Could we remove cloning?

[Frances]

It seems my argument to change cloning has been revived, but I see a distinct lack of albinos or long-term health benefits to make cloning more spoopy. I've gotten more RP out of it lately with my shaman lizard, who believes that cloning is simply giving the soul of the dead a new body to inhabit. Removing cloning would invalidate his religion, which I feel would be discrimination, and I've already contacted the NAAL. (National Association for the Advancement of Lizards)

As it has been repeated several times, this change does not force cloning outside of the lore, but simply makes it unpopular/no longer commonplace.

---

---

Well, apologise. But I think that idea absolutely stupid from the begining.

My suggestion has not been brought up by lore concerns but by roleplay/OOC ones. It is very difficult to speculate accurately about what will be possible 400 years from now (have we been right about half of the stuff we thought we'd have in the year 2000, back in the 1900s?), so pretty much anything in 2457 could go or not. The way the game works and plays is more important than background lore, and neither saying that cloning would be commonplace or not would be terribly immersion-breaking.

---

---

Are lore arguments invalid? This should be taken into consideration both ICly and OOCly, should it not?

I would like to dismiss lore arguments as much as possible as it is the lore's job to bend to gameplay and roleplay first (lore != roleplay). Whenever someone brings a lore argument in a non-lore thread, it usually leads to several pages of subjective and disorganized arguing which has little to do with the original issue.

 

For those that do want to wait to be cloned. Hence why I said pretty much. You're implying that the antags plans will never work/don't mean anything because the person killed is always revived. Which is false.

I'm confused. You say it doesn't matter because most people don't get cloned, then you say that a few do. What exactly is your point here?

Also, antags have little to do with it because they can always take the head of someone they killed. But it's sorta lame when the only way to effectively kill someone is to cut their head off like everyone is some sort of weird zombie. You can't rely on poisoning, staged accidents, or basically anything that doesn't require robusting in a private room.

 

Come on.. really? You were headmin, you know this isn't true more than anyone.

It is actually the reason why I know we should be talking to people who fail at antagging and explain to them how to antag better, rather than let them run rampant and leave their victims to be cloned.

 

Just wanted to point out, I'm 99% sure it's the psych.

People play the psych so little I forgot it even existed lmao. Anyway, my point still stands that you rarely see geneticists. I'm not going to argue whether it's 1% or 5% of medbay (or any other number) because that's not the most relevant thing.

 

---

---

Also I'll reply to Jamini's post later, as I'm busy and writing up a reply will take a while.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Guest

[PoZe]

My suggestion has not been brought up by lore concerns but by roleplay/OOC ones. It is very difficult to speculate accurately about what will be possible 400 years from now (have we been right about half of the stuff we thought we'd have in the year 2000, back in the 1900s?), so pretty much anything in 2457 could go or not. The way the game works and plays is more important than background lore, and neither saying that cloning would be commonplace or not would be terribly immersion-breaking.

 

If you are confused by the progress then read news: Japan planing to make an orbita Elevator at 2050. In 2014 UK scientis in cybernetics were implanted with first nervous implan that can remotely control electronics and share nervous feeling between humas that has that implant(as his experiment with his Wife), NASA is planing to shot orbital trash with Laser Cannon from International Space Station in 2016, First real holograms are exist. It's a progress and we have made great step for this 15 years from 2000. How do you think will be a progress after 400 years?

[Jamini]

If you made this thread just to look what people thing then it's fine, France. But if you think to remove it seriously I would ask to leave that though. I swear if that will be involved I will quit from Aurora forver, because there is not place for those insane ideas.

 

PoZe and King George (from the server) ups the count of

"I will leave if we remove cloning."

To four players.

Just saying.

[Frances]

PoZe and King George (from the server) ups the count of

"I will leave if we remove cloning."

To four players.

Just saying.

People have been threatening to leave (or openly claimed they were leaving) the server over a flurry of various issues, to such a point that it has begun to be ridiculed by a portion of the playerbase.

If people are opposed to this idea for a valid reason, then they should be able to argue their point with logic, not by throwing a tantrum.

[VoltageHero]

I'm going to try and distance myself from one side or another now, since it's slowly devolving into "ha, you're stupid, I'm right, and we should do (x) with cloning".

I'm sorry to say, but if you're willing to leave the server because of something as trivial as removing a game mechanic, I don't think you're playing here for the right thing. There CAN still be a decent amount of RP without genetics. Stop waving "I'm going to leave if you remove it!" over your head. It doesn't do anything beneficial for either side.

On the other hand, to remove cloning would, (because it IS a game mechanic) cause quite a bit of back-lash, not besides what's seen here. This would have to be a clear cut case of the majority making the decision. Multiple polls would have to go up, and people would have to be SURE what they were voting for. Either way, the two sides in this thread are going to have people upset, due to the outcome of this situation.

Either we're going to have players who believe other's don't value death-RP as much as they should, or players who think they ruined their RP by removing a mechanic.

[nanotoxin]

I'm confused. You say it doesn't matter because most people don't get cloned, then you say that a few do. What exactly is your point here?

 

I'm saying that there are a few people who do go through with the cloning, I'm not saying we need to cater to everyone's needs, but if there is part of the community that utilizes this mechanic, then I don't think it's fair that it's stripped from them.

By the way, I'm not trying to be biased here. I haven't died in maybe two/three weeks (the life of an assistant), but this would be something that changes this server drastically, and I'm just making sure all points are covered.

 

as it is the lore's job to bend to gameplay and roleplay first (lore != roleplay)

 

Have we really never changed anything about game play to match the lore?

[ZipZero]

If you think that not being cloned will make your death more "meaningful", then you can put a Do Not Clone order in your medical records (and don't return to your body in the event that medical "forgets" to look at your records).

Removal of cloning will not make people care more the the deaths of others. People don't generally mourn for the deaths of those they do not know, and making more people stay dead will not change that. In addition, in a lot of rounds, people just do not have the time to show the way they feel about someone's death. It's hard to hold a funeral when a new body is turning up in maintenance every few minutes, people are streaming into medbay with bullet shrapnel and failing organs, and the station is full of holes that have to be fixed. Taking away the ability to come back into the round is not going to make any of this better. In fact, it might make it even worse, when the only people that are able to fix the situation lie rotting in the morgue.

It's true, death is less frequent if you're not running into danger. However, even if your individual chance of dying is small, plenty of people die nearly every round due to factors that were beyond their control. You could be out wiring the solars when carp/drones spawn next to you. You could enter the round only to find out that the arrivals shuttle, or cryogenic storage, were vented, and you die only seconds after joining. Maybe you're just at the wrong place at the wrong time when someone bombs decides to bomb the station. I don't see how these deaths can be "meaningful", or how preventing these people from coming back into the round will further roleplay.

It's generally regarded as a pretty terrible thing to do to prevent someone from being cloned after death, taking them out of the round permanently. If cloning was impossible, killing someone at all would do just that. Not being able to play because some antagonist has an itchy trigger finger is not fun at all. I've seen a fair number of decisions regarding players being killed be done using the argument that people can just be cloned. I don't think it's really a good idea to upset this balance without a suitable replacement.

As I generally play synthetics, cloning does not have a major effect on me. In fact, having no medical side of genetics would make my mapping quite a lot easier. Yet, I feel that a lot of rounds would lose their appeal if people were dead for good, and I've had plenty of good RP regarding cloning. I don't want that to be taken away.

[Frances]

I'm going to try and distance myself from one side or another now, since it's slowly devolving into "ha, you're stupid, I'm right, and we should do (x) with cloning".

I'm sorry to say, but if you're willing to leave the server because of something as trivial as removing a game mechanic, I don't think you're playing here for the right thing. There CAN still be a decent amount of RP without genetics. Stop waving "I'm going to leave if you remove it!" over your head. It doesn't do anything beneficial for either side.

On the other hand, to remove cloning would, (because it IS a game mechanic) cause quite a bit of back-lash, not besides what's seen here. This would have to be a clear cut case of the majority making the decision. Multiple polls would have to go up, and people would have to be SURE what they were voting for. Either way, the two sides in this thread are going to have people upset, due to the outcome of this situation.

Either we're going to have players who believe other's don't value death-RP as much as they should, or players who think they ruined their RP by removing a mechanic.

The last few conversations about cloning/genetics I partook in were far more civil and moderate than this one.

This is a change I would like to see (if merely for the sake of figuring out how it makes the server different, and deciding whether we should stick with it or file it away as a dumb idea), but I must say I am sad to see the upset it seems to have caused.

It's a somewhat minor addition on my end (and on the end of other players that are against cloning, I believe). I don't understand how this proposition can upset people so much, but if it makes people very angry (even if it's relatively few people) then I'm not sure it's really worth bothering.

[PoZe]

I'm sorry to say, but if you're willing to leave the server because of something as trivial as removing a game mechanic, I don't think you're playing here for the right thing.

 

I haven't treat to someone or anything Else. I have just note that there is not point for me to play on this server if it will remove big feature. And as you can see here we are not care if someone leave the server if he wasn't so popular. Yes it's my problem that I want to have cloning, that IS why I am willing to leave the server if that will happenes.

[Guest]

AS a note

This is a very hot topic and you lot are almost at each others necks about it.

I am very against it. I do not need to state my reasons as they have been said by loads of people already.

I do not believe that adding/removing mechanic will make people care about RP or death.

If you remove the respawn timer like you suggested to me on the server, then you will have people who just don't care about it at all.

Offtopic note:

If we were to remove it, I would not be copying the footsteps of another server, I am fed up of hearing, lets make this like Bay/Paradise/tg, we are Aurora.

[nanotoxin]

I apologize if I had come off s trying to get at someone's throat. It wasn't my intention to become hostile with anyone, and I hope it didn't appear that way to anyone.

[Guest]

I've yet to hear a straight-up, not hidden from everyone-else kind of reason as to why we should remove cloning.

Why?

[Frances]

I've yet to hear a straight-up, not hidden from everyone-else kind of reason as to why we should remove cloning.

Why?

I stated a lot of reasons in my OP.

[Guest]

Except those are all roleplay issues that cannot make people give a dimmadammit even if you tried.

[Erik Tiber]

Except those are all roleplay issues that cannot make people give a dimmadammit even if you tried.

You probably could somehow make people more likely to care.

This is, quite obviously, not one of those ways. In a similar way to how the solution to a headache is not amputation.

[Eliot Clef]

To the extent that it matters, the only time deaths have happened around me in-game, I usually haven't had time to slow down and deal with it beyond what is strictly necessary.

This is basically how it goes:

1) Can I get them help? IF Y -> Get help. IF N -> Move on.

2) Do I know them/does my character have attachment? IF Y -> Depends on character, with IAM a vengeful streak is usually the reaction if the person in question was killed by somebody rather than just circumstances. IF N -> Continue as normal.

The only time I've had a character deeply impacted by death was when an execution was authorized against somebody who stole the nuke, and he (Eliot) ended up being the only person on the firing squad because the rest of the firing squad got cut off from the execution site.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

I've decided for a hopefully suitable solution to the cloning and genetics debate, that provides RP and 'weight' to death without forcing it upon the players or gutting a perfectly good mechanic or department.

Cloning itself:

Cloning is guaranteed by Nanotrasen for employees that work in its research stations unless they opt out. It's expensive, but compared to the vast wealth of Nanotrasen, pocket change. The Sol Alliance doesn't commonly clone people because of said cost and moral quandaries of the following:

The first time someone is cloned, no matter how many successive clonings they have, they from a [total loss of brain function / heart attack / to be decided for maximum spoop] and become unclonable exactly [2? / 5? / 10?] years after the first cloning. If we choose 10 years, then when someone dies and is cloned on March 16th, 2450, they will die March 16th 2460. This expiration date extends to all sentient races.

Nobody knows why clones have a[n] [x] year expiration date. Genetics research is partially created to try to unlock the deep secrets of the genomes, discover 'why' there's this deadline, and try to overcome it. In the process they discover the other deep secrets locked inside our genome.

This presents an interesting moral dilemma, spoop, and weight to being cloned without immediately affecting the players. This doesn't change any mechanics, and allows people to decide on their own time (IE when the station stops blowing up) to IC'ly realize that they now know the exact moment that they'll permanently die and become unrecoverable. This makes it even harder to decide if we want to tell clones if they were cloned. Perhaps we can include disclaimers in records, if players wish, denoting if they want to be informed on if they were cloned or not, but that is a separate proposal.

This is deliciously unrelated to the debate, but I think it's a viable alternative to gutting or restricting - it provides opportunities, but not by force. You can go on not caring that you'll die in 5[?] years, and so can anyone else. But when you want to care, you can.

[K0NFL1QT]

Arbitrary expiration date is ick.

[Eliot Clef]

The first time someone is cloned, no matter how many successive clonings they have, they from a [total loss of brain function / heart attack / to be decided for maximum spoop] and become unclonable exactly [2? / 5? / 10?] years after the first cloning. If we choose 10 years, then when someone dies and is cloned on March 16th, 2450, they will die March 16th 2460. This expiration date extends to all sentient races.

 

The first successful cloning of an animal was in 1996. This clone had a shorter-than-average lifespan for a domestic sheep, by about half. Clone mice also tend (but do not always) to have a shorter lifespan than naturally-born mice. The year is 2457. It has been four hundred and sixty one years since the first instance of successful animal cloning, with current research (from what I could find at a cursory investigation) 'only' producing animals that have increased health problems.

We haven't cloned a human yet, but still. This entire idea hinges on a mysterious lack of progress that I don't think is necessary. It's an artificial roadblock that I expect will require retconning of existing backstories for the purposes of, ultimately, cheap drama that will mostly be short-term. Cloning will no longer be used in backstories except by people who want particularly "mortal" characters, which could be established through other avenues or even as a result of poor cloning practices if the "clone who will die relatively soon" story needs to be pursued.

Honestly, I think the powerful backlash present in this thread kind of speaks for itself. Leave cloning alone, please.

[jackfractal]

The year is 2457.

 

While I get where you're going with this, by that metric, none of SS13's technology makes a lick of sense. We have single purpose computers, the size of vending machines, with less functionality then a modern calculator.

In many ways, SS13's technology, aesthetics, and society are a lot closer to that of the 1960's (with a handy helping of magic to make the stuff like the gravity generator and teleporters work) then what technology in 2457 might actually look like.

My personal opinion on the subject of cloning is that it should stay, but the system should be made more interesting. It's both simple and boring right now, both for the clone-er and the clone-ee.

Regardless of if it gets redesigned, I'm of the opinion that clone memory disorder is a really silly idea, that doctors being forced to lie to their patients is a worse idea, and that amputating perfectly functional limbs to replace them with artificial copies of the clone's previous artificial limbs is butchery at best and something closer to a war-crime at worst.

[Frances]

I am getting increasingly swayed by the argument that "death in the SS13 universe isn't very serious by nature".

There are a lot of things in the game that are not very serious. Screaming assistants running around at every turn and getting themselves killed in dumb ways is one of them. Maybe death isn't something we want to force people to be serious about. If they can't take it seriously right now, I feel like it might be for a reason other than cloning. In most cases, the game is too hectic to get people to process a death properly, unless the death was a canon event in extended or something such.

[Erik Tiber]

I've decided for a hopefully suitable solution to the cloning and genetics debate, that provides RP and 'weight' to death without forcing it upon the players or gutting a perfectly good mechanic or department.

Cloning itself:

Cloning is guaranteed by Nanotrasen for employees that work in its research stations unless they opt out. It's expensive, but compared to the vast wealth of Nanotrasen, pocket change. The Sol Alliance doesn't commonly clone people because of said cost and moral quandaries of the following:

The first time someone is cloned, no matter how many successive clonings they have, they from a [total loss of brain function / heart attack / to be decided for maximum spoop] and become unclonable exactly [2? / 5? / 10?] years after the first cloning. If we choose 10 years, then when someone dies and is cloned on March 16th, 2450, they will die March 16th 2460. This expiration date extends to all sentient races.

Nobody knows why clones have a[n] [x] year expiration date. Genetics research is partially created to try to unlock the deep secrets of the genomes, discover 'why' there's this deadline, and try to overcome it. In the process they discover the other deep secrets locked inside our genome.

This presents an interesting moral dilemma, spoop, and weight to being cloned without immediately affecting the players. This doesn't change any mechanics, and allows people to decide on their own time (IE when the station stops blowing up) to IC'ly realize that they now know the exact moment that they'll permanently die and become unrecoverable. This makes it even harder to decide if we want to tell clones if they were cloned. Perhaps we can include disclaimers in records, if players wish, denoting if they want to be informed on if they were cloned or not, but that is a separate proposal.

This is deliciously unrelated to the debate, but I think it's a viable alternative to gutting or restricting - it provides opportunities, but not by force. You can go on not caring that you'll die in 5[?] years, and so can anyone else. But when you want to care, you can.

No, no no no no. It's completely arbitrary. No. Please god no. Just no. There are better alternatives. Far better alternatives. Already, there's the problem presented by the fact that cloning doesn't actually bring someone back to life and it's just a new copy of the old body, while you leave the old brain to rot.

It would be better to make it such that you don't clone brains, just bodies, and you remove old brains from the old body and replace it into a new, cloned body. Bam, there, death is now viable. No need for arbitrary and utterly artificial limits. I can not take such an arbitrary limit seriously, because it could so easily be avoided, and because the limits make no sense. They have an extremely in-depth understanding of biology because they are able to 3d-print a new body. They would know if something were killing the clone. They would understand what was happening. Cloning, as it currently exists, implies an extremely advanced level of tech. Which is part of why I would suggest, you know, making it so you just clone bodies rather than brains, because 'nondestructive upload' tech is so mindblowingly goddamn advanced as presented in-game.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

The year being 2457 means whatever we want it to mean. It's not actually 2457 irl, so arguments about what is realistic for that year are completely bunk.And if every arbitrary or unrealistic aspect of the lore or game was removed, we'd have a gutted game. Plasma wouldn't exist, because it's a made up resource that makes no sense and also it's dumb when you think about it. The basis premise is that we don't like change. Your brain argument is just as arbitrary.

If Warhammer 40k can have genetically engineered Orks use weapons that only work because the Orks believe that they do and it's seen as a perfectly valid and creative lore, we can have some spooky genetic mystery that causes clones to die. Not everything has to be spelled out, that's boring and it serves to explain at rather than encourage debate. The fact there's a disagreement over "We should know what's causing this." proves my point because this would be a great argument to have IC'ly. It gives additional context to cloning, doesn't mechanically change anything, and is an optional reason to care about being cloned, so that it's inclusive and up to players to decide when, if, and how much they care.

[Guest]

Note that the suggestion is calling for a mechanical change/removal of existing game mechanics in order to suit whatever OOC reasoning they have.

Whether or not this effects the lore is neither here nor there. Attempting to justify the OOC with IC schiesse is outright ludicrous in almost every situation.

[Nik]

it's not like we have people who play clones, some of which have been clones for over ten years, and this wouldn't affect anyone because then we'd never see anyone playing clones

Oh wait. We do.

The backlash is depressing, I admit, but I can see both sides being valid. It's not worth the effort to change it, and it's certainly a bad plan to add IC nonsense to make cloning worse.