More traitor leeway

[tristan1333]

 

Traitors are super restricted IMO. If I were to send a bomb via telescience to blow up my target (Destroying the surrounding area ect.) from what I have seen I would expect a warning from and admin. If I were bomb escape with a multitude of bombs for the escape alone objective, I would also suspect a warning or a ban. Spreading a virus to kill a horde of people, probably a ban. Also for the escape alone objective. I ran into the conference room where heads were having a meeting and blew up a syndicate mini-bomb. Sent one person into crit, blew off another's hand and minor wounds for the rest. I was ALMOST banned, however another admin intervened. How are antags meant to make things interesting, when interesting things can't happen?

I am NOT saying that traitors should be allowed to mass bomb with telescience nor do anything super evil not related to their objectives.

A bit of a rant but overall:

Antags, should be allowed, to do interesting things that affect themselves and other people around them. This isn't a bay super RP server. I believe rule 6 should be revised

 

[Qinetix]

 

It's due to some past issues where some people used the "I'm an antag" excuse to mass murder (like that one time the CMO went on a killing spree and killed his entire staff 10 minutes into the round).

 

Even tough under some circumstances you may be allowed to kill en mase,which I doubt it unless the entire station is after your head for some reason.

 

Then again hjacking the shuttle is way easier with just a pair of tools and an emag. Or other things.... depends. Also blowing everyone to smithereens is not interesting,it just pisses people off, being a serial killer on a certain species is however interesting, trying to subdue the station on a well devised plan is interesting, inducing panic is interesting...

 

You can do interesting things.... they just require you to be subtle.

 

[FoS]

 

I was always under the impression that Antags were generally supposed to just finish their objectives and if they wanted to do something more that may result in other players deaths/potential destruction that they were expected to adminhelp it to get permission?

 

I'm a little bit confused by your suggestion and examples since they seem to be conflicting statements. You're saying that traitors should not be able to mass bomb or do super evil things that are not objective related but you are saying they should be able to do things that affect people around them even if it isn't objective related?

 

It's not generally fun for innocent bystanders to be taken out of the game in a way that doesn't let them fight back or enjoy the situation. If they get taken out too quickly into the round then it isn't really fun for anyone except the Antag and I always thought the point of playing an Antag was to try and make it fun for the rest of the players first and yourself last? Maybe I just misunderstood the point of the role.

 

[belarion]

 

If what you're planning to do helps with your objectives in some way you usually get away with it, but not always, if two or three victims throw a player complaint you're gonna get bwoinked for an explanation regardless of circumstances.

 

With things like mass bombing or gassing the station its always better to ahelp first to let the admins know what you're planning so they know you're not just griefing, 99% of the time they won't have a problem with it, and when they do its usually because its OTT or lag inducing, you just have to bear in mind whether or not you're being "excessive" in taking people out of the round.

 

[Bone White]

 

If you want to telescience a bomb somewhere, ahelp it first. There's no harm in asking.

 

If someone plans something and lets us know about their plan before they act it out, then we can intervene/control it as appropriate to ensure the game is enjoyed to it's fullest potential.

 

When someone causes collateral damage, it's a lot easier to believe your intention pre-event, than post-event.

 

[Rivers]

Sure, you can argue that this isn't a super hard core role-play station, but it's also not goon station. The rules are to preserve the fun-for-all rather than fun-for-one (or few). Part of the enjoyment of being a traitor antag is finding out how you can do something and get away with it. You're an assassin, not nuke ops. Different antags different rules. Traitors play a role on the station roleplay-wise, they need to contribute to the roleplay without becoming completely obvious. You're not supposed to be playing for only your own enjoyment, you're supposed to contribute to the enjoyment of the other players. Being able to blow up the station willy nilly and killing random bystanders starts to sound like a get-out-jail-grief-card.

[Fj45]

 

^

 

Sums up everything you could say really. And there really is no skill in just planting a bomb and watching everyone explode.

 

[SpaceTimeNow]

 

Very touchy subject.

 

I think if you plan something well in advance it is reasonable to ask an admin beforehand and everything is ok.

 

It get's much more difficult if you have a quick action forced uppon you, like someone catches you red handed standing above your dead target. Especially if that happend in a crowded area, like the medbay. You can easily beeing forced into a situation where you are rushed by the mostly unarmed staff dripping in one by one into your room trying to be a hero. Then you are presented with a choice: Try to flee and loose your target, get revealed that you are a traitor (no one believes the guy that ran away) or you stand and slaughter the iditos rushing in, which makes you a mass murderer. Either way, you get boned.

 

What i am getting at is that in many cases not only the traitor should act responsible but also the "heros" rushing in to help. In the end they forced the issue, the also had the choice just to run or at least stay back.

 

As it stands right now rule 6 is very vague and this two sentences are very loaded with goals to be propperly considered in a split second decision:

 

If you’re selected for an antagonist role, then treat it as an interesting challenge and not an excuse to destroy other peoples’ game experience. Your actions should make the game more fun, more exciting and more enjoyable for everyone. Even or perhaps especially your victims.

 

In my opionon this rule should include much more examples as to what's ok and what's not. Words like challange, fun, exciting and enjoyable leave way to much room for interpretation and may be perceived very differently from person to person. Which gives the admn the ability to decide everything on a case by case bases but it leaves the players in a grey area and in the end the player is the person beeing banned, not the admin.

 

This is all comming from a person that almost never plays antag, except for something like Xeno or Blob where your objectives are cristall clear and you don't run into situations where you have to explain yourself. That beeing said, in the few times where if have been asked by admins they agreed with my opinion. But even then it breaks the immersion and makes you doubt your actions for the rest of the round.

 

[Spacemanspark]

 

I don't think we need to give traitors the ability to murderspree whenever here.

It ruins other player's fun because one guy wants to murder everybody.

It'll also create more metagrudges, hostility towards one another, and more people who just go SSD when they don't get traitor.