Deals with antagonists

Rule Clarifications Questions
1

I ahelped this two days ago, but I ran into a situation as a captain where the safest choice to protect crew and station property, was to make a deal with a ninja due to an insufficient lack of crew (two security members). Other heads complained this was against the rules, and ultimately voted in majority to kill the ninja, which I allowed due to an uncertainty.

My choice in that moment was to protect other players from getting bombed or killed. Allowing the ninja to complete their objectives, on the condition they allowed departments to prepare, and did so non-destructively, they were given immunity, as the station lacked the needed resources to properly handle them.

In the in-game rules, I was unable to find an example which prohibited this. However other players claimed that they were bwoinked for similar occurrences before.

My question: Is it actually against the rules in that type of scenario to make a deal with an antagonist, especially after faxing centcom for an ERT, with no response, in order to preserve life?

2

Within reason, if you’re taking actions to protect other crew under very obvious credible threat of extreme harm, such as gibbing or mass death, it’s fine to hand off protected items or allow them to complete objectives under the caveat that you stop them from also engaging in physical destruction, or attempt to recover the high value items after the fact.

Like, if you’re being threatened with a China Lake, it’s 100% reasonable to hand off restricted gear, or allow an antagonist to steal an objective, but if that objective is to murder someone, you should fight against it.

2 Likes
3

Thanks for clarifying! <:

I thought that was the case, but I just had to make sure, since everyone else was upset with me for it.

And they claimed other admins had a problem with it.

1 Like