more hands at once. I say we have a creature that instead of having hands manipulates objects with a dynamic orbital pull, meaning that it has mechanically an infinite number of potential hands.

Don't remove any races in favour of this one. The racevault is closed - no more entry allowed. Removing race A just to pander to people who want race B will make people who like race A really quite mad.

You can still only join up to the max cyborg slot limit. So as soon as you get I think 3 cyborgs on station and 1 AI on station AI players and Cyborg players will no longer be able to late-join, and will instead have to rely on posibrains.

In that case, I repeat my sentiment. If we're justifying this foolishness with 'first contact', I say Vaurca should only be allowed to play the most menial of civilian roles, and then we should start focusing on applying 'sensible' limitations to other race's occupation pool.

Severe and extreme restrictions on what a race can play as would: A: Not actually have an effect on IC racism, which is the only notable racism mechanic. If people are alien-loving hippies than restricting races to certain roles won't make other people less of alien-loving hippies. People don't care what the lore says. Your idea that people base their IC knowledge and resultant behaviors on the lore is ridiculous; people base their behaviour of off emotive response. They don't give two shits about the lore or how goddamn beautiful it may be. B: Make playing a race less interesting and opportune. Removing opportunities from a player and giving them nothing in return just to satisfy lore considerations that probably can't even be feasibly satisfied in the first place is a ridiculous notion. If you want a 'more racist' universe, then you need to come to face the fact that the issue is not what races are allowed to do by lore, but what races are allowed to do by players. If you cannot change the player perspective on a race then you cannot, and no amount of mechanical punitive action against a race will change this. If people do not want to be racist they will not be racist, no matter how much you say they should be. In the meantime, you should not be making the game mechanically less enjoyable for players to satisfy your desire for a racist universe. And, while I honestly have no idea why you two are saying the lore can be changed, I'll say this; lore CAN be changed but it should not be done so frivolously as is suggested, and changing Vaurca lore is a suggestion best fit for a different thread.

It's because I took a break from playing. Trust me, when I come back the complaints will resume.

Banning any race from any position based solely off of lore considerations is to me an even bigger no-no. Constricting what a player can play as is not something you should do willy-nilly, and it's not the path that this server has followed in the past. Establishing a new precedent here only opens a can of worms that I am sure people will start enjoying less and less when it becomes more widespread.

The argument that we should remove cult from the game entirely because it doesn't make sense is wrong, because it does make sense. The Cult of Nar'sie is a canonical thing. This is one of the many revisions Jackboot has made to our lore, and I like this one in particular because it allows me to ignore arguments that x doesn't belong because it doesn't make scientific sense. Our universe is no longer designed to be scientific, nor is it strictly forbidden for there to be magical elements. If people are unwilling to cooperate with the chaplain then it is expected that they should have their own plan. If they do not have their own plan, then they are refusing the chaplain in favour of sitting on their thumbs. Altogether however, that is an IC consideration and if people are unwilling to drop their edgy character skepticism then that is their own choice.