"Character skills" vs. "Lawful combat" duality

[Guest]

Jesus fuck, Alberyk, that is not what anyone had in mind. That's WAY too robust.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

I like the system how it is, with reservations. You have to earn your reputation as a grizzled bad-ass, instead of having these handed to you. You aren't entitled to combat success, you have to earn it, even if this doesn't coincide with your actual backstory.

Knowing I'm unrobust in direct conflict is why most of my characters are either averse to combat, or do less direct things like poisoning or just hiring Jaylor someone else to break your knees.

My reservation is only that the skill-sheet we have at round-start, where we allocate character skills, has zero bearing on anything. It's not in the employment computer, or anywhere else. Only the admins and you can see it. I'd prefer if this had a little bearing somehow, like there being a failure or success chance to doing operations (Surgery mishaps when not trained or professional, percentage to hit when you shoot someone (misfiring a stun baton into your own face which would be fucking hilarious) etc etc. But this would require a huge overhaul to the code, so this isn't really something I have in mind unless we suddenly get a larger, dedicated dev team.

I would like to see different stats given to you by different hardsuits. Or radically buff their benefits. The unathi breacher suit should be terrifying to fight against (not the cheap NT knock off), giving the wearer immunity to nearly all the types of damage. Unathi can't fit into tanks, so this is their version of tanks, yet I've seen people KO'd with a single stool to the head with it on. It makes me sad.

Syndie hardsuits would give you the same benefits, if maybe immunity to stuns.

Engineering gives you immunity to radiation... If it doesn't already?

tl;dr, innate character skills given to characters isn't very sexy. Giving people the possibility to gain better stats through finding or earning different items or suits would be sexy.

[LordFowl]

If we implement stats we remove absolute control of a player over their character's roleplay potential.

Which is a good thing. Combat is among the biggest proofs in SS13 that player's often cannot be trusted with the responsibility of simulating an actual person, and compounded with the fact that its almost always difficult to punish the unrealistic abuse of combat mechanics, its become a rampant issue.

While yes, it makes sense to reward people for developing 'unique combat strategems' or what have you, you have to realize that that person in their moment of mindfucking genius has subconsciously or even consciously given that knowledge to every one of their characters, from their crippled wheelchair janitor to their head of security space 'nam veteran. Mechanical statistics create a system of distinction between each character.

[jackfractal]

I'm personally in favor of having some kind of mechanical variety between characters (not of implementing it, because that would be a job and a half), but there is something to consider.

In order for some characters to be good at some things, other characters would have to be bad at that thing.

If you don't have the 'fabrication' trait then building a wall takes six times as long. If you don't have the 'weapons training' trait you're going to miss five out of six shots at a distance over three meters.

To make the stats meaningful, you need to make people without those stats substantially inferior to the default level of ability as it exists in the game now. Right now, with a few minor exceptions, if you are capable of doing a task, you are able to do that task perfectly and, in most cases, instantaneously.

[Frances]

Which is a good thing. Combat is among the biggest proofs in SS13 that player's often cannot be trusted with the responsibility of simulating an actual person, and compounded with the fact that its almost always difficult to punish the unrealistic abuse of combat mechanics, its become a rampant issue.

That's honestly a really, really interesting take on it.

I think this reflects upon another duality, the one of "HRP is about SS13, but roleplayed out" vs. "HRP is about delivering a completely unique (and more serious) experience".

We're closer to the former, as are most other HRP servers, due to the amount of development that is required to add better, fuller features (and also because some people dislike change.) I think that "fun" SS13 RP is a good thing, though, and if we were to completely overhaul the combat to enforce realism (rather than robustness) I'd rather see it on a completely new server.

[MagnificentMelkior]

I really don't the idea of combat skills influencing mechanics. Antags already have a hard time, how much worse do you think it will be when an antag doctor has to go against security that is enhanced with IC skill mechanics? Here's my take on it: only mechanically skilled people should play characters who are mechanically skilled. If you want to have a badass character you have to earn it through system mastery. Yes, combat roles like operative and sec should get better equipment to robust people with (and they do! Seriously security is a force to be reckoned with and that's not even counting ERT), but to make them superior really just cheapens the achievement of people who pull off badass characters through being admirably skillful. It's literally the same as someone playing a scientist who is supposed to be a genius but they can't pull it off through RP and job mastery wanting people to be forced to ICly accept them as the genius the player envisioned them as. If you can't cut it, don't play it.

The problem, where it exists, of people being immersion breakingly robust is one that is best handled by administration, rather than through coding.

[Frances]

I really don't the idea of combat skills influencing mechanics. Antags already have a hard time, how much worse do you think it will be when an antag doctor has to go against security that is enhanced with IC skill mechanics?

Well, antags aren't forced to stick to their characters' skills (dat syndicate spec ops training), so this problem could easily be solved by giving antags maxed stats, or letting them reroll their stats upon being picked as antag.

 

The problem, where it exists, of people being immersion breakingly robust is one that is best handled by administration, rather than through coding.

But you don't want to punish people simply for being good at the game

I can see a character getting up from a wheelchair to slap antag dick as being a problem, but what about the doctor or cargotech who decides to fight antags and wins against all odds? What should we do with them?

[LetzShake]

I choked a violent changeling to death using only a spray bottle, yesterday.

It's a really satisfying experience to win using your character's skills but I don't think we should hard-code it. I really think the way it's currently handled, as just being a product of roleplay is best.

[witchbells]

But you don't want to punish people simply for being good at the game

I can see a character getting up from a wheelchair to slap antag dick as being a problem, but what about the doctor or cargotech who decides to fight antags and wins against all odds? What should we do with them?

 

These kinds of people usually get slapped for powergaming.

[MagnificentMelkior]

I really think the way it's currently handled, as just being a product of roleplay is best.

Yes. Another reason I forgot to mention in my previous post is that hard coding in any of these proposed "solutions" would inevitably cause collateral damage.

[Nikov]

Stats you can't control. Preset depending on job. If you're a cargo tech, you're not good with your fists.

 

Ever see Cinderella Man? Literally, a cargo technician knocked out a professional boxer.

[Blingx3]

You're trying to control poweres beyond your control

[LordFowl]

Yes. That is exactly the purpose of mechanical skills. The skills of a character are currently out of our control, which results in ridiculous situations, so we'd trying to put skills into our control.

An effective roleplay server has always been in my mind a benevolent autocracy. While the actual autocratic 'dictator' can technically be a staff, or can be the server itself (server as in the system, not the entire community), the roleplayers need to be controlled to create an enjoyable environment. We put our trust into the server to guide us to enjoyable situations because we cannot trust our fellow players to do the same.

[Lady_of_Ravens]

Yes. That is exactly the purpose of mechanical skills. The skills of a character are currently out of our control, which results in ridiculous situations, so we'd trying to put skills into our control.

An effective roleplay server has always been in my mind a benevolent autocracy. While the actual autocratic 'dictator' can technically be a staff, or can be the server itself (server as in the system, not the entire community), the roleplayers need to be controlled to create an enjoyable environment. We put our trust into the server to guide us to enjoyable situations because we cannot trust our fellow players to do the same.

 

Wow... if I were to listen to that sort of bullshit I'd be looking for a new server. Or maybe just give up on SS13 entirely.

[LordFowl]

Simultaneously disparaging AND crude. I am almost impressed.

[Lady_of_Ravens]

Simultaneously disparaging AND crude. I am almost impressed.

 

Don't worry, I'm not going anywhere. I'm just saying that your opinion is foul and offensive... but thankfully not the majority.

[Frances]

Simultaneously disparaging AND crude. I am almost impressed.

 

Don't worry, I'm not going anywhere. I'm just saying that your opinion is foul and offensive... but thankfully not the majority.

I'm really confused lmao.

How is saying that players need guidelines offensive?

[halorocks22]

Simultaneously disparaging AND crude. I am almost impressed.

 

Don't worry, I'm not going anywhere. I'm just saying that your opinion is foul and offensive... but thankfully not the majority.

I'm really confused lmao.

How is saying that players need guidelines offensive?

 

I don't need no guidelines. I'm a strong, independent AIDS-infected white cisgendered heterosexual male who chooses to do whatever I want regardless of whether or not I'll be harmed by my actions. Guidelines are for the peasantry.

[hivefleetchicken]

How is saying that players need guidelines offensive?

 

I don't need no guidelines. I'm a strong, independent AIDS-infected white cisgendered heterosexual male who chooses to do whatever I want regardless of whether or not I'll be harmed by my actions. Guidelines are for the peasantry.

 

Hey, goyim, pass me a patriarchy, eh?

Also, hell yes, stats seem like a great idea.

[EvilBrage]

Stats? No, please for the love of god no. Like, "Toby's back in the office" no.

Now, traits? Those I can get behind. Fallout-esque traits that come with both advantages and disadvantages. Each could cost a point (-1 to total,) be neutral (0), or give you a point (+1) based on the effect; every character starts with zero and can pick from a list that can give or take points, never going below their starting value of zero points. Also something something arbitrary maximum number of traits.

I'll throw down a few examples:

Positive Traits (-1 points)

Mr. Fixit: You're a handy man! You can construct and deconstruct objects twice as fast.

Heavy-Handed: Savage. Your unarmed melee attacks do more damage.

Cat-Eyes: You can see further in the dark, and the squares you can see are brighter.

Combative: You're especially adept at combat. Your attacks miss less often.

Chem Resistant: You've got a unique metabolism. Chemicals (both beneficial and harmful) have a reduced effect on you.

Balanced: Like a cat. You recover more quickly after falling down (but not from stuns.)

Neutral Traits (0)

Dirty Fighter: No trick is beneath you. Your attacks will do critical damage more often, but your wait period between attacks is longer.

Fragile: You grew up with a small frame. You move more quickly, but have less total health and your limbs break more easily.

Bruiser: You're a head above your peers, and twice as wide. You have a bonus to total health and your limbs don't break as easily, but you move more slowly.

Tough Guy/Gal: Pain doesn't phase you. You'll be able to move at normal speed while in pain, but you won't receive notifications about broken limbs/organs.

Negative Traits (+1)

Uncreative: You never were good at thinking outside the box. You cannot create improvised weapons or cable cuffs.

Addict: Your next fix is the most important thing to you now. After 30 minutes without your chem of choice, you start going into withdrawal.

Whimp: What's a gym? Your melee attacks do less damage.

Cross-Eyed: Why are there two of him? Your ranged and throwing attacks miss more often.

Unbalanced: Help, I've fallen and I can't get up! It takes you longer to recover from slips, falls, and stuns.

This way, there will be mechanical variations between characters, but not to the point where the outcome of an encounter is a foregone conclusion; some skill will still be involved in the fight. Antagonists will also have the option to change their traits as they're assigned the role - but these are also IC information (if discovered,) and so someone who's typically an addict who removes their traits as a changeling would definitely be suspicious to other crew members.

[Xelnagahunter]

Stats? No, please for the love of god no. Like, "Toby's back in the office" no.

Now, traits? Those I can get behind. Fallout-esque traits that come with both advantages and disadvantages. Each could cost a point (-1 to total,) be neutral (0), or give you a point (+1) based on the effect; every character starts with zero and can pick from a list that can give or take points, never going below their starting value of zero points. Also something something arbitrary maximum number of traits.

I'll throw down a few examples:

Positive Traits (-1 points)

Mr. Fixit: You're a handy man! You can construct and deconstruct objects twice as fast.

Heavy-Handed: Savage. Your unarmed melee attacks do more damage.

Cat-Eyes: You can see further in the dark, and the squares you can see are brighter.

Combative: You're especially adept at combat. Your attacks miss less often.

Chem Resistant: You've got a unique metabolism. Chemicals (both beneficial and harmful) have a reduced effect on you.

Balanced: Like a cat. You recover more quickly after falling down (but not from stuns.)

Neutral Traits (0)

Dirty Fighter: No trick is beneath you. Your attacks will do critical damage more often, but your wait period between attacks is longer.

Fragile: You grew up with a small frame. You move more quickly, but have less total health and your limbs break more easily.

Bruiser: You're a head above your peers, and twice as wide. You have a bonus to total health and your limbs don't break as easily, but you move more slowly.

Tough Guy/Gal: Pain doesn't phase you. You'll be able to move at normal speed while in pain, but you won't receive notifications about broken limbs/organs.

Negative Traits (+1)

Uncreative: You never were good at thinking outside the box. You cannot create improvised weapons or cable cuffs.

Addict: Your next fix is the most important thing to you now. After 30 minutes without your chem of choice, you start going into withdrawal.

Whimp: What's a gym? Your melee attacks do less damage.

Cross-Eyed: Why are there two of him? Your ranged and throwing attacks miss more often.

Unbalanced: Help, I've fallen and I can't get up! It takes you longer to recover from slips, falls, and stuns.

This way, there will be mechanical variations between characters, but not to the point where the outcome of an encounter is a foregone conclusion; some skill will still be involved in the fight. Antagonists will also have the option to change their traits as they're assigned the role - but these are also IC information (if discovered,) and so someone who's typically an addict who removes their traits as a changeling would definitely be suspicious to other crew members.

This is possibly the best idea ever. I love this as it creates a fair chance for less robust players while still giving the mechanic manipulators the ability to do so and still win.

If I ever see someone dragging a locker about in a fight and use it to beat me I'll be sour as fuck.

[Guest]

Yes. That is exactly the purpose of mechanical skills. The skills of a character are currently out of our control, which results in ridiculous situations, so we'd trying to put skills into our control.

An effective roleplay server has always been in my mind a benevolent autocracy. While the actual autocratic 'dictator' can technically be a staff, or can be the server itself (server as in the system, not the entire community), the roleplayers need to be controlled to create an enjoyable environment. We put our trust into the server to guide us to enjoyable situations because we cannot trust our fellow players to do the same.

 

Wow... if I were to listen to that sort of bullshit I'd be looking for a new server. Or maybe just give up on SS13 entirely.

Fowl has it almost nailed down this time, but his words make it sounds more twisted than blunt. It's not an autocracy as much as a system of compromise, but the very existence of game rules makes is slightly autocratic and are enforced by the staff, much like an autocratic police force would. The main difference is that you are free speak out against it and there is a possiblity of it changing. The rules, written and non-written ones, exist because at least the majorty of players agree that they help improve gameplay.

If you disagree with it, be my guest, go play on Goon instead.

Edit: Didn't mean that in a hostile manner, I appologise if it comes out that way. It's just that people shit on the server too much, labeling it as fortress clique. In truth, change is best when it comes slowly, as more tought is invested in the long run.