Coldflame

Wouldn't that make shadowlings take twice the damage from light (as they're both a shadowperson and a shadowling)?

Er, well, if we gave him the different objective thing and make him fall under "Play Antags Responsibly" then this may be avoidable... darn, I'm clueless of what to do now. Also, isn't 20 TC what norm. traitors spawn with anyway? All the nukie'd get would be a fancy gun and a suit he can get from the normal uplinks anyhow. 20 TC is standard for traitors, but it's still more than enough to go on an effective murderbone spree combined with standard nukeops gear. The event would either need a rework, be limited to a round-changer of the magnitude of xenos, or a different objective.

A lone operative is likely to play it pretty tactical and try avoid detection, so I imagine they could kill a fair few people before getting mowed down by sec should they choose to take the murderbone route. 20 TC is enough for some serious killing potential. There's also the issue with a lone operative deploying into engineering and releasing the singularity just to be a dick, unless the rules were different for them.

I like the idea, but introducing someone with a free pass to murderbone and a potential roundender at a random time could easily go wrong. It'd be neat as an admin thing to spice up slow rounds, though.

This is a really minor one, but there are currently very few of these around- most notably, none in sec, which is pretty odd. I don't think the HoS even has access to a 'security' newscaster. If they were more prevalent, they might actually see some use.

Spending karma to start the round with access to advantageous powers at very little disadvantage? I can't say I agree with this one

I'd prefer references to be kept out of code, in lieu of either serious descriptions or smart jokes in keeping with ss13's deadpan humor codewise.

shouldn't we establish if other maps are on the table before discussing a rotation? I think metastation's in the early stages of being playable on paracode and that's about it.

Doesn't the server theoretically cap since all jobs are limited? (I think civilian has around a 5:1 ratio with sec though it might not work exactly like that). Though I think the population doesn't go high enough to exhaust the job slots? More ontopic, I don't reall see a need for a cap. Whilst certainly different to lower-pop rounds, higher pop rounds have an interesting atmosphere and you're more liable to run into someone willing to actually engage in some passive RP with. fuck playing sec on highpop, though

I think that admins (or maybe everyone) should be able to opt out of getting karma, it seems to be an ideal middle ground for the problems with admins and their interactions with the karma system

they wouldn't give it out again and if they did they would know who the stealthmin was

I don't want people to be able to know who my characters are or if I'm online unless I want them to know. It'd still be a good opt-in option for admins who are open about when they're online and who they play. More directly relevant to the thread: I think there should be a cap on how much karma Person A can give Person B in any given day/week/month to discourage both actual karma trading and only distributing karma within a clique. If people can't constantly feed karma back and forth with their friends, they're more liable to distribute it to people who actually earn it.

At that point lockboxes might as well be removed.

Not all antags are traitors. Circular logic like this is why cults and revolutions can't get rnd weapons. rev's out of the rotation and cult can fit three-hit kill weapon asspull tokens in their pocket

Doesn't using the verb forfeit your respawn right as well? I forget. Regardless, you're still free to kill yourself without using the verb, so I don't see how this is a compelling argument in favor of keeping it.

If crowbars could open locked lockers and crates there would be no reason to lock them in the first place

Roboticists can no longer use the console as I understand it. Access to R&D seems reasonable to me, though I've not played science in a while so I'm not sure what the current atmosphere of the department is.

aren't clowns supposed to be completely incompentent rather than skilled entertainers? this'd probably work better for the mime

-Science don't need phazons -Sec don't need phazons -Antags with phazons are at a pretty big advantage The change making phazons very hard to get hold of was intentional. As far as I'm aware, phazons are mainly intended as a non-crew (deathsquad/specialERT) tool to begin with in most cases, though I might be wrong.

bonus points if your selection carries over to your safe, should you play a job that gets one

To be completely honest, I'm not sure what purpose the suicide verb actually serves. The only ones I can see are: -Killing yourself slightly more effectively than via 'natural' methods -Killing yourself whilst prevented from doing so 'naturally', (i.e. by cuffs or by being near other players who will step in and prevent it) -Killing yourself in a manner that prevents being revived -Using suicide 'tactics' as an antag (i.e. wizard bodyswap shenanigans, suiciding just before dock for death traitor objective, etc) I've not played recently, but I seem to recall a somewhat prevalent amount of players typing suicide as soon as they were detained by sec, captured by an antag, or faced any other form of adversity or loss of agency. I personally feel like the suicide verb goes against the spirit of the game given the complete lack of ways to prevent another player using it. Around 95% of the time players will be perfectly free to beat themselves to death, space themselves, OD, or kill themselves however they see fit; The times that actually call for use of the suicide verb are those it probably shouldn't actually be used. From a balance standpoint the verb also has some issues. As stated above, it has various uses as an antag; a somewhat common wizard tactic is to suicide and then bodyswap, which is neither an intended use of the bodyswap spell nor the suicide verb (for a single spellpoint the wizard gains a significantly more powerful version of disintegrate, in effect.) Traitors with die a glorious death can not possibly fail this objective unintentionally- Unless they're unconscious, they can type in the suicide verb (on a side note, this also removes tension from the otherwise interesting dynamic of a traitor protecting another traitor with the die objective). Antags with complete control other other players (shadowling, mindslavers, vampires), can also force a detained inferior to use the verb, taking them out of the round and instantly closing off a lead to themselves. All of that said, the suicide verb certainly isn't a huge issue. I'm curious as to what others think of the suicide verb (perhaps I could be somewhat bias against it, though I've tried to be fairly objective with this).

Is there actually any need for this except for making the HoS slightly faster (and an even more attractive target)?

Um no, just no. Space law absolutely is NOT server rules; someone who breaks space law is NOT breaking serve rules, by any stretch. Space Law is an IC thing and game mechanic. I don't think you know how lockboxes work. They're literally impossible to open unless you have (1) ARMORY access (2) An Emag. There's literally only three people on the entire station who can open them, legally. There's literally NO other way to possibly open them. http://nanotrasen.se/wiki/index.php/Space_law - "Adminhelp if you wish to intentionally break the law." As for lockboxes, it's been suggested multiple times that perhaps only a sec ID could be required. I was also under the impression that emp could break into a lockbox? Those two aside, there's still zero reason for R&D or non-sec to have secHUDs.

Most ot he arguments I see in this thread seem to be from the standpoint of crew interacting with sec being a 'us vs them' situation, which simply isn't the case. Non-sec, Non-antags have absolutely zero use for secHUDs if they don't intend on intentionally breaking the law (which is against the rules anyway, contrary to the actions of a significant portion of the playerbase), or vigilantism. There's no 'fun' use of a secHUD that doesn't involve being a dick to another player. With regards to antags, lockboxes are far from impregnable. IDs with basic sec access aren't exactly challenging to get hold of for a crafty antag, and several antags have other methods into lockboxes. Not to mention secHUD's being powerful in the hands of an antag, and being available though other means. In short: you don't need a secHUD if you're not: -Sec -An antag -Intending on inconveniencing, or harming, other players, be it for 'fun' or vigilantism

SecHUDs (all three varieties) are extremely abusable, have no practical use for non-sec roles, and there's no reason for them not to be lockboxed. There's not much else to say on the topic.