Rule Suggestion 1.16 Combat Cuff Revision

["Peasant"]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:

I would like to change 1.16 Combat Cuffing - Do not attempt to cuff someone whilst in a combat scenario, you may only cuff someone in a controlled RP situation.

TO

1.16 Combat Cuffing - Do not attempt to cuff someone whilst they are holding any type of beam, weapon (including melee weapons) or shield. You may only cuff someone in a controlled RP situation.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:

Not to my knowledge.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):

- More realistic RP
- Clearer examples on combat cuffing

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:

- Harder to kidnap people solo, I guess?

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:

It doesn’t make sense that people can be cuffed whilst holding a large item such as a containment beam, deployable shield/riot shield or a combative item such as a knife. You could argue that it’s a skill issue however, it also makes literally 0 sense that someone actively using both their arms to hold something in some cases, should be able to be cuffed. That is not realistic at all. Even if my suggestion is denied, please change this rule to be more realistic.

 

[nooblet]

+ support

you cant realistically cuff somebody with a riot shield, including beams, however this wouldn't stop them from being put under fear rp so not really harder to kidnap someone with a non-weapon out. all around this is a good change

 

[Emilia Foddg]

-Support
Unless it excludes D-Class. Those guys have a tough enough time already.

 

["Peasant"]

-Support
Unless it excludes D-Class. Those guys have a tough enough time already.

Why would D-class need to be cuffing people? Their goal is to escape the Foundation, not take hostages.

 

[chez_curd]

Why would D-class need to be cuffing people? Their goal is to escape the Foundation, not take hostages.

D-Class love to take hostages, I wouldn't mind them being an exemption

 

[YandereMuffin]

any type of beam,

Why this? What kind of combative value does a beam have in stopping an enemy trying to cuff you?

 

["Peasant"]

Why this? What kind of combative value does a beam have in stopping an enemy trying to cuff you?

It has literally nothing to do with combative value and everything to do with realism. You can’t just magically cuff someone holding a heavy containment beam. It wouldn’t make sense. I understand that the rule change is marked under “combat cuffing” but it wouldn’t make sense to make an entirely new rule just for beams, shields and knives in my opinion.

 

[nooblet]

It has literally nothing to do with combative value and everything to do with realism. You can’t just magically cuff someone holding a heavy containment beam. It wouldn’t make sense. I understand that the rule change is marked under “combat cuffing” but it wouldn’t make sense to make an entirely new rule just for beams, shields and knives in my opinion.

I agree with this specifically because of the logic behind it, it makes 0 sense to be able to cuff someone who is holding something that would take 2 hands to hold like a beam, or a shield, or a rifle but still allows people doing non-combative actions such as holding out a keycard, clipboard, document, or tablet to be cuffed. It doesn't really add or take anything away from combat just forces the player to create a controlled RP scenario before handcuffing someone.

Realistically it would not make sense for a CI on surface to see an ERT member beaming a loose SCP and being able to run up to him, handcuff him, and kill him but with how the ruling it currently that wouldn't really be against any rules, or if an SCU was holding out a shield and is handcuffed from behind, it would put away the shield allowing whatever they were blocking to attack him which again wouldn't really make sense from an RP stand point in my opinion.

 

[Dusk]

+support

 

[Aura_]

+support

this should clarify some of the gray areas surrounding the rule. Melee weapons in particular are something that are obviously fatal to the point where even our police are told to maintain over 20 feet from someone armed with a knife because of how quickly the average person can close that distance.

extending it to other combative related things makes sense

 

[Advil Smith]

Hey so just to confirm would this keep tranq cuffing? Tranq cuffing is very important because a lot of people sometimes get silly and don’t wanna follow those suggestions called fear rp. I would support one that it can’t be used on a GOI or sum to maybe balance it so they would stop complaining about it

 

[Tigole]

+support

 

[Mozzie]

+Support

 

[shadows]

+Support

 

[nooblet]

Hey so just to confirm would this keep tranq cuffing? Tranq cuffing is very important because a lot of people sometimes get silly and don’t wanna follow those suggestions called fear rp. I would support one that it can’t be used on a GOI or sum to maybe balance it so they would stop complaining about it

the way its described doesn't really affect that rule from what I can see, seems more targeted towards people not tranq'd holding out a non-lethal combative item

 

[Niox]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:

I would like to change 1.16 Combat Cuffing - Do not attempt to cuff someone whilst in a combat scenario, you may only cuff someone in a controlled RP situation.

TO

1.16 Combat Cuffing - Do not attempt to cuff someone whilst they are holding any type of beam, weapon (including melee weapons) or shield. You may only cuff someone in a controlled RP situation.

If for example, 2 people are pointing guns at someone (Who has their own gun out), and a 3rd person has cuffs out, that is a controlled RP situation. Even if the individual has a weapon out, they can still be cuffed, because one side is clearly in control.

Adding the clause of not being able to cuff someone while they have a weapon out, directly contradicts the statement of being also able to cuff them in a controlled RP situation. This also just complicates the rule for no particular reason.

-Support

 

[Kito]

Hey so just to confirm would this keep tranq cuffing? Tranq cuffing is very important because a lot of people sometimes get silly and don’t wanna follow those suggestions called fear rp. I would support one that it can’t be used on a GOI or sum to maybe balance it so they would stop complaining about it

Its been ruled a bunch of times, if you're tranq'd, its in a controlled situation since you cant fight back at all, and you can be cuffed even with a weapon out. Its annoying as fuck and makes the tranq gun super powerful, but I guess thats why its given to very few people.

 

[Evil]

Do not attempt to cuff someone whilst they are holding any type of beam, weapon (including melee weapons) or shield.

-support
I grab their shield and throw it on the ground and either the person drop on the ground and I cuff them or they let it drop and get tackle or I kick there weak points (femur, shin, your nuts) to get you in the ground and then i cuff you.

I see you with a beam out and i pull out my cuff and tackle you from behind and cuff you and if you in front of me i kick you in the shins or nuts and cuff you.

I see you with a knife.. I kick you in the nuts, you drop on the floor and i cuff you or if need be i disarm you, Supplex city you and then cuff you

 

[Merrick Travolta]

It has literally nothing to do with combative value and everything to do with realism. You can’t just magically cuff someone holding a heavy containment beam. It wouldn’t make sense. I understand that the rule change is marked under “combat cuffing” but it wouldn’t make sense to make an entirely new rule just for beams, shields and knives in my opinion.

It also makes zero sense for say a D-class being able to handcuff someone highly trained in CQC or just with military training like MTF. But here we are.

I do not believe this should apply to beams. Shields and knives are already considered weapons and you cannot be cuffed whilst holding them iirc unless it's under a controlled scenario.

 

["Peasant"]

If for example, 2 people are pointing guns at someone (Who has their own gun out), and a 3rd person has cuffs out, that is a controlled RP situation. Even if the individual has a weapon out, they can still be cuffed, because one side is clearly in control.

Adding the clause of not being able to cuff someone while they have a weapon out, directly contradicts the statement of being also able to cuff them in a controlled RP situation. This also just complicates the rule for no particular reason.

-Support

Wouldn't said person have to put their gun away before being cuffed? I've always said "put your gun away and stop moving" because that's just combat cuffing, regardless of how many people are presently holding someone at gunpoint.

The rule is "1.16 Combat Cuffing - Do not attempt to cuff someone whilst in a combat scenario, you may only cuff someone in a controlled RP situation."

I'm assuming that by someone still having their gun out, that would suffice as cuffing someone whilst in a combat scenario. They would need to put their gun away first.