Reasonable limitations of Antagonist sabotage.

As title, mainly for LRP as an extension of roleplay.

The rules for LRP include “Don’t be a dick” and “Antagonists have a LOT of leeway… may kill/sabotage as they see fit… degrades the experience for the majority of the server you will be told to stop… widespread sabotage (power…”

Sabotage in general is NOT my issue. Antagonists are called antagonists for a reason, and sometimes it’s warranted. However, my question is what extent of “reason” is actually applied to the ruling.

Cutting power cables to deny departments the ability to function is a valid distraction/chaos-causing tactic, but when it does not serve to aid in any given goal it not only hinders the crew, but also any other agents on the station.

As an example from a recent round, a Syndie was cutting cables around the entire station, and hiding their work fairly well. Medical spent 3/4ths of the round without power and so did the Syndicate Agent who was a Chemist. The Chemist did not get to perform ANY of their tasks, as they were locked in Chemistry for a long time due to not having a crowbar.

Thus, I would qualify excessive/unnecessary deprivation of station power as sabotaging your antagonist teammates unless it’s used to aid in a specific objective. For example, cutting the power to Security to gain access to the Armory, or to Bridge to try and get at the Captain or Vault. Neither of which happened during the round I referenced.

I would also generally call it a dick move.

To reiterate, I _understand _that cutting power is sometimes justified, and that a single rule here can’t cover every situation. However, if nothing else I would like mass cutting power to be further covered by the rules in-game as something antagonists shouldn’t do without it directly aiding in their goals, though my main question of clarification is just about the reasonable limitations.

Antags are generally free to ignore the “Don’t be a dick” rule whenever it directly helps their objectives. Antags are also generally free to ignore it when the impacted number of players are limited.

Traitors are not team antagonists. There are no requirements for them to work with each other, and there are no restrictions on them working against each other.


Due to the large amount of contextual and situational information that may be relevant, the rule clarifications section is not for reviewing past ahelps or situations. Concerns about specific situations should be brought up with ahelp and concerns about past admin actions should be brought to the head admin. No part of this answer should be interpreted as a review of any past ahelp or situation.