TullyBBurnalot
-
Posts
2,631 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Posts posted by TullyBBurnalot
-
-
Well, we are kinda changing SOP.
And "lynch lists" can die in a fire. Anyway giving people that much level of shit can get slapped by a fax to the face.
-
Actually a good point. "Suspicious personnel" redacted from Code Red SOP.
Edit: Wait, nitpicks in installations? OH YAS.
-snip about suit sensors-Realistically speaking, there is no reason NOT to have them maxed out. Even if it's Extended, you're still working aboard a space station with multiple potential workplace hazards.
Safety first.
NEXT!
-snip about Department Transit-Well, considering I removed the whole thing about forcing people into Departments, and the fuckass huge "Durrr obvious" value of this, striking those things as well.
NEXT!
-The NSS Cyberiad and NTV Charon seem to be regarded as two separate vessels, yet according to this page, Space Law only applies to the NSS Cyberiad. Just an oversight I noticed, but it still might wanna be clarified that the NTV Charons rules and the NSS Cyberiads rules are the same.Anyone who tries weaseling out of being convicted because they're on the Charon can adequately be shut up without repercussions.
Besides, the Charon is a boarding shuttle, not really a station or a major ship like the Cyberiad or Icarus, respectively.
NEXT!
-Under Singularity Containment Failure. 2 and 3 should likely be changed to "a" and "b" in order to look nicer. Just a personal opinion.Good taste. Changed.
NEXT!
-Under Tesla Containment Failure. The Tesla Matrix has a chance to drift of into space (I've seen it a total of one time), so cases where it leaves should be referred to in SoP. Also, locker hiding was nerfed in the most recent patch to the game, so that might need to be looked at again.I did notice that PR. Tesla Containment Failure Situational SOP changed to:
Tesla Containment Failure
- The Tesla Matrix is to be tracked at all costs, and its current location announced to the crew;
- If the Tesla Matrix remains inside the Cyberiad rather than arcing into space, the Charon is to be called
NEXT!
-Under Fires/Gas Spills. 3 and 4 could probably just be summarized into "Engineering Staff should proceed to restore the affected areas to workable(?) conditions."True. Guidelines changed to a single:
Engineering and Atmospherics personnel are to restore the affected area to working and livable condition -
This should work only for removing cuffs. If you get buckled, you still need to get out of that first, the long way.
-
Image for reference:
Basically, a 1 TC Traitor Item: a non-breakable, re-usable bobby pin that, so long as it is in one of your pockets, lets you break out of handcuffs in 15-20 seconds!
Has no effect on zipties or cable cuffs, though, for obvious reasons.
Courtesy of Tigercat2000 for the idea!
-
The following has been added to said relevant areas:
Failure to do so may lead to their arrest for Creating a Workplace Hazard -
I would not be averse to the idea of a "RnD Checkup" for the more stealthy items. In fact, I can see it being a great idea, actually.
1) Security is allowed to retain their knowledge of existence, but lack the capacity to identify. This would mean no more "Hey, this pen has liquid in it" just by looking at it. Which even I think is cheesy;
2) It would probably lead to more cooperation between RnD and Security, and give RnD a fun little thing to do. Officer McHambatan shows up with a bag of possible contraband, RnD analyses it and tells Mister McHambatan what the contraband is after an analysis of the objects, and now we have evidence (or not) of it;
3) It would allow for the current level of knowledge, overall, to be retained, while instating some degree of complexity beyond "AI, come here".
-
I absolutely agree. I have always been an advocate for semi-frequent listing precisely because I wish to avoid stagnation. Hell, that's why I, Free and Neca worked on the whole Space Law rewrite, and why I dedicate myself to writing pointless legalese documentation no one ever reads.
/selfdeprecation
The issue is, I am not convinced this is the correct turn to take. As Earth mentioned, this would be regressing to a state of affairs that was already attempted, and failed. And this was back when Paradise was still a little babby, not nearly the grand beast it is now. It feels like a backwards "Let's try this again" step, rather than a step forward.
-
One of the issues here is that limited knowledge of this kind cannot be adequately confined to Security. If Security are to have limited knowledge of Antagonist items, then the rest of the crew would also have to have limited knowledge, either on part with Security, or even less.
In practice, this would mean telling everyone playing on the server "you don't know what X is now". And I don't feel like this is feasible, much less favorable.
Limiting available antagonist knowledge is something that was... never really done, so far as I am aware, since I have been playing here (about 2 years?). It's something that people have gotten accustomed to. It's something that's part of the current atmosphere of the server. It's one of the things that, for better or worse, defines Paradise and separates her from, say, Baystation. Considering our average server population, and the influx of new players even while unlisted, I do not think it would healthy for the community to implement such a drastic change.
Do not get me wrong. I do not intend to speak for the community, but I cannot help but feel that, considering how things have been operating, so far, suddenly imposing such clear restrictions on available IC knowledge, especially for Security players, would lead to very much what Earth was saying; people trying to work around it. Security, and the crew in general, have been operating under the "we know what this all is" rule for a long time. I do not believe that such a change is even feasible at this point. Not only would it require every current player to suddenly play along nicely, but it would also require new players to get accustomed to it. And frankly, I believe it is something that is, at this point, alien to Paradise. I fear what that would mean for new potential players.
Basically what Deanthelis said, as well.
Limiting antagonist knowledge, artificially, at this point in Paradise's history, would be like suddenly turning 90 degrees on a straight road. Could it work? Maybe. Do I think it would work and would lead to a better, funner experience for everyone on the server? Not really.
-
I very much like this idea, as it make the Psych relevant. Very few people actually roleplay mental illness adequately, or even seek the Psych for guidance, so adding mechanics to act as a sort of incentive can most definitely open up new avenues for players to explore.
Full blessing from your resident armchair psychologist.
-
For the sake of testing, the following had been added to Code Red/Gamma General Crew SOP:
Personnel are to follow the instructions of Security staff, so long as they are within the bounds of Space Law and are not acting against the general well-being of the station and its crew -
Considering the lack of responses, moving this as finished in... 3 days.
-
For capital crimes only the Magistrate, Captain, or CC should be allowed to authorize parole.
Already in there. It mentions "Non-Capital".
NEXT!
Also, Parole should only be offered for crimes 15 minutes or greater. Any shorter than that, and they can sit it out.That's why it's left at the discretion of said people.
NEXT!
There's nothing written about gun/contraband permits, should that be left for Legal SOP?Yes, will be there.
-
Added the following Modifier:
Name: Parole
Category: Special Modifier
Description: To be released, under parole, before the allotted sentence for a crime is up.
Notes: Prisoners may technically be paroled for any crime. However, for Capital Crimes, see "404 - Enemy of the Corporation". For non-Capital Crimes, Parole may be offered at the discretion of the Warden, Head of Security, Captain or Magistrate. Personnel under parole are to be kept under surveillance and, if they commit another crime, are to be sentenced for that crime, in addition to the sentence that they were paroled from. Any personnel breaking Parole are disqualified from future Parole. Any personnel breaking Parole from Capital Crimes are to be executed upon capture.
Because I realized nothing was written anywhere about Parole.
-
"Non-Hostile"
-
Following discussion, this happened:
-
Second one is covered in Sec SOP.
First one falls under the "you are expected to know this going in " category.
-
As it is currently worded, no, Vandalism does not cover killing random animals. It covers Departmental Pets (like Ian, Pun-Pun and Runtime).
That said, as Neca mentioned, it would not be difficult to add a "all animals killed" thing to Vandalism.
-
I still think this wording could be improved, such that a person could just scan down the list and stop at the first matching rule, rather than having to read and compare the whole thing every time.
That’s why I worded the original list in the order I did - so you can evaluate the lines one at a time, and stop at the first matching one.
Interesting. So, something like a "Worst Case ---> Best Case" algorithm or a "Best Cast ---> Worst Case"?
NEXT!
I think the consequences are more serious than security being annoyed.Examples:
- Pranks that lead sec/command to hunt for lings rather than cult, ultimately leading to the cult going undetected for longer and people dying as a result of Sec being on a distracted goose-chase.
- Frustration for Security players, which contributes to the problem of having enough good/experienced people being willing to play security.
- Frustration for the crew, who want to be believed by Sec, but aren’t, due to security being pranked regularly.
Of those, the first is a round-altering event, the third can ruin someone’s round, and the second contributes to a chronic problem in the department that probably does the most out of any department to set the tone of the round.
I do agree there is potential for a law like this to be abused. However, I also think that the behavior it discourages is most definitely harmful and worth discouraging.
While I agree with some of your points, your last one is critical. Realistically, the potential for abuse for this Law could very well surpass the potential problems solved. By a large margin.
NEXT!
- 501: Releasing the Tesla - process as EoC, also contact CC- 502: Destroying the Gravity Generator - process as EoC, contact CC
This is already covered in Grand Sabotage.
- 504: Being a hatched shadowling, rogue AI, nuclear operative, etc - shoot them on sightBasically covered under 404.
- 503: Harming a SSD person - stop them, contact CCSame as the Sexual Assault Law. This is punishable OOCly by warnings/tempbans/permabans. No point having an IC law for it.
NEXT!
I’d still be more inclined to go with:Name: Repeat Offender / Three Strikes Rule
Category: Special Modifier
Description: To be brigged at least 3 different times for separate, unrelated crimes.
Notes: On the third brigging, the sentence is converted to permabrig automatically.
Example: Person A steals something. Caught and brigged. Upon release, they steal another thing. Caught and brigged. Upon release, they steal a third thing, and this time they get a perma sentence.
This is simpler, clearer, and requires zero math.
IMHO, if someone is going to spend their whole shift on a crime spree, continuing despite being brigged for it multiple times, they should end up in perma.
Having someone continually cycle in and out of the brig all shift, because they keep committing crimes despite being repeatedly brigged, is infuriating.
It is infuriating. However, implementing a "Three Strike" system like this means someone could get permabrigged for stealing 3 crowbars.
Seems overkill.
NEXT!
The above is for “Escape”. If someone only attempts to escape, but doesn’t actually escape, maybe modify differently.Breaking a lightbulb is not worth 20 minutes.
Attempting to escape is just as serious as actually escaping. The only difference is whether or not Security manages to stop them. Regardless, they still just tried to break out of jail.
NEXT!
Or just “Major Assault”.I highly doubt you’d cause enough damage to warrant this if you attacked only with your fists.
Not unless it was a consentual fistfight. In that case, do we really want to be using these strong charges?
I have, on several occasions, seen non-consensual fistfights lead to this level of damage. While it may be impractical when compared to using tools, it does happen.
-
Does Webster's work?
-
*SCREAM
Change Medical Reasons fromPrisoners are entitled to medical attention if sick or injured.to something like
Prisoners are entitled to medical attention if sick or injured. If an prisoner intentionally injures themself, then medical aid is not required to be given to them.As much as I love to do this, no. It's needlessly cruel and should not be in Space Law.
NEXT!
Adding Kidnapping as a charge is good, but I would spend less time focusing on what is NOT kidnapping, and more time on what IS kidnapping. E.g: "Someone other than security either (A) restraining someone and moving them against their will, or (B) physically keeping them in a certain area against their will". Say what the law is meant to cover, and say "nothing else counts". Listing a bunch of "this is not it, this is not it either" in the description isn't so helpful.Kidnapping definition changed to:
To hold a crewmember under duress, against their will.And notes changed to:
Physical harm need not be done for this law to apply: the crewmember must either be forcefully kept in their workspace against their will, or forcefully relocated to another location against their will and being prevented from leaving. Cuffing/Restraining any personnel against their will, outside of legal arrests, qualifies as Kidnapping. Anything else does not fall under this law.Relevant changes added to Kidnapping of an Officer as well.
NEXT!
I prefer assault with a deadly weapon over aggravated assault. It is clearer, and does not depend on the luck of whether medical intervenes before the victim ends up in crit.Quickness of medical attention is irrelevant. The "cut-off point" of the law is not medical attention, it's the amount of damage done. However, I would be more than happy to define this point as "Soft Critical Condition or more severe".
NEXT!
It can be very hard to determine the intent of attackers. I'm skeptical of attempts to distinguish between crimes based purely on the metal state of the attacker. Sometimes it is obvious (e.g: when they hide the body). Most of the time, it isn't. You can't take their word for it, either - usually a smart attacker will lie about their intent to get a lighter sentence.Which was the problem with Assault VS Attempted Murder in the first place. Except now, we're handling only actual deaths and, mind you, "Cannot be executed" VS "MAY be executed". Discerning intent can be hard, yes. That's what the Detective and logical reasoning are there for. Sometimes the distinction should be made.
NEXT!
I do like the law against having contraband. "I just found it, that's legit" is heard way, way too often from the mouthes of crew who have blatently illegal tech. I do worry, though, that this law will decrease gateway use, and lead to syndies either keeping only one item on them at once (thus dodging the EoC designation) or simply going full combat (reasoning they're guaranteed to face an EoC charge if caught simply due to their inventory, regardless of their actions, so they might as well be violent as it won't increase their sentence).This is something that really can only be ascertained properly with playtesting. I, for one, welcome the opportunity to see what people will come up with.
NEXT!
The EoC saying that execution is mandatory for uncontainable threats is good, in that it lists examples of uncontainable threats (e.g: powered vamps). However, is captain/magistrate signoff still required to execute them? Or can any officer just do it? After all, asking for permission is arguably pointless if the cap/magistrate only has one answer they can give?That is actually a very good point. I would honestly say that, in cases where containment is not possible, then Magistrate/Captain permission should not be required, considering the inherent futility of it. However, I would very much like to hear the opinions of the Server Staff on this.
NEXT!
EoC really needs its sentencing guidelines turned into a bullet-point list, for readability.Also a good point. Entire Law changed to:
Name: Enemy of the Corporation
Code: 404
Category: Capital
Description: To be proven to be working for an enemy of NanoTrasen (eg: Syndicate) and/or to be working to undermine NanoTrasen's operations.
Notes: Current enemies of Nanotrasen include but are not limited to: The Syndicate (through secret agents, boarding parties, and brainwashing specialists), the Wizard Federation, the Changeling Hivemind, Shadowlings, Vampires and other intelligent hostile forms of life that seek to cause major damage to the station and or crew.
If the Enemy of the Corporation has not committed any Major or Capital Crimes, they are to be placed in Permanent Imprisonment (Permabrig/Solitary/Labor Camp). Execution is not permitted. Borging may occur at the EoC's discretion.
If the Enemy of the Corporation has committed Major or Capital Crimes, Execution is permitted. Consult the Captain or Magistrate.
Parole can be offered, at the discretion of the Captain or Magistrate. This should only happen in emergencies, where extra hands are desperately needed. Paroled Enemies of the Corporation are to be stripped of all their belongings and given basic Civilian access.
Any personnel that escape Permanent Imprisonment under this law are to be executed when captured.
Hatched Shadowlings are to be killed on sight.
Changelings, if Executed, are to be cremated or borged.
Powered Vampires, or any other Enemies of the Corporation that cannot be contained safely in the Brig, are to be executed.
Head Revolutionaries are to be executed or exiled as soon as they are positively identified.
Any other Enemies of the Corporation that willingly turn themselves into Security of their own accord are to be kept in Permanent Imprisonment.
Minor changes, but more readable.
NEXT!
Suggestion - New Crime - "Creating a false security alert"I would also like to see "creating a false security alert" added as a crime of some kind.
Example:
- Bartender creates panic by saying "SYNDICATE BOMB IN BAR" and it turns out to be the drink - they just wanted everyone to come to bar because they were bored.
- Clown causes code red by screaming "CHANGELING ABSORBING ASSISTANT IN MAINT" and they're just making it up "as a prank, HONK!"
- Joe McGreytide hits himself repeatedly with a toolbox, then claims he was attacked by a vampire when questioned, which triggers code blue and a station-wide vampire hunt while the real threat goes undetected.
Crud like this happens very regularly, and is utterly infuriating to security, who can't even punish the people who are blatently doing this and happy to admit it. Crew need to trust security will follow the law, but equally Sec need to trust normal crew to tell the truth, and that trust is very undermined when crew obviously get away with lying to everyone about major threats, safe in the knowledge they can't be punished for this.
As annoying as it is, I do not think adding this law is a good idea, for the same reason that "Insulting an Officer" was an awful law. You'd basically be throwing someone into prison for doing something that, more often than not, has no negative repercussions apart from Security being slightly annoyed.
NEXT!
If Space Law is so complicated people want an out-of-game calculation program to figure out correct sentences, then it is TOO complicated, and must be simplified so a normal person (ie: NOT a word nerd like us) can figure it out themselves.This is absolutely vital. Security is already a ridiculously stressful job that experienced players shy away from - making the regs even more complicated, to the point that people start turning to third-party programs just to make sense of them, is a big step backwards.
I honestly hope that the Space Law calculator was not taken seriously. If you cannot perform basic math (or cannot be bothered to do so), you should not be playing as Security.
NEXT!
Why is this in space law? If it ever came up it would be dealt with via boinks (and a probable ban) instead of space law. I can't remember anyone being sentenced for this, ever. If we're going to have "crimes" for which the punishment is "ahelp this!" then it should be its own category, "War Crimes" and include things like "releasing the tesla", "destroying gravity gen", "harming a SSD person", etc. Perhaps you could even put the "Kill On Sight" list (e.g: hatched shadowlings, rogue AI, nuke ops, blob, etc) in here, rather than EoC. Would be kinda neat to have a "space law does not apply to these entities. Kill them on sight - they will try to do the same to you!" section).Again, would not mind removing this, since it is literally never, ever, ever used. Ever.
NECA!
NEXT!
Why not just say: A prisoner arrested more than once gets 10 minutes added to their timer for each arrest beyond the first. So one arrest = X minutes, two arrests = X + 10 minutes, three arrests = X + 20 minutes, etc. This isn't dependent on the number of crimes they do - so it is simpler to calculate.Or, simply have a rule that says someone arrested, and brigged, 3 times in the same shift gets permaed, no matter what the charges were. 3 strikes rule is far simpler and has similar impact on repeat offenders.
My complexity addition is showing. This is something that showed up during discussion as well. However, your proposals seem a bit... harsh. Law has been changed to:
Name: Repeat Offender
Category: Special Modifier
Description: To repeatedly commit crimes and receive brig time for them. This Modifier does not apply unless the person in question has already been caught and brigged at least twice.
Notes: On the third brigging, the prisoner's sentence is increased by 10 minutes. Each successive brigging will add another ten minutes. Can bring sentences to Permabrig status if the 60 minute mark is reached.
Example: Person A is brigged for Assault, for 10 minutes. Person A then gets brigged for Vandalism, for 5 minutes. Person A then gets brigged for Assault and Possession of a Weapon, for 30 minutes (10 for Assault, 10 for Possession of a Weapon, 10 due to Repeat Offender). Person A then gets brigged for Assault on an Officer, for 35 minutes (15+20). Person A then gets brigged for Possession of a Restricted Weapon and Assault on an Officer, for 60 minutes (15 for Possession of a Restricted Weapon, 15 for Assault on an Officer, 30 due to Repeat Offender), bringing the sentence to Permabrig Status.
NEXT!
IMHO, the modifier for "Escape" should be:- If their sentence is timed, double it, or add 20 minutes, whichever is more
- If their sentence is perma, escaping now qualifies them for execution
- If their sentence was already execution, escaping now qualifies them for Kill on Sight status.
The last two are, effectively, being done on a regular basis (second one is even explicit in EoC). The first one, however, again, seems a tad bit harsh. If the sentence is timed, all the person has to do is sit there quietly. Trying to escape brings them back to the starting line. Seems only fitting.
However, I have added the following to 404:
Any personnel escaping from an Execution sentence are to be killed on sight.NEXT!
+25% is really light for people who act like this.I'd be more inclined to make this +50%.
I am happy to say most people no longer just wordlessly spam resist. Not to mention, 25% can be very harsh depending on the amount of crimes committed.
NEXT!
-25% is way too little incentive for people to rat out their conspirators.I'd up this to a potential -50%.
Not restricted to just that. Again, I would rather not start using halves with Modifiers, as that would make them weigh far too much.
NEXT!
I would add gateway to the list of example areas.It is a restricted area, yet people break into it constantly and whine about how it is "only gateway!" when caught.
Noted in General SOP, noted here. Spess Law was made before the Gateway was implemented, it'll be fixed, no worries.
NEXT!
Aside from the name changes, it looks like the change from AwaDW to AA disqualifies anyone being charged with this unless they crit the victim. That seems silly. You can beat someone senseless, even to the point they might die without treatment from bleeding, etc, but since you did not crit them during the attack (maybe medical started treating them)? the worst you can get is a 201 assault charge, medium crime, 10 minute brig sentence?Aside from the fact that seems like an artificial example, see above. The discerning cut-off point for AA is "severe damage". I can, however, understand how that is vague.
Therefore, I propose:
Name: Aggravated Assault
Code: 313
Category: Major
Description: To assault someone with enough force to cause severe bodily damage (severe external bleeding, severe limb damage, broken bones, internal bleeding, organ damage, disfigurement), but not resulting in their immediate death.
Notes: If the victim of aggravated assault eventually dies of their wounds, the crime should be deliberated between Accidental Murder and Premeditated Murder.
Changes in bold.
NEXT!
- Assault with a deadly weapon: you attacked someone with a weapon that could have killed them, and did a substantial amount of damage.You can still do this with your fists, though. See above. Would rather have a blanket "beat someone senseless" law.
NEXT!
- Murder: you killed someone, with no reason to believe it was an accident. (we presume if you kill someone, it is intentional, since it is not an easy thing to do by mistake)- Manslaughter: you killed someone, with a specific reason for us to believe it was an accident.
If it is an issue with naming, I would be willing to change it. However, I would like to know everyone's opinions on it. Personally, however, I don't think it's a big deal. What matters is the content of the law. Not the name of it.
NEXT!
This would fall under anyone who has any means of escaping, that means all vampires, powerful or not, shadowlings (not thralls), changelings and wizardsSee above. In addition, there is a big difference between "unpowered" vampires and "powered" ones. "Unpowered" vampires being permabrigged is something I still see happen regularly.
NEXT!
If it's self harm, loading them up with ether to sedate them should suffice. If it continues, cuffing them to their bed or pulling out the straight jacket should do it. Other than that, there's not much you can do to stop them, short of temporarily removing their arms. I know self-harm is allowed by most AI lawsets, could it be allowed under Space Law? If they're really punching themselves in the face and not using the suicide verb, then I'd hardly say it's worth it.Part of Security's job is to make sure prisoners that are not executed serve their sentences. That said, you have a straightjacket in the execution room for a reason.
-
Nar-Sie Summoning Situational SOP stricken for not being something that Situational SOP should cover.
Seriously, its Nar-Sie being summoned. Kiss your ass goodbye.
-
What it says on the tin. Came out of a discussion on Discord, wanted to see the opinion of everyone on it.
-
Wi-Fi connection failed five minutes ago.
0/10. Would not use again.
-
Following discussion with the other Space Law Nerd, a note has been added to Aggravated Assault. This is a one-off thing, mind you, because of the severity of this particular crime.
How do you guys feel about the general direction of Paradise
in Suggestions
Posted
All this tells me is if we can't even get people to go along with some basic IC guidelines, the odds of them properly following IC-impacting OOC guidelines is even lower.