Jump to content
DanseMacabre

Prevent on-station characters from being played as off-station antagonists.

Recommended Posts

I am making this thread because of an exchange I recently experienced. https://imgur.com/a/Lc32BnI - Now, the admin in question here is absolutely correct. Apparently, this isn't a rule. However, I feel it should be.

 

This suggestion has been posed once before - However, it was made in excess of two years ago. The guidelines, however, state this: 

Quote

"If a similar suggestion of the same nature has been dismissed in a period of three months, it will be binned."

Therefore, I am interpreting the guidelines in such a way that if a period of more than three months have past, you are allowed to make a similar suggestion of the same nature. This is a suggestion of the same nature.

 

I feel strongly that on-station characters should never, under any circumstances, be played as an off-station antagonist. That is including, but not limited to: heisters, mercenaries, wizards, and ninjas. I feel that to allow people to play their normal, station characters as an antagonist from off the station is a bad idea. There are a few reasons I feel that way, and I'll be outlining them below.

 

  1. It encourages station characters to treat antagonists differently - Station characters have something that off-station antagonists do that - That is to say, they have relationships with the people aboard. I hope I don't have to explain how this might impact the dynamic between a bloodthirsty mercenary group and, for example, John Doe's friends in the supply department. In essence, I feel that it might encourage station characters to help off-station antagonists because, well, their old friend Johnny Doe is with them!
  2. It presents a double-standard in terms of what characters can do - Aurora does not allow players to hop their characters around. A security officer, in my experience, isn't allowed to suddenly jump their character over to being the CMO - This is a good thing, in my mind, as it discourages unrealistic behavior. Your cargo technician isn't going to suddenly become a scientist out of nowhere. However, this standard does not exist for off-station antagonists - How could a janitor suddenly become a ninja? Or a wizard?
  3. It simply doesn't make sense to me - Where, exactly, does the average character find the time to live a double life as an elite mercenary commando? A vicious pirate? A sage wizard? A gimpsuited assassin? How are they able to exist as these two things at once - an employee for NanoTrasen, working on a highly valuable research station, and also a part-time contract killer by trade? On-station antagonists do not suffer this problem - They are not constantly evading the law, living in a mercenary's hideout, and what have you. They're an infiltrator, or a cultist, or something along those lines.
  4. Though it isn't tactful, the previous thread is correct. It does encourage that "clique circlejerk" business.

 

In essence, I don't personally like it. I think, in general, it is poor form. I think it complicates roleplay and makes what could be a situation that makes sense all the more unrealistic. A lot of words to say that, I know. 

Thanks for your consideration, I know this isn't exactly the ideal "Wow, this is my second forums post on Aurora", but I think it needed to be said.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Please, this should have been a rule a long time ago. The only instance this would ever make sense is if a char got fired and resorted to piracy. Everything else is confusing as hell. +1

Share this post


Link to post

What the hell, I thought this was a rule. Well, the only way I could see this being done well is if you made a cool little arc for a dreg leaving the station, then coming back months or years later to pillage it, but that's too much effort so I'm fine for it becoming an official rule now.

Share this post


Link to post

I also believe that this should be a rule for somewhat the same reasons that the initial post has described. It is kinda immersion breaking, and gets worse when it comes to stuff like ninja and wizards.

Share this post


Link to post

The only time I've ever done this it was as a ninja pretending to be my character, and even flipped some of the lettering around. I agree with this, though.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm fine with this being a rule. It would prevent more issues than it causes if it were a clear ruling. Alb pretty much sums up my thoughts. Ninja and Wizard being on-station characters really breaks the immersion when it's some dude you've been working with for 6 months, and oftentimes other off-station antags like heisters or mercs have no reason being on-station characters. Sure we'd lose out on the occasionally well done on-station heister, but I think overall it's a worthwhile compromise. 

Share this post


Link to post

I definitely see the reasoning behind why this sort of thing could be immersion breaking/would require good justification, but having witnessed the round where this just recently happened my only disagreement is that it sparked some really good RP. Having a character you know and worked with suddenly turn out to be colluding with raiders or leading a secret double life as a cyber ninja is dramatic, if a little far fetched and thus contained only to one round that's not canon. In my mind it can actually take a rather basic "raiders invade and steal stuff" premise and turn it into something chock full of interesting RP and character confrontations if a recognizable face is among the group. Plus a turncoat character using their familiarity as an advantage when antagging isn't harmful in my opinion, it would make for memorable role play.

Share this post


Link to post

+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.

Edited by Carver
Remember; you gain no advantage from it if everyone hates your station characters to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post

I swear to god. Fix this or it will be Yahir for every antag. YaWizard.  YaRaider. YaMerc. YaNinja. 

Share this post


Link to post

Ultimately I agree on this but in a slightly different format. We have tons of policies that are enforced that don't exist within the written rule structure. While normally I feel this should be something that applies, I feel that someone doing something special with a gimmick or the like should be allowed to ahelp for an exxception and the playerbase should know that this is doable. This would put such gimmicks in line with things like atmos or engine sabotage, where if you plan to do it in a proper way that does not impede the round but adds to it the admins can give you the okay.

I can understand arguments to the contrary, but it would help mitigate the loss of those types of things that can be done well.

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Xelnagahunter said:

Ultimately I agree on this but in a slightly different format. We have tons of policies that are enforced that don't exist within the written rule structure. While normally I feel this should be something that applies, I feel that someone doing something special with a gimmick or the like should be allowed to ahelp for an exxception and the playerbase should know that this is doable. This would put such gimmicks in line with things like atmos or engine sabotage, where if you plan to do it in a proper way that does not impede the round but adds to it the admins can give you the okay.

I can understand arguments to the contrary, but it would help mitigate the loss of those types of things that can be done well.

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.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah sure.

There can be exceptions if the guy ahelps it and is known to be a good RP'er, though

I dunno, it's been an unspoken rule on the server for so long I didn't even know it wasn't part of the rules

Edited by wowzewow

Share this post


Link to post

I'd agree on room for exceptions. It seems like the sort of thing that needs to be presented with good justification, a "here's why my character would feasibly be working with the antags", along with the planning that goes in early round to decide on an antag gimmick. It'd be a shame to completely bar existing characters from doing this when it can certainly be done well.

Share this post


Link to post

this is one of those situations where I, as the token community contrarian would say something to be the devil's advocate but there's literally no position to even test the value of this suggestion with.

Gonna have to agree, it just seems obvious that "Preston Prestoff, Raider" seems really immersion breaking and hurts others' experiences.

Edited by Scheveningen

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Shenaanigans said:

I'd agree on room for exceptions. It seems like the sort of thing that needs to be presented with good justification, a "here's why my character would feasibly be working with the antags", along with the planning that goes in early round to decide on an antag gimmick. It'd be a shame to completely bar existing characters from doing this when it can certainly be done well.

Essentially this. But the only reasonable exception is raiders, and yknow, the character.

But I can live without this aswell, I think it would cause more harm than good in general.

Share this post


Link to post

I thought it was a rule because of like, didn't Richard Syion or something always make their nuke op char just Richard Syion while also being security on station? It was something like that or they waited until their character was canonically fired by CCIA (then the DO Corps) and I remember them bragging that "Now I can make my character be a nuke op and get my revenge since he doesn't work for the company anymore!" This was many moons ago but it's why I always thought it was a rule.

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, sonicgotnuked said:

While I can see some moments as an acceptation. These could be ahelped

 

Otherwise, I agree.

This is definitely where I stand. Don't make this a blanket no ruling. Make it a default no ruling. If you have a good concept for it, you should be able to plead your case and get it staff-approved.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Nantei said:

This is definitely where I stand. Don't make this a blanket no ruling. Make it a default no ruling. If you have a good concept for it, you should be able to plead your case and get it staff-approved.

heartily agree, i like this idea.

i like the ones where it might be easy to mistake an off-station antag for someone else, but going further than that into "Preston Prestoff, raider," territory is definitely iffy and easy to mishandle.

there was one round in particular, a usual character was a raider, and i didn't even know. i actually thought they were just visitor. well, technically, they were visiting the station, but y'know. 

it's fun and neat when people play with darkest timeline interpretations of their characters; but even then you can at least tell it's not straight up literally the same guy you had a drink with the day before.

long winded reply really just to say: default rule is no, but plead your case first to at LEAST get some good direction on it from an admin to make sure conflict isn't isolated to your own clique and the round is fun for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...