Jump to content

Antagonism, and the state of antags


w3bster

Recommended Posts

Disclaimer : This thread is not to whine about specific players or situations, but rather a general ongoing thread which many generally complained about. Should you wish to discuss and share examples of situations, please do not do so in a matter that targets certain players or staff. There is complaint forums for that. This thread is to discuss the state of antagonists and the general displease many see.


First up, let me open this thread with two situational examples that i have experienced, in order to put context to what i wish to discuss


Example No. 1


A few days ago, the game mode was Malfunctioning AI, in which i was in fact the AI.

I had a few cyborgs, of whom i did not want to involve immediately as i had plans in mind.

My overall plan was to, as per relevance to malf AI laws, make up a bio hazard threat that Central Command would of warned me through secure channels.

I prepared myself as to people questioning why Central Command would tell me instead of command via faxes and command reports by making up the fact that the biohazard was still of unknown nature, and wished to keep it hush-hush and off-the-records, hence communicating via the AI through encrypted channels. Generating no proof of communications but the logging servers at the Tcommsat.


At least, so was my plan. As i began putting it in motion, the Research Director seemingly entirely ignored my biohazard warnings, and directly told me that he did not really care. Instead of playing along, they immediately faxed Central Command requesting if they did in fact tell me of such. Which obviously, they replied with "We did not tell the AI such things. please verify it's laws.". I tried playing it off by saying that they probably wanted it to be kept out of the records. Even told the crew that the Tcommsat was now restricted to duty officers and up. the Research Director kept ignoring this, and continually harassed me to verify my laws and completely ignore the potential bio hazardous situation i attempted developing. They insisted on prioritizing my laws. Upon my numerous refusals, they announced with their announcement console that i was rogue. My cyborgs, whom i did not order anything since the beginning and were simply going on with their tasks as if they were non-malf, were immediately locked down and blown up. At that point, i had to go the usual full-hostile mode. I played it off as if Central had sent a "contract termination squad" for completely ignoring my biohazard threat and the RD announcing it over public comms. The crew obviously ignored that and had the "AI is malf, ignore everything it says, it's bullshit" mindset.



Knowledge of the antagonists and Syndicate Items is restricted.

We expect players to allow traitors some leeway and as such have a list here of who and what can be recgonized and by who. We expect players to not powergame and give the antagonists a little leeway to get away with things.



As the crew was preparing to rush me. Engineering was already outside of my core, melting my walls and breaking in. Once they completed that, they announced over the radios "security, the back of the AI's open, go". I kept escalating conflict, yet kept attempting to go with my biohazard situation. Told them that they still had the chance to beg Nanotrasen for forgiveness or become an independent station. I delayed Delta as much as i could, and ended up even disabling my core turrets, hoping i could struck some dialogue with those that would attempt disabling me. That did not happen. Security rushed my core, disabled my APC and whacked me to death. Typical end to a malf AI scenario.



Generally, avoid playing hero.

There are certain opportunities every character can seize to overthrow an antagonist, but going rambo on syndicate ops as a frail, unarmed medical doctor constitutes a failure to roleplay and will likely end with you getting shot. Also, if you are unarmed, and being held at gunpoint, it is generally expected for you to comply with your captor, or risk suffering the consequences.



Example No. 2


Just yesterday, the game mode was Cultist. There was an unbelievable lack of security personnel. Early in the shift, three staff members were found drawing weird runes in Hydro. As security was send to investigate, they were let off after a bit of harassment. Then an officer followed them and saw them writing one in a public area of the station, hence witness to them actually drawing a glowing rune with their own blood. So they were brought in the brig. I, the Warden, personally took care of the case. The officers had stunned them and dragged them to the brig in cuffs, locked them in chairs. I told officers to disperse, and dealt with them personally. I was told by the Captain to confiscate the tomes and runic papers they had on them and was told to force a psychological evaluation on the one that drew the rune. I dismissed the captain and began speaking with them. I made sure to be extra nice, apologized for our department's rude behavior, let them regain their tomes and papers, let them with a warning to keep religious stuff to themselves, not to vandalize public station areas with their religious stuff, told them that they'd get no brig time due to their mistreatment, apologized again and let them on their way. OOCly, i told myself that it would be pretty shit to confiscate their stuff and would halt any role play they could attempt to put with their antag roles. So i thought i did the good thing, both ICly and OOCly by letting them off without confiscating anything.


Skip forward in the shift. The only security forces left are me, the warden, a Forensics tech, and an officer. The officer begged for help, stuttering on the main radio. apparently they were assaulted with a big knife in the holodeck and were in a critical state. They were sent off to medical to be treated, leaving me and the forensics tech. I tell the tech to investigate the scene. to which they do. it doesn't turn up more information, so our only lead in the assault is the officer who could give an account. Henceforth, i take a break from the brig and head to medical after 15-20 minutes of them being there, willing to check on their state. The officer was just released from surgery yet lacked blood. So two people, geneticist and a doc if i remember correctly, ran off with her deeper in medical. After 5-10 minutes, i ask the surgeon where is the officer, and that they are taking time. Surgeon starts looking for the officer and docs which fail to answer on the medical radio, with me to accompany them. We end up stumbling in them in the surgery storage, with the officer on the ground, naked, the two other perps besides them, the officer stuttering for help once again. I immediatly whip out a stun gun, shoot one once. The other rushes at me, disarms me of my gun, empties it in me. It takes another surgeon to come, drag me off, shake me up so i can neutralize them. I get cuffs on them, i order the cyborg and forensics to take them off to the brig whilst i keep guard of the hurt officer. the Forensics, which is in processing with the two suspects, asks i come as he cannot process them. I end up going there. Only to find the cyborg harm batonning the cuffed Forensics tech. By this point, it's obvious the cyborg is not working correctly. He locks and electrocutes the door. I end up bashing the window open, only for the cyborg with their cyborg powers to overtake and cuff me. It is at that point that the two perps get uncuffed from the cyborg, draw me and the forensics in the corridor, only to harm baton us into a critical status, draw runes under us, and tell us this only phrase. This one and only phrase. The only one they ever say, their only attempt at roleplay.


"Convert or die".


At this point, i just cannot anymore. One of those dudes, the one that said "Convert or die", was one of the same i released earlier. the same i apologized to. the same i let go. I lose it. I ghost instantly and begin ranting in deadchat. I am just mad at that point. Really mad. There is no way this is proper role play. I adminhelp in my fit of rage, calling gank. Which is ruled out. So they're scott free, nothing is done against them. Whilst ghosting around, i and many others look in disgust as they rush the armory, arm themselves up, take guns and equipment and basically turn the station in a death match. a blood bad. other non-cultist people also manage to get lethal guns, and a real clusterfuck of a deathmatch ensues. With staff overwhelmed with Ahelps i am sure. Cultists end up with half of them dead, or critical. shit went wild. Round ended with bitterness in a lot of people's mouths. Deadchat appalled at the situation.



The primary goal of antangonists is to CONTRIBUTE TO OTHERS' ENJOYMENT.

Be creative when coming up with objectives, and try to do things which will be fun for others, not only yourself.



The issue at hand


After that round, people began discussing in OOC and deadchat. What is wrong with the server? Those are not isolated incidents at all. May it be Nuke Ops, changelings, cultists, traitors.. Many rounds end with a party playing only for their own enjoyment. Ending up in a lot of bitterness. It was agreed that it was not only due to the players themselves, but something has it so everyone ends up with such behavior. somewhere, people took this mindset. As crew, people will attempt to foil the antags at all costs, within the stretched limits of the rules. As antags, people end up in most of the cases going full "shit", ignoring roleplay boundaries, killing others relentlessly or mindlessly, completely voiding their roles and careers and characters, on the grounds of "being this antag allows me, this is non-cannon!". "I can do this as cultist. Cult basically is brainwashing and turns me in this bloodthirsty monster!". "I'm an extra-terrestial being that lives by feeding off DNA. so i can do that without remorse!".


What makes people think like that? What makes it so people play in a matter that incites major negativity in the community and renders even observers angry?

Some speculated it may be related with the removal of Antagonist objectives, where people simply do not know what to do, so they resort to doing the very basic of the antagonist and going wild.


What do you believe can be done to resolve this situation?

What are your thoughts on this situation?*



*Note : If you plan on replying with "pfft people are drama queens" or "people over exaggerate things" or general shitposting, please refrain. I want this thread to be constructive opinions and discussion. Not a thread where people write empty rants and nothing is done. Thank you.

Link to comment

I thought your plan for the malf round was very clever, though to be honest it wasn't engineering that went for you first it was security. Engineering deployed to save the heads and sec officers that were trapped in your upload area (from what I saw)


up until that point, myself and the chief were in the engineering lobby. I wish your biohazard plan panned out better and people were more willing to suspend disbelief that, JUST MAYBE there was actually a biohazard warning.

Link to comment

Personally, I'd say that having a time limit (like, 3 days) for antag roles might fix this.


But even then, I don't know. But examples seemed like complete shitshows. I don't know what to think about it anymore. And TBH, if it was only my opinion that mattered, I'd make the Aurora an extended-only server.


But that's what worries me. People keep complaining "But we need our antags! We need our combat!" and yet, these things happen a vast majority of the time.


There's only a few times where I can actually remember antags being fun. And oh god, when I say fun, they were FUCKING FUN. That one ninja with the storytelling. That one time Geraldine lost it. That time where nukeops were discussing selling the body of the RD to a chopshop or just killing it. Or that one time where they decided that the RD (me) actually WAS worth capturing, and so they convinced me to hop into a locker with nanopaste to constantly repair myself as they dragged me to the shuttle. That was fun.


But these are rare, and they're getting more rare as time goes I feel (and all but two of them involved only older, esteemed players - the two others? The two others involved the most awesome new players I've ever met). So I don't know what, exactly, could be done to fix this.

Link to comment

The problem with the crew vs antag situation is the same it has always been. Victory goes to the person who plays the least fair and who offers the opposition the fewest opportunities to act.


"But you're not supposed to play to win!" yells everyone.


Sure, whatever, but everyone keeps playing to win because losing sucks. Losing involves being dead, or being in jail unable to act. Winning, on the other hand, is great! You get to keep running around, keep interacting with people, keep playing. As an antag you get to keep spinning your gimmick, or running from security.


So of course people play to win, expecting them to do otherwise is to ignore the most basic concepts of game design. The core tenant of making a game is to incentivize desirable behavior. You want to reward people for doing what they should be doing, and what they should be doing is making the game fun for everyone involved.


For example, in Team Fortress two, the medic class gets points for both healing AND they for kills made by their partner. You want the medic to heal lots of people, so you give them points for that, and you want medics to pair up with dangerous players to kill lots of the enemy, so you give them points for that. You incentivize both beneficial behaviors and that's what people do. This works even without explanation. If you give people a way of keeping score, and you reward them for certain behavior, they will do that behavior. It's not rocket science.


If we want people to give other players second chances, play with good sportsmanship, and buy into other people's role-play scenarios for the good of the round... we have to incentivize that. If a plan you've spent an hour and a half setting in motion can be destroyed by a single taser shot, you are not going to want to give people the opportunity to take that shot. You are going to get them before they get you.


The game we're playing punishes all the behaviors we claim to want, and it does so brutally. Until that's fixed, we can have as many threads about this as we like and nothing will change.


We can try to keep patching the social context with rules, time limits, white lists, and punishments and they might mitigate the issue somewhat (I remain dubious of their effectiveness), but these tactics treat the symptoms, not the problem itself.


tl/dr: SS13 is not well designed for the kind of play this server wants. To fix this problem you must modify the game so that it incentivizes the playstyle you're looking for.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
What about adding antagonist whitelists?


That way, the staff know who is actually capable of doing evil shit, and doing it with actual decent RP.

 

Regarding this, i'd like to bring attention to our current whitelist system. It takes time, approvals, moderation and would simply not be viable. Only a select few would be antagonists, new players would not have the chance to experience that, ETC. It was already discussed yet with positions such as Synthetics in mind, and it was ruled out. I'd be against an Antagonist whitelist.


Instead of a whitelist system, i'd be more willing of the staff to hand out antagonist bans more easily and vastly.

Although this brings the question, what qualifies for an antagonist bad, behavior-wise?

Link to comment


So of course people play to win, expecting them to do otherwise is to ignore the most basic concepts of game design. The core tenant of making a game is to incentivize desirable behavior. You want to reward people for doing what they should be doing, and what they should be doing is making the game fun for everyone involved.


tl/dr: SS13 is not well designed for the kind of play this server wants. To fix this problem you must modify the game so that it incentivizes the playstyle you want.

 

That's a good and fair point. Many games keep players coming for their incentives. Just have to look at their designs. They reward players by doing a certain behavior.


Now, regarding this, one thing that it made me remember was Paradise's Karma system. Basically, people with good roleplay behavior/whom act nice, are rewarded by other players with Karma points. With enough karma points, players can unlock certain positions and races. Hence, in such a chaotic server, people manage to harmonize their behaviors as they have a goal, a reward. It's not winning, it's obtaining karma. And in order to do that, you have to please other players and make them enjoy and smile and laugh at what you do. Entertainment, basically. Which brings on a whole new perspective at how people play the game.


I'd like to know, what are your thoughts about Paradise's karma system and how it acts as an incentive for better roleplay and overall enjoyment?

Link to comment

Welcome to light roleplay.


Your mistake is ever allowing OOC to influence IC. If I let a traitor go, it's because I don't have evidence to hold them. Don't let people go because you OOCly know they're antags. Guess what?


That's metagaming.


Any gamemode with an antag has always been crap. In the malf round, I would have questioned you too - we're not obligated to 'play along'. If you say Central told you something of critical importance, then I'm going to investigate. Come up with a better idea next time, or plan for these events in the future;


In short - stop letting OOC influence IC. Take it as it happens, and don't give people chances. People are awful. This is a light roleplay server. Just play IC like you would play IC. If your character would only shoot someone once, then do it. If they wouldn't, don't.

Link to comment

Regarding the malf round, I feel like there's some issue with how the DO who handled that fax responsed; I believe there was an unwritten/somewhat unclarified rule for DO's about not immediately shutting down an antag or something to that effect (It's something me and Scopes touched on many months ago); I think there should be a written guideline added to how DOs handle in-round faxxes that involve antags, when the response could either make or break said antag. I'll bring this up when Skull gets to the DOs on his to-do list.

Link to comment
Welcome to light roleplay.


Your mistake is ever allowing OOC to influence IC. If I let a traitor go, it's because I don't have evidence to hold them. Don't let people go because you OOCly know they're antags. Guess what?


That's metagaming.


Any gamemode with an antag has always been crap. In the malf round, I would have questioned you too - we're not obligated to 'play along'. If you say Central told you something of critical importance, then I'm going to investigate. Come up with a better idea next time, or plan for these events in the future;


In short - stop letting OOC influence IC. Take it as it happens, and don't give people chances. People are awful. This is a light roleplay server. Just play IC like you would play IC. If your character would only shoot someone once, then do it. If they wouldn't, don't.

 


Why would i of kept them? I didn't say i was OOCly influenced. I said that OOCly it would be a shit thing to do. ICly, we had nothing to hold their gear. Why would we? Religion ain't forbidden aboard the Aurora. Is it? I kept to the rules, OOCly. Don't metagame. I didn't confiscate their things by simple OOC knowledge that they were a cult.

 

". People are awful. This is a light roleplay server. Just play IC like you would play IC. If your character would only shoot someone once, then do it. If they wouldn't, don't."

 

Didn't i say in the end of my OP, no shitposting?

Aurora's a Heavy Roleplay Station, according to it's own description. People are awful if /you/ think they're awful.


Please constructively partake in this discussion, or don't at all.


EDIT: Oh, and i also mentionned in the VERY BEGINNING that this thread was not to discuss the events, but the following issues resulting in those events.

Link to comment

The Paradise Karma system is structureless due to it's lack of criteria. You give people Karma for doing stuff that you like. That's it. "What you like" is entirely subjective.


This means that rather than rewarding specific behavior, it rewards behavior that pleases the collective. Over time, those people who gain a lot of karma do so because their actions are in-line with the unconscious biases of the community at large. Sometimes that's by playing a particular role well, but usually it's for things that are funny, or silly, or unique. The guy who replicated the Hotline Miami murderspree's while wearing a jacket and a chicken mask got a lot of Karma despite murdering literally half the station.


In addition to being unfocused to the point of not being a useful tool for shaping behavior, the karma rewards themselves are... limited in scope. The roles available are marginally important, with the possible exception of the Blueshield, and the alien races, while sort of cool, are interesting primarily due to being an obvious way to show off.


They're also reeeally slow at adding new rewards which means that, older players effectively graduate from the feedback system after they've purchased the rewards that interest them.


In short, I feel like the Paradise Karma system is sort of gesturing in the right direction, but it's still missing some key pieces to be really effective.

Link to comment

It seems to me like there are two distinct problems. Antags feeling like crew won't RP with them, so they resort to powergaming and playing to win, and crew feeling like any time they give antags some leeway, they get fucked over and end up in the shitty situation. This creates a positive feedback loop until we arrive at the situation where we're at today. Antags feel like the only way they have a chance to play the game is to kill anybody who suspects them, and crew feel like if someone does something mildly antagonistic, that it's their moral obligation to murderbone them in the name of safety. This isn't healthy, but it seems to be what's happening to me.


Some of this has to do with new players (or bad players) doing things like this, but this clearly hasn't been limited to new players. Everybody seems to be irritated by it, but due to people generally distrusting the staff, they're averse to complaining about it. This seems to be brought about by people being report happy over minor things a few months ago.


Or something like that.

Link to comment

I tend to write really long posts but I don't think many people read them so here's a short one instead. (I do try to address the issue and not just the situation, though. Believe in me.)



Consider this. In the first situation you mentioned, what was the issue?


That the Biohazard situation the AI attempted to roleplay was shut down. Don't look at the RD, don't look at the DOs, look at the problem.


Why did this happen? Lack of planning. How can this be solved? More planning. Probably.


It sounds like a cool idea on paper. However, I don't think there's anything wrong with a head being suspicious of an AI giving out orders or engaging extraordinary procedures (the AI's job isn't to lead or direct). It would be natural for them to ask for CC confirmation, and get suspicious if they couldn't obtain it. And although it would be nice if the admins/DOs played along, it should be assumed that faxes could be a problem, as long as they're an element you don't control. The RD reacting the way they did isn't unexpected given the high stakes of a situation such as an AI announcing a biohazard you know to be a hoax. (And there's an explanation for the borgs blowing up in Garnascus' self-complaint, too.)


What's the best way to fix this? Get the admins on-board. If your job is to impersonate centcom (and the admins are centcom) the easiest way to do it is to get the admins to help you (and they should usually be willing to help proven you have an interesting plan. These are people that love the game more than anyone and are always trying their best to make a round more fun for players.) Otherwise, you're counting on the possibility of something you can't predict being able to foil your plan, and at that point you can't fault anyone but yourself.


The RD didn't play along, but he didn't have any particular incentive to play along. You could give him some very good ones to do so.

Link to comment

Regarding example no. 1:

I'm going to side with FFrances and agree with her points. You had to have assumed that they're going to gun it for the fax, and you cannot blame them for doing it, as it is literally the most sensible thing to do. Instead, either find ways to disable the fax machines, or give the staff a head's up with, "Hey, I want to do this stuff, could you play along with the faxes?" They'll alert the DOs, and voila, you have yourself a playground. This also applies to pretty much anyone forever who wants to impersonate Central Command (cough-cough-nuke-ops-cough).


Regarding example no. 2:

I would argue that the roleplay all before your conversion was your mechanical encounter with the players in question. Roleplay is not just words and fluff, it can also be action. You have an action-packed encounter with your assailants, and they managed to corner you. And then they gave you a very simple choice: "Join or die." I'd argue that this is valid. Now, please do tell me, what do you think they should have done? Or what you would have done, in their stead?


And regarding Sue:

The general stance on this should be fairly simple: if you have IC evidence to back up the charges issued, then you keep the charges and act accordingly even if you know the person is an antag OOCly. If you don't have the evidence to back up the charges, then it's going to turn into a case of metagaming. Hopefully all staff enforce this standard, and if they do not, then please submit a staff complaint, and I'll square the issue.

Link to comment

Thank you for your replies, Skull132 and Frances.

Although this is going the way i hoped it would not (Discussing about my examples, instead of the issues at hand), i'll reply to the question Skull asks in Example No. 2


What should they have done?


That is a good question, a great question. Now, let me point you to where i mentioned that i was extra nice to them. I did my Warden role to the fullest and was super courteous towards them. They didn't seem psycho at all. They didn't seem crazy or bloodthirsty. Simply some religious people with extra-edgy tendencies.


Now, switch from that to them just batonning you to near death, with the simple mention of "Join or die", it really switches the mindset. It leaves a bitter taste to my mouth. I played nice earlier. Why can't you now? You weren't a psycho freak earlier. Why now? How did your character submit to such development under an hour? How did you go from point A to point Z so fast? Now, if you say that their behavior was fine, and that their justification for it which is "well i am in a crazed cult, it is normal i act as such" is good, then i believe it simply furthers the issue i highlighted and want to discuss about. Their behavior, no matter how "in the bound of the rules" it was, did not in any case provide entertainment to me, the Forensics Tech, the observers around us or anyone that wasn't those few people. Anyone that wasn't cult was either royally fucked by "Join or die" supported by a subverted AI (Which is incredibly hard, nigh impossible to fight.) were left with a bitter taste and unhappy feelings. Now, the next time some of those people might play as security, and manage to catch cultists the way we did at the beginning of the round, instead of thinking OOCly like i mentionned "Oh, i don't need to remove their antagonistic traits. I'm sure they'll create good roleplay!", they'll probably think back to that godawful round they had where they were dealt with brutally for attempting to play nice. And henceforth, try to find every little tidbit ICly to keep the cultists either under watchful eyes or confiscate their items or have them in the brig for as long as possible. I could of went through with the psychological eval, kept them forever in the brig as there was no psych. I could of kept them in for Vandalism, instead of letting them off with a warning.


Now, some of you may think, "But it is your fault for doing so. You got yourself in that position. Your issue.". Well, you are part of the issue at hand and encouraging it. That round, i attempted to play with the mindset that everyone wanted to create good roleplay and enjoyment for everyone. To only be left with this mindset. If it's my problem for letting them walk away, does that mean next time i should be an utter dick to them and disable them as much as possible? That'd just be amplifying the issue.


What are ways we could cut this issue? This vicious circle that just keeps on going of bitterness that makes people act worse that leaves more bitterness that makes people act even worse?

Link to comment
I did my Warden role to the fullest and was super courteous towards them. They didn't seem psycho at all. They didn't seem crazy or bloodthirsty. Simply some religious people with extra-edgy tendencies.

 

I'm going to focus on this little bit right here. They seemed like some religious people with extra edgy tendencies, nothing more. Could it have been, perhaps, that your judgment of them was wrong? Could they have deceived your character for sympathy and taken advantage of your character when they could?


Or do you think people shouldn't be allowed to do that?

Link to comment

Okay, I think I have an idea how to get this thread more on track with what you wanted.


The issue you're presenting goes as follow: "People aren't playing along". The question we should be asking, thusly, is: "Why are people not playing along?"


hint: I don't think a lot of people on this server are playing to win, but I think a lot more are playing to "do a good job".

Link to comment

I agree with the people who said you should keep IC and OOC completely seperate. You brigging us forever because of no psychologist wouldn't be just OOCly lame, that's kindof irrelevent I feel. It's ICly lame because you would be violating your procedures. The lame part OOCly would be that you broke the IC standards in a way that ruined the round. If us antags were super obviously bad IC then that's our fault and you should brig us. As you said, religious activity isn't worth that sentence, and also because if you lack the ability to give a punishment, protocol is not permabrig until a role signs on.


With that out of the way...

I was the cultist that harmbatoned you and said "convert/join or die." In one of your posts you pointed out that I had a seemingly large character shift. That's a very good point and I think you may have touched on a part of the problem. My character, Martin Richter, is not the type of guy who would likely become a crazy cultist, BUT I WAS a cultist. I didn't come up with a reason why I would have joined the cult beyond "power I guess?" So I RP'd as my normal self, except I injected my desire to do well as a cultist into the character. Because of that, I did whatever was most expedient to assure my victory, and since I didn't have cuffs on me and it was a crazy situation (by this I mean that I was myself pretty beat up and ended up in crit from my injuries after the fight. I was already moving slow during the fight with you), that meant subduing you in the simplest way possible: the cudgel. I do feel bad that you being a good warden and actually following regulations/caring about prisoners got you rekt in the end, and I think Richter would feel bad about it too, upon reflection.

I was about to type out that you had to join or die either way, and that I'd just have liked to be nicer about it ICly to return the favor, but on reflection I think it might have been possible to take you hostage... if only I were more bodily able. I don't know if things would be different if they happened a second time, but in future I will try to be more lenient as an antag.

Link to comment
I did my Warden role to the fullest and was super courteous towards them. They didn't seem psycho at all. They didn't seem crazy or bloodthirsty. Simply some religious people with extra-edgy tendencies.

Could it have been, perhaps, that your judgment of them was wrong? Could they have deceived your character for sympathy and taken advantage of your character when they could?


Or do you think people shouldn't be allowed to do that?

 

I think you are misinterpreting what i think to be the issue.

My issue was not them crossing me. I couldn't care less. My issue was them doing it in a way that provided no enjoyment to me or others that weren't those two cultists at that time.

Their mindsets were not "What can i do that's nice and can make everyone enjoy my antagonism?"

But rather "What can i do to win with this antag?"


I'm not asking them to make every little person happy. I'm not asking for them not to do cultist things. But in a way that is more fleshed out. If they did manage to overtake me, actually stunned me instead of breaking my every bones, spoke to me about the cult, why they're doing this, their motives, ETC, then coerced me, RPly, to join their cult, then it might of been otherwise. Instead, they had the mindset of playing in order to ensure their victory. Henceforth, ignoring any boundaries that one might set, that objectives might of set.


My issue was that i did not play to make sure i won. I did not play to make sure i came out on top. Rather i played to make sure everyone could of went out of that round with a smile. Which they did not reciprocate, by playing to win. And that is a mindset that is largely seen on the server and is contributing to what i believe to be a current issue with our antagonists.

 

I did whatever was most expedient to assure my victory.

 

(Now, my goal with this quote is not to attack MagnificentMelkior. Rather to point out what is the mind set of the majority of the server when it comes to antagonism or counter-antagonism.)

 

The primary goal of antangonists is to CONTRIBUTE TO OTHERS' ENJOYMENT.

Be creative when coming up with objectives, and try to do things which will be fun for others, not only yourself.

Link to comment

I think the antag rule is flawed.


Rest of the players saldom have any motivation to return the favor and help the antag player. I'm not thinking in a sense that they let the antags win intentionally, but rather not to approach antags with Play to Win attitude. This has created a feedback loop that's giving antags excuse to powergame, while making the crew up their game as well. End result? Only players whose skill range is well above the majority have an actual chance to implement interesting concepts, as rest of the players are too busy running away from the steel grasp of security too actually stop and make an effort to engage players. That, or slow, peaceful, boring rounds.


Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Rest of the players seldom have any motivation to return the favor and help the antag player. I'm not thinking in a sense that they let the antags win intentionally, but rather not to approach antags with Play to Win attitude. This has created a feedback loop that's giving antags excuse to powergame, while making the crew up their game as well.

 

An antagonist can't "powergame" by definition, as they're the conflict initiators and should be reasonably expected to plan for possible contingencies. Powergaming would be, for example, Jaylor changing the AI laws as a non-antagonist because he's got no clue how to do that. An antagonist Jaylor on the other hand is actually a trained special agent, sneaky shape-shifting alien, or cultist gifted with the arcane whispers of Nar'sie (take your pick). Or maybe he just decided today he hates everyone and he's going to go on a shooting spree. Or maybe he's recruiting for his gang and wants to overthrow the heads of staff to show his dominance - but you'll never see a non-antagonist Jaylor using a deconstructor in science, mixing chemicals, changing AI laws, or actually enforcing station laws in the very unfortunate event that a moron decides he'd make good security staff.


I actually tend to make very sure that said choices are punished with even more chaos - within reasonable limits, of course.


At the risk of sounding narcissistic, I'll ask this: why do people enjoy my wizard rounds, for the most part? A wizard is non-negotiably the most powerful antagonist out there, so when I have a little more wiggle-room to actually create something interesting for the players involved in the round, I'm able to do so with increased efficiency (and lower the odds that I'll suffer a random death at the hands of Rambo McShootFace.) If someone decides that it's do or die, I can stun them and reiterate that they have to complete some arbitrary task for me, continually hinting (or outright stating) that I will let them live if they help me.


I believe we've lost realism in our characters - more specifically, the fear of death. For some godforsaken reason, apparently there are other things that are "more important" to the characters of Aurora like unathi honor or getting that last sarcastic quip in before you kick the bucket, or just fighting back for no damn reason at all despite the fact that you're clearly boned (those of you who continually hit the resist button when I've got you buckled in a chair and am clearly trying to talk to you - I'm looking right. At. You.)


How do we get this back? Fuck if I know, else I'd be putting this in the suggestion forum. Permanent death is my favored solution for most games, but that's off the table for Aurora. So what, then - a dead character cannot be played again for X rounds? That would simultaneously make half of people even more ridiculous while the other half might just get the hint.


For now, however, I have only advice: to antagonists, I would encourage you to seek out the seedier elements of Aurora. Don't ask for too much; rather than saying "can you grind up this deadly poison and put it into a syringe for me," instead try "hey, can I use your grinder real quick? Here's fifty creds, go take a smoke break." To all others, I would encourage you to act realistically in both IC and OOC terms - if Suspect McShifty is acting shifty on a code green and pulls the rules out on your security officer, is it really worth it to stick around and shout for a search warrant, or would a sensible person really just want to go along with their day? Is it really fun for other players involved to brig someone for fifteen minutes because they called you a dick? Is it worth your job to refuse to medically treat someone because they took your cheeseburger?


I think that recognizing that we're all essentially here for the same reason is a big step towards solving all these problems without obtuse mechanical restrictions or additional rules.

Link to comment

I guess I made a wrong choice of words. By powergame, I mean being robust as fuck and not toning down. You, as a robust player can do whatever the fuck you want. If you take wizard, you can take the combat path and still focus on making the round fun, because there is very little that can stop you (probably, if you are as skilled as I make you to be). Me, on the other hand, would get butchered in seconds because I wouldn't be able to fight Sec that is, more often than not, composed of players that match your skill level.


While non-antag players are capable of toning down on this skill level, very few chose to do so. A default position is that as much force as required should be used to bring down the antags. This is the Play to Win view of the non-antags. While fair in concept, where does this leave us less robust players? In a cell or doing stupid, vague shit that's less interesting than a direct confrontation.


While I probably come out as moany, I'm really not. I'm fine with losing as an antag, as long as I don't get metagamed to shit.


But on a sidenote, yes, I agree. Making a punishment for unreasonable behavior is a good way to deal with this, but I still think the underlying issue to this specific issue of "murder aversion" is people to simply accept the fact that losing isn't that bad. A concept sometimes hard to grasp when people around you consistently brag about their robustness and give no quarter themselves.

Link to comment

It doesn't help antags at all that there tend to be more than a few of the crew who like to spout off Identifying Names. Some fool will say "glowing runes" or "dark tome" on the comms and now we all know, in a very OOC way, that it's a cult round. "Red spacesuit" and "organic needle" have a similar effect, as do plenty of other things, of cuing in the crew about what to be meta-suspicious about. For those of us who make an effort not to metagame it may only be an inconvenience, but it's not so hard to get into the mindset of looking for reasons to justify figuring it out ICly.


So if I may offer a suggestion, it's not to use those identifying names any more than necessary. Ask yourself why your character would care what book a patient has, or if they'd know the difference between glowing blood runes, and graffiti made with luminescent paint. Use a different term than "organic needle" whenever possible (alien proboscis works), and never say "red spacesuit" like it's a code word for "bad guys".

Link to comment
It doesn't help antags at all that there tend to be more than a few of the crew who like to spout off Identifying Names. Some fool will say "glowing runes" or "dark tome" on the comms and now we all know, in a very OOC way, that it's a cult round. "Red spacesuit" and "organic needle" have a similar effect, as do plenty of other things, of cuing in the crew about what to be meta-suspicious about. For those of us who make an effort not to metagame it may only be an inconvenience, but it's not so hard to get into the mindset of looking for reasons to justify figuring it out ICly.


So if I may offer a suggestion, it's not to use those identifying names any more than necessary. Ask yourself why your character would care what book a patient has, or if they'd know the difference between glowing blood runes, and graffiti made with luminescent paint. Use a different term than "organic needle" whenever possible (alien proboscis works), and never say "red spacesuit" like it's a code word for "bad guys".

 

I see where you're coming from with this but players will still just read between the lines. Alien proboscis=ling, strange space suit=syndi. The only thing you could do is just not say anything, but then it becomes silly.

Link to comment
It doesn't help antags at all that there tend to be more than a few of the crew who like to spout off Identifying Names. Some fool will say "glowing runes" or "dark tome" on the comms and now we all know, in a very OOC way, that it's a cult round. "Red spacesuit" and "organic needle" have a similar effect, as do plenty of other things, of cuing in the crew about what to be meta-suspicious about. For those of us who make an effort not to metagame it may only be an inconvenience, but it's not so hard to get into the mindset of looking for reasons to justify figuring it out ICly.


So if I may offer a suggestion, it's not to use those identifying names any more than necessary. Ask yourself why your character would care what book a patient has, or if they'd know the difference between glowing blood runes, and graffiti made with luminescent paint. Use a different term than "organic needle" whenever possible (alien proboscis works), and never say "red spacesuit" like it's a code word for "bad guys".

 

The point about the red spacesuits is valid even when in a differing game mode. I can't tell you how often a malf AI will talk about people in red hardsuits seen near the bridge. It pisses me off to no end that I have to respond to those ICly when I might know otherwise. I don't even care if the objective is just a distraction, it is a very obvious twist towards trying to make some of our robusty players instantly begin gearing and searching for a nuke ops team, because the players know they robust guys will validhunt those red suits. -.-

Link to comment

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...