Security Redux

Scope of Changes

Stun weapons such as the stun baton, disabler, and disabler SMG will be removed from the game entirely.

Warden and HoS special weapons will receive reworks that do not revolve around stuns.

Jobs which start with disablers will either have them removed or replaced.

Security will have a new baton. This baton will still deal stun damage, but it scales based on how much blunt damage it is doing.

Many niche and ill-defined rules about how security is supposed to engage will be concentrated into escalation rules: Verbal -> Non-Lethal -> Lethal will apply to all non-antagonists, security included (though we spare flexibility for different levels if it makes sense for the situation). This will allow security, command, and crew to escalate against each other, allowing for more forms of IC conflict between crew, which was previously restricted under self-antag rules.

Rationale

Security at the time of writing is both stressful to play, and to play against.

On the side of security, many of the problems stem from the various rules and expectations placed on them, which do not exist for any other role in the game. Additionally, when members of security are mistreated, these same restrictions constrict how they are able to respond; their lack of freedom leads to OOC frustration, and leads them towards employing tactics which only serve to frustrate both sides even further.

Conversely, many of the problems from playing against security come from how they are designed to play, mechanically-speaking. Stuns are considered appropriate to be used in any case where someone is remotely non-compliant. Stuns carry no consequence for security to use, there are very few counters to them doing this, and even if there were, security are uniquely protected by the rules from most forms of resistance (assuming they are crew). The combination of these things causes people to hold very bitter attitudes towards security, as there is no way of engaging with them on even ground (both for crew, and for antagonists).

The oppressive nature of stuns discourages antags from holding meaningful interactions with other crew, but especially security. Taking any risk towards being caught, even if it’s for something creative or interesting, yields a real danger of being stunned and having your whole plan foiled. Meanwhile, this runs no danger for security, as there is no way for the suspect to prepare for stuns. This sets up an incentive structure that discourages antagonists from being creative, in favor of them being more cutthroat, playing quietly, and taking fewer risks, which is not what we wish to encourage.

This document aims to detail a way to rectify these issues.

The Issues

Laid out precisely, there are several issues with security.

• Security is Rules-heavy

  • Both in interactions from and towards security, people have to worry about walking on eggshells to avoid breaking the rules. There are heavy constraints on how people can respond to and from sec IC, and this leads to much friction and stress from both sides.

• The Stunmeta

  • The most common complaint with stuns is they are the best response to almost any situation. No matter how well equipped someone is, stuns can easily incapacitate someone in a 1v1 better than any firearm can. Nerfing stuns to remediate this will just make the life of a security player harder, and adding any form of stun resist will open up another vector of balance and complexity.

• Lack of consequence

  • Using stuns on someone has no weight or consequence. There is no reason for sec to hear someone out, roleplay, or assess a situation before stunning them. With stuns, if the suspect is innocent then they can be released at no loss to them, and if they’re guilty then their actions can be justified. If there is an actively tense situation, stuns are a get-out-of-jail-free card to ending the situation in their favor. Put simply, they are not fun to play against or conducive to two-sided roleplay with security. This discourages antagonists from interacting with both security and the rest of the crew, and encourages more “gamey” behaviors.

• Escalation

  • Escalation is a common landmine for security players, both socially and rules-wise. Even though stuns are often the better option, security players are often chastised and nitpicked by other players for their use of lethals.
  • Additionally stuns, because they are considered non-lethals, are often deployed quite liberally by security. This it difficult to roleplay conflict with security; stuns do not damage people, but are simultaneously extremely strong, allowing them to shut down any confrontation quickly and without consequence.

What the changes achieve

• Makes security more rules-light
  • These changes allow for greater IC freedom in interactions both from and toward security.
  • Security will follow the same rules for escalation as all other crew. This allows for a greater variety of interactions to happen, ways of escalating into a fight IC without self-antagging, and less overbearing rules surrounding both these things.
• The tools in security’s arsenal bear consequences. The equipment used in arrests will all deal damage and require appropriate escalation, just like the tools that everyone else gets.
  • This allows for slower paced, two-way interactions in confrontations with security.
  • The stakes for both sides are real, and there is reason for hesitancy and negotiation before escalating a conflict into a fully-fledged gunfight.
• Security can be countered without being decimated
  • It is riskier to eliminate security from the picture than to have a well-put-together plan. This is the ideal situation for both sides, as it allows for more interesting situations to unfold.

Considerations

• Silicons

  • Security’s relationship with AI and cyborgs will be greatly altered, as they will no longer be able to aid sec in making arrests under most circumstances.
  • The proposed solution to this is to add a “station authorities” exception to law 1, allowing for security and command to deal with threats, while also permitting some creative interpretation.

• Crew Relations

  • This is not a pass for security to shoot wanted people unprovoked. Security must still use escalation against people they are arresting.
  • Although mald should decrease in the long term, this may cause some culture-shock in the short term. Admins should be on the lookout for malding both in Discord and in-game.
  • Admins should give security leeway in how they handle arrests. However, they should watch out to make sure nobody is pushing their authority too far.

  Credit

  Inspired by Funky Station’s doc of the same name.