The less violent antagonist option

[Nayser]

Playing as antagonist is a lot of fun, but i'am more of a pacifist so i prefer objectives that are about stealing and doing other non-lethal things.

I'm sure i'm not the only pacifist out there. So here's what i suggest:

A new option in game preferences that removes lethal or over the line evil objectives for some antagonist roles like traitor or vampire.

Enabling that option wouldn't change objectives of antagonist roles that are suposed to be lethal and evil by nature. That would be antags like xenomorph or terror spider.

Alternatively turning on "the less lethal objectives" option could make killing and other violent objectives appear with lesser chance, basicly make them appear rarely instead of never.

This could also be a good thing for new players too, since killing can be sometimes very difficult as your target can be a robust ss13 veteran HoS or a learning-to-play engineer if lucky (not lucky for engineer).

[Dumbdumn5]

Could tie this into your NT relation, making opposed far more likely or able to receive more violent objectives with skeptics being less likely or unable to receive violent objectives, though it might be better as a preference if added. As a pacifist nerdmin, I would like to see this.

[Nayser]

10 minutes ago, Dumbdumn5 said:

Could tie this into your NT relation, making opposed far more likely or able to receive more violent objectives with skeptics being less likely or unable to receive violent objectives, though it might be better as a preference if added. As a pacifist nerdmin, I would like to see this.

That is actually improvement over my idea, i just think it will be a lot more difficult to implement if it is tied to NT relation.

[ZN23X]

You also aren't required to complete objectives so can ignore the violent ones, and be creative with the non violent ones. There was a match recently I was Blueshield, clown was being friendly, friendly enough to hang out on the bridge per the captain.

After the shuttle was called he says "So...I have an odd request...there are some guys who I uh...well...owe alot of money...and if I get this one thing...uh...your antique laser...they'll erase my debts...can I have it captain?" Captain would have let him have it but it was already stolen. He was a traitor with the steal the pistol objective and found a creative not violent, not even stealing it way to obtain it.

Poor clown was decapitated by maint drones on shuttle.

I wept

[ZN23X]

Curious if you could also literally contact an admin and say "hey...I'm a traitor but don't want to kill anyone, can that objective be rerolled?"

They can give you new targets if your target cryos so I assume they can give you an entirely different objective 

...and I also like the idea mentioned above of it being relative to your NT views. Wonder how hard that'd be to implement.

Edited March 15, 2017 by ZN23X

[Shadeykins]

The entire point of an antagonist is to create conflict/make the round interesting.

 

Quietly shuffling off to the side and stealing without creating a stir whatsoever hardly achieves these goals and sort of removes the point of there being antagonists all together. Most people enter the round with the express interest of waiting to see what happens, when nothing happens most people are understandably perturbed.

 

Traitors shouldn't be Extended+.

 

If you don't want to be an antag, ahelp it and get it passed to someone else.

[Dinarzad]

That assumes theft can't cause a stir and assumes someone is trying to greentext super hard.

If you have to steal the captain's laser gun, do it in a fun or interesting way and leave just enough evidence to spark a hunt. Congrats, the round is now interesting.
's more ways to make a round interesting and hectic then just killing people.

[Birdtalon]

Theft usually doesn't cause a stir because the people who are trying to "greentext super hard" tend to just steal their objective(s) and then do nothing for the rest of the round. A mixture of objectives adds variety.

I find it hard to believe that a "pacifist" would find it morally correct to be working for a shady organisation such as the syndicate willingly when they openly condone violence and killings. If you're a tator and you don't feel like you can do your objectives you can always fax the syndicate with an emag and protest.

[Nayser]

1 minute ago, Birdtalon said:

Theft usually doesn't cause a stir because the people who are trying to "greentext super hard" tend to just steal their objective(s) and then do nothing for the rest of the round. A mixture of objectives adds variety.

I find it hard to believe that a "pacifist" would find it morally correct to be working for a shady organisation such as the syndicate willingly when they openly condone violence and killings. If you're a tator and you don't feel like you can do your objectives you can always fax the syndicate with an emag and protest.

Actually there are multiple reasons you can work for syndicate, that does not mean you have to approve of syndicate to be their agent.

As mentioned above ZN23X there was clown who said he owed a lot of money, so he was forced to work for them, it is also known that punishment for failing syndicate objective is most commonly death.

 

PS: what is greentexting?

[Birdtalon]

Greentexting is the green "The traitor was successful" you get pop up at the end of the round. Or not in my case.

That being said as long as people have the ability to just have the regular objectives I'm not against the idea. As long as my objectives wouldn't just be kill kill kill if I chose the lethal option, I'd still like a variety for varied gameplay.

 

[Nayser]

3 hours ago, Shadeykins said:

The entire point of an antagonist is to create conflict/make the round interesting.

 

Quietly shuffling off to the side and stealing without creating a stir whatsoever hardly achieves these goals and sort of removes the point of there being antagonists all together. Most people enter the round with the express interest of waiting to see what happens, when nothing happens most people are understandably perturbed.

 

Traitors shouldn't be Extended+.

 

If you don't want to be an antag, ahelp it and get it passed to someone else.

I can guarantee you there will always be a lot more antags that are willing to go full HAM than try not to get caught and not be murderous. Besides most of antags are violent/evil by nature. And trust me, stealing is not the only non-lethal objective, who said the "Don't let target fly off on escape pod" is a violent objective?  And can you imagine how it wouldn't create conflict? Direct approach for that objective would be to kidnap your target and hide him somewhere. 

[Nayser]

15 minutes ago, Birdtalon said:

Greentexting is the green "The traitor was successful" you get pop up at the end of the round. Or not in my case.

That being said as long as people have the ability to just have the regular objectives I'm not against the idea. As long as my objectives wouldn't just be kill kill kill if I chose the lethal option, I'd still like a variety for varied gameplay.

 

The fact that you said "kill kill kill" makes me think there could also be third option which is opposite of what i suggested. So there could be 3 antag options, Peaceful. Normal. Violent

[ZN23X]

7 hours ago, Dinarzad said:

That assumes theft can't cause a stir and assumes someone is trying to greentext super hard.

If you have to steal the captain's laser gun, do it in a fun or interesting way and leave just enough evidence to spark a hunt. Congrats, the round is now interesting.
's more ways to make a round interesting and hectic then just killing people.

Agreed. Some antags just quickly complete all objectives then sit on thier hands all round. If I quickly and discretely kill my target(s) and steal my item(s) for green text it doesnt immediately make the round interesting. Being a violent antag doesn't automatically  make you interesting.

Case and point, the most boring rounds are the ones where the cult spend 90+ minutes creating an unstoppable army in a location it's impossible for sec to reach and then murders the entire crew in less than 10 minutes. That's not making the round interesting, at least not for anyone except cultists who just wanna go "REEEEE!! KILL KILL KILL!!!". It's like an ascended shadowling round that takes more time to develop.

The most boring round I personally played was one where I got caught by cult early as a sec officer and spent over an hour sitting around doing nothing as a juggernaut because the cult needed to save me for when the time was right.

I saw a round that had a group of peaceful vampires that were protesting for vampires rights...a cult round where the cult was  peaceful and would only accept people who willingly joined and trying to convince thier sacrifice target to be willingly sacrificed in the name of thier god.

The creativity of the antags (and even non antags) is what makes rounds interesting, not the objectives.

I'll never forget the clown who asked for the captain's pistol to pay his debts. I can't tell the difference between the ones who wait for shuttle call to quickly break through the wall and steal it.

Edited March 15, 2017 by ZN23X

[Shadeykins]

5 hours ago, ZN23X said:

Agreed. Some antags just quickly complete all objectives then sit on thier hands all round. If I quickly and discretely kill my target(s) and steal my item(s) for green text it doesnt immediately make the round interesting. Being a violent antag doesn't automatically  make you interesting.

Bodies will be found and people notice other people missing. There's no honestly "discreet" method of killing someone on station and more often than not your kills will be sloppy which leads to a chase. This builds intrigue or can help to elevate the threat level on station and gives security and medical something to do. Nobody particularly cares if something is stolen unless it's the NAD or Hypospray. The majority of command veterans won't really care if the RD loses his vest, if one of the hand teleporters goes missing (because a head always steals it anyways), if a jetpack is gone (really I don't understand why this is an objective), or if the station blueprints are missing (they just fire the CE, generally).

 

Cults also leave evidence, because whether or not they're screwing around off station they've left a rune somewhere on station that can be discovered. Vampires should not be protesting for rights (in fact, if someone's definitively a vampire you can permabrig them immediately), and cults are incorrigible with the interests of the station. Antagonists are antagonists, they should not be sitting around having tea parties and concerning themselves with the dalliances of worker's rights. In fact the clause that "you don't have to go after your objectives" hasn't been present in the rules for some time, the only thing that's implied is that you shouldn't be uninteresting.

 

As pulled from the rules...

 

If you are not willing to act as an Antagonist, or if you have to leave the round midway, Adminhelp so someone else can fill your role;

 

and

 

Remember the goal of an Antagonist is to make the round exciting, fun, and dangerous, within limits. You should make an effort to add to the round, as opposed to simply completing your objectives and carrying on normally.

[ZN23X]

So we should just suppress players that have the creativity to do something original and make sure everyone does the same stuff as the last guy did repeatedly?

How do cultists building a base off station and going completely or mostly unnoticed for over 90 minutes make the round exciting and fun? Yes there's 10 minutes of danger whIle they slaughter everyone after a good chunk of the crew, including sec, goes to cryo because they are bored to death. What about the cult round I was sitting around as a juggernaut for an hour waiting for my masters to allow me to do something? Were they being exciting and fun? Are they making an effort to add to the round or are they just going for objectives? All they did the whole time was talk about thier sacrifice target. 

Again...being violent (or dangerous) doesn't inherently make you interesting...and you can be interesting without being violent. 

...and it's not like having non violent antags will make all antags non violent. Different people enjoy different things. Having a mix allows for more unique experiences.

And that's the best thing about this game. It's why I keep coming back. I'm not trying to improve my character, my stats, or trying to win. I keep playing so I can have yet another unique experience which this game lends it self to like no other. I've played a few months and I keep seeing new stuff. I love it. Maybe some people have been here so long they've seen it all and nothing feels unique and exciting to them anymore. I dunno.

[Happy Tim]

And you know, even violent objectives might be fun if the game encourages the more subtle approach than just simple beating someone with an e-sword to death.

But I think it's cool to get more options. I like to assassinate, from time to time, but I can see a niche for those solutions.

If we want to trully create a medium RP playerbase instead of "I'm unsure of whatever I RP or just robust". There is a very subtle difference here..

[Shadeykins]

4 hours ago, ZN23X said:

So we should just suppress players that have the creativity to do something original and make sure everyone does the same stuff as the last guy did repeatedly?

How do cultists building a base off station and going completely or mostly unnoticed for over 90 minutes make the round exciting and fun? Yes there's 10 minutes of danger whIle they slaughter everyone after a good chunk of the crew, including sec, goes to cryo because they are bored to death. What about the cult round I was sitting around as a juggernaut for an hour waiting for my masters to allow me to do something? Were they being exciting and fun? Are they making an effort to add to the round or are they just going for objectives? All they did the whole time was talk about thier sacrifice target. 

Again...being violent (or dangerous) doesn't inherently make you interesting...and you can be interesting without being violent. 

...and it's not like having non violent antags will make all antags non violent. Different people enjoy different things. Having a mix allows for more unique experiences.

And that's the best thing about this game. It's why I keep coming back. I'm not trying to improve my character, my stats, or trying to win. I keep playing so I can have yet another unique experience which this game lends it self to like no other. I've played a few months and I keep seeing new stuff. I love it. Maybe some people have been here so long they've seen it all and nothing feels unique and exciting to them anymore. I dunno.

I suggest you very thoroughly re-read my post, since the bulk of your response is predicated on a misunderstanding about something I already addressed. Nowhere do I endorse cultists sitting off station, I simply state that to get back on station they would have had to have left a rune.

 

It's also incredibly hard to have a silent cult, since 90% of your conversions are more interested in faffing around. The cult sitting back and building up is a common occurrence because it's one of the only few ways they can achieve their objectives. Cults (like shadowlings) are designed to be stealth antagonists who almost entirely rely on being too powerful to stop by the time you realize their presence.

 

Theft objectives do almost absolutely nothing to spice up the round, especially since a lot of them are mundane objects that either nobody cares about or neglects to pick up from their locker 50% of the time. The hypospray and NAD are probably the two theft objectives that require some serious forethought to get, because they're always in someone's bag.

 

Letting people play AntagLite does not add anything substantive to the round, it just leads to dull rounds where everyone is sitting on their hands wondering what happened to all the antags. Most of the interesting/unique and exciting things in SS13 are caused by antags. You tracking down a vampire with your buddy officer, risking your neck to save a friend, desperately (and perhaps futilely) fighting a massive plasmafire, or when you're down to the last man on a blob round and have the gut realization that you're going to have to sacrifice yourself in a nuclear explosion while everyone else evacuates.

 

Playing Mall Cop where you're trying to find Dr. Johnson's favourite pair of defib paddles he lost is not interesting. We should not incentivize these kinds of objectives, if anything most of the existing theft objectives should be scrapped in favour of unique/interesting ones that you have to go out of your way for. IE: There used to be an objective to get off the station with corgi meat, and this could actually be *quite* the task if cargo was lacking in points.

 

Stealing 100 moles of plasma on the other hand requires you to walk up to a tank that nobody in engineering is ever standing beside (conveniently located by maintenance) and click a button. Unused slime extract is even easier, because you can mass produce it and nobody will even blink if it's in your inventory. Jetpacks can be ordered, can be stolen from EVA, can be gained from mining points... Getting a jetpack is legitimately as easy as asking to be a gateway explorer, and grabbing one on your way in. Even better? Transfer to engineering and say you're wiring the solars, again, nobody blinks.

 

While I appreciate that for some people playing antag can be frustrating/hard (a lot of people feel bad/get really anxious. The first time I got an assassinate objective two years back I legitimately cried over it), this is I  predicated on a misunderstanding of what the role is intended for and the gravitas of your actions. While I enjoy keeping people in the round to the greatest extent that I can, character death is a necessary component to push the round forward/inspire people to action. This is especially true in SS13.

[ZN23X]

I didn't argue that we need to get rid of violent antags, my arguement is that people are capable of making rounds interesting without being violent.

We need less antags thinking "What's the easiest way to do this?" and more thinking "What's the most interesting way to do this?"

We didn't put the protesting vampires in perma or get rid of the voluntary cultists because THAT would have made the round more boring. Instead we played along with it and it made for two uniquely interesting experiences.

[Shadeykins]

2 hours ago, ZN23X said:

I didn't argue that we need to get rid of violent antags, my arguement is that people are capable of making rounds interesting without being violent.

We need less antags thinking "What's the easiest way to do this?" and more thinking "What's the most interesting way to do this?"

We didn't put the protesting vampires in perma or get rid of the voluntary cultists because THAT would have made the round more boring. Instead we played along with it and it made for two uniquely interesting experiences.

I really don't understand the logic in bending over so far backwards that you're willing to tolerate groups that are explicitly hellbent on killing people and are vehemently opposed to the interests of the company you're intended to work for. I appreciate people being clever and interesting, I fail to see how either of those two fit into that paradigm in a way that isn't worthy of the command officer in that situation receiving a job ban or a talking to.

 

If you're not applying Space Law appropriately (and permabrigging 'innocent' vampires and deconverting known cultists is outlined in Space Law) you can be subject to job bans. It's written right in the rules that security is under heavy scrutiny in regards to these sorts of things.

 

Your suggestion is to allow people to choose only 'pacifist' objectives, which aren't very well supported in the first place and run counter to what an antagonist is supposed to be doing. It's before your time, but I will say that wizard objectives were changed from theft-like goals to "cause as much mayhem on the station as possible" because of friendly antagonist nonsense that was not enjoyable and heinously unpopular.

[Dinarzad]

I don't see why this is being so intensely argued.
Antags can and do already ignore objectives they dislike or can Ahelp and ask admins for new objectives if they do all of theirs super early or if they don;t feel comfortable doing some of them.

Isn't this... just making a preference option version of that, more or less? It;s the exact same feature that can be and IS doen right now, just a version that doesn't take admin intervention...?

[Nayser]

So this discussion is split into two sides basicly.

One is roughly saying that without murdering and causing chaos there is no fun.

The other is saying creativity makes rounds fun, not the murdering/chaos.

 

I suppose i'm with the second side, which is obvious ofcourse.

If you want to make rounds fun there is not even a need to be antagonist. 

Here's a good example: I was playing as warden and then i start hearing energy sword sounds and some other odd sounds, i start investigating, checking lockers and maint, didn't find anything. And then suddenly i notice a cleverly hidden body bag behind black chair in security office. There was a vox inside who was playing a prank on all security yet somehow i was the only one to notice that. When i opened the body bag a message in big red letters appeared in my text box and i heard explosive/gibbing sound. I swear i had my heart jump out. It was a vox bopping me with a toy. He got me good... now you may call me bad at my job but i did let him go even though he tresspassed, why? Because common sense. Just because law says so doesn't necesserily mean you must do it. If you follow IC laws like game rules and constantly seek action than this is practicly lite rp.

As mentioned by shadeykins.

Remember the goal of an Antagonist is to make the round exciting, fun, and dangerous, within limits. You should make an effort to add to the round, as opposed to simply completing your objectives and carrying on normally.

Despite that for some reason wizards exist. I hate wizard rounds the most. I fail to see where they are dangerous WITHIN LIMITS.

Wizards either die really quick and round ends or wizard just kills everyone on his way easily. Not. Fun.

If there is no vampries protesting for their rights or clowns begging captain for his gun that is not medium rp.

Because you face morally questionable choices when you see antags trying to be not evil. You must arrest them but is it right? You don't arrest them, other officers disagree with you, a conflict grows. Thats what makes it medium rp.

 

[ZN23X]

1 hour ago, Nayser said:

One is roughly saying that without murdering and causing chaos there is no fun.

The other is saying creativity makes rounds fun, not the murdering/chaos.

I'm saying both make it interesting, not one or the other.

[ZN23X]

...and Shady, save the threats for job bans for people who actually abuse thier jobs. I'm one of the people in Sec who intentionally  avoids excessive force and being "Shitcurity" because I don't want to unecessarily make the game less fun for others and I don't want to overstep my bounds.

Since you want to quote the wiki and abide by it word for word. Under space law. "Great cases of RP may excuse certain crimes." The term "certain crimes" doesn't specify which crimes so you can't even say to me "They are classified as EOC which is unforgivable"...it could mean any crime based on the circumstance.

....and as Dinarzad said...and has been pointed out in my examples  (which are few of many I could share) and examples given by others there are plenty of people already making rounds interesting in this fashion. Pretty sure the admins have worse stuff to worry about than people who are good at RPing.

If the only thing that stimulates you is violence this is the wrong server for you. Paradise offers a much more sophisticated and complex environment which is why it's so good. An environment that includes, but is not limited to, violence.

[Shadeykins]

2 hours ago, Nayser said:

If there is no vampries protesting for their rights or clowns begging captain for his gun that is not medium rp.

Because you face morally questionable choices when you see antags trying to be not evil. You must arrest them but is it right? You don't arrest them, other officers disagree with you, a conflict grows. Thats what makes it medium rp.

 

And herein lies the crux of the issue. If there are no antags to be noticed, there are no morally questionable choices and there is no conflict. People getting to opt out of objectives they don't like is ludicrous and this is just pushing toward hugbox station, something we should really strive to avoid. The charm in SS13 is the inherent danger of its environment and the uncertainty/suspense of "What happens next?" and "Who can I trust?" that keeps you on edge.

 

5/8 traitors with pacifist objectives is not interesting. It is not dangerous. It just means there's effectively 3 antags, while the other five are busy politely bartering for their goods. One or two people doing this in conjunction with other objectives is perfectly fine, when it becomes the norm you just have a round of extended. If you think Wizard was an example, Raiders is an even better one.

 

Raiders was the pacifist game mode where the Vox raiders (who were clearly antags) were only to steal things. It was pretty much universally hated and heralded as one of the most boring and pointless gamemodes in rotation. Borers has been in the same situation for a long time, as their unclear antagonist status (or pacifism) leads to ludicrous situations wherein crewmembers actively fight for/defend the rights of mind-possessing brain slugs. We should not foster pacifist antagonists, and if we do they should always be the assassinate objective of another (or multiple) antagonist(s).

 

"If you are not willing to act as an Antagonist, or if you have to leave the round midway, Adminhelp so someone else can fill your role;"

 

As for security, Space Law is deliberately written so there is no moral dilemma and no ambiguity.

"As a member of Security, higher standards of play are expected of you. You are expected to follow Space Law and Standard Operating Procedure correctly, when playing Security."

 

Want to know what's a more interesting moral dilemma? Having been contracted to kill your friend, or someone you really don't want to. There's an almost infinite complexity and richness in that, as opposed to a security officer deciding they should be sympathetic to someone working for a terrorist organization consisting of space pirates and opposing corporations. The Vox scenario doesn't even come close, as that's literally just a bored civilian (who is bored because antagonists either don't exist/aren't doing anything) occupying himself by playing pranks on security. There is a difference between arresting the confirmed enemy of the corporation, and not immediately tasering and arresting everyone who so much as steps through the security lobby doors.

 

Example town. If you worked for a store and the competition hired someone to steal something of a sensitive nature, you wouldn't barter with them or offer sympathy even if they were nice. You would immediately call your superior on it, or even the police. If you did barter with them without the express authority of higher ups, you would probably lose your job. This is nicely supported by this segment of the rules -- you're not supposed to be doing this without ahelping.

"If you wish to RP a corrupt member of Security (taking bribes, beating a prisoner, etc), then Adminhelp for permission first. We're generally willing to give permission if the situation warrants it, or you have a valid justification"

 

It stands to reason that there's really no moral dilemma when a well-known terrorist organization, consisting mostly of space pirates, funded by NanoTrasen's opposition sends a hostile agent to your workstation (hostile agents which are known to be violent/serial liars).

 

I don't mind cutting people leeway or humouring clever and intelligent ideas. Your clown and the antique laser example (ironically) is likely predicated on a round where Travelling Merchant (the clown) managed to convince me (the Captain) to send a fax to Central Command which ultimately resulted in him being awarded the antique laser pistol in exchange for some museum tickets and a deposit. Want to know what's great about this example? He was also a changeling and discreetly created a lot of work for security by helping his syndicate peers and pursuing other objectives (one of which was an assassinate objective).

 

@ZN23X You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I'm quoting the wiki. I'm not. Every quote I've pulled has been from the server rules or is tightly incorporated with the server rules (which Space Law happens to be). I've also been here for over two years, so I don't really see where you can get off implying I should go to another server because "Paradise isn't right for me". I'm not opposed to the occasional traitor who goes about their theft objectives in a clever way, I'm opposed to gameifying hugbox and encouraging it as a normal and regular occurrence.

 

By the by, this is the full clause you're quoting. Emphasis on the latter part.

 

"Great cases of RP may excuse certain crimes. Adminhelp if you wish to intentionally break a law. Just remember, you will get fired for it if you can't cover it up. The threat of a ban still applies."

 

Also, double-posting is really poor form. Please use the edit function.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Shadeykins

[ZN23X]

I'm not saying Paradise isn't right for you specifically @Shadeykins. I'm saying it isn't right for people who are only stimulated by violence. It only applies to you if you are only stimulated by violence.

Even if it seems like it, I'm not personally attacking you personally, I'm attacking the notion that only violence leads to interesting rounds.

I enjoy the chaos and mayhem of a nukie, wizard, or blob round, I also enjoy the RP that keeps me from being bored out of my mind in slow building cultists rounds. I appreciate both the antags, non antags, and admins that create unique events or scenarios I've never seen before.

Edited March 16, 2017 by ZN23X