Rule Suggestion Sampling rules are to broad

Rule suggestions will be reviewed by Superadmins, this may take longer than standard content suggestions.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Reposted_

Reposted_

Civil Gamers Expert
One Year Club Two Year Club Three Year Club
Jul 18, 2023
19
1
111
A bit of an explanation as to why this is needed in the first place, recently while I was playing on SCP a small group of MTF came into my CC with D-Class to sample me, they did not ask nor did they have a researcher with them. Doing what I thought was reasonable I killed the D-class, only to be warned after the fact by an Admin that no mater who wanted to, I was obligated to let them sample under the Silver SCP rule. When asked for an explanation, they explained that technically anyone no-mater the job class can enter an SCP's CC to take samples and the SCP is required do nothing about it.


What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
This suggestion limits the job-classes protected by the Silver SCP rule, specifically limiting it to Researchers, Raiding factions and high ranking foundation members. Specificaly if that is to broad itself, I believe that their should at least be specifications on when the silver rule applies for specific SCPs.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
There have likely been requests to modify SCP rules in the past, though this one specifically targets out of breach interactions.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
-More researcher necessity due to now being required to sample most SCPs
-Samples become more valuable due to the increased effort needed as well as lessened supply.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
-Less overall sample supply.
-Less SCP interactions (Though often SCPs just hop on for sampling if someone isn't waiting in queue)

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
This rule change prevents the abuse of the silver rule by parties that it was not supposed to include while also increasing the necessity for researchers for more than just RP.
 
Last edited:
Upvote -4 Downvote
I feel like if you're playing as an SCP you should be roleplaying because you want to roleplay not just kill farming because you don't think the department sampling should be sampling

This is a RP server at the end of the day, if you're an SCP that has to afk for three hours for a breach surely you'd be happy to see other people regardless of who is running the test/sampling .
 
-Support

Brutal honesty:
This is an unnecessary suggestion and sounds more like a failing either on your, or the staff members end and then making a suggestion out of frustration at the situation.

SCPs are allowed to kill D class if they have a reason to do so such as 076 (as long as it is roleplayed out) but if you are not breached why do you feel the need to just commit NITRP?

I would recommend making a staff complaint if you feel you were treated unfairly, or, change your suggestion to specify that a clarification needs to be made for every single SCP as to what grants permission to kill someone.
 
Reposted_ said:
only to be warned after the fact by an Admin that no mater who wanted to, I was obligated to let them sample under the Silver SCP rule.
Click to expand...
This admin is speaking pure bs because, while the Silver Rule does state to not just mindlessly kill people and to at least roleplay with them, there is also an expectation for the opposite party to roleplay.

If you're on SCP-173 for example and they send a single Class-D in to sample you, it's not unreasonable for you to just kill them. If you're 7722 and the Class-D says they're muslim, it's expected that you'd shoot them in the face.

And if you're a murderous sentient SCP which is sat in its cell for hours at a time, then when you finally do get interaction, you aren't spoken to or anything, and rather just sampled for your biomass, you sure as HELL would kill the person sampling you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rosalyn 'Vrda'
Maksim Enigma said:
I would recommend making a staff complaint if you feel you were treated unfairly, or, change your suggestion to specify that a clarification needs to be made for every single SCP as to what grants permission to kill someone.
Click to expand...
Yea thats fair, ill update it shortly.
Rosalyn 'Vrda' said:
I feel like if you're playing as an SCP you should be roleplaying because you want to roleplay not just kill farming because you don't think the department sampling should be sampling

This is a RP server at the end of the day, if you're an SCP that has to afk for three hours for a breach surely you'd be happy to see other people regardless of who is running the test/sampling .
Click to expand...
The reasoning for the complaint is that it is to vague on what is allowed, and atleast acording to what I was told, anyone can go into a sentient SCPs cell and begin sampling, I love SCP rp but still feel like the rule over extends
 
Avery Snow said:
I think too many departments are allowed to sample. But I don't think it should be up to the SCP on who they allow to sample either.
Click to expand...
The whole system makes it easy for literally any regiment to sample minus base researcher. And people wonder why I call these sampling regiments monopolies.
 
peep69 said:
This admin is speaking pure bs because, while the Silver Rule does state to not just mindlessly kill people and to at least roleplay with them, there is also an expectation for the opposite party to roleplay.

If you're on SCP-173 for example and they send a single Class-D in to sample you, it's not unreasonable for you to just kill them. If you're 7722 and the Class-D says they're muslim, it's expected that you'd shoot them in the face.

And if you're a murderous sentient SCP which is sat in its cell for hours at a time, then when you finally do get interaction, you aren't spoken to or anything, and rather just sampled for your biomass, you sure as HELL would kill the person sampling you.
Click to expand...
Hard agree, silver rule usually refers to not instantly attack anyone that enters your chamber, let RP develop first, if it doesnt develop because the other party just wants to milk you skipping RP, yes, start attacking them... If you are playing a sentient SCP that can talk, warn them first.

A while ago, i was flagged on as TG, an O-1 member came by with a dclass, he just released the dclass and said to me "im gonna sample u", which i answered i was not going to allow sampling and to leave, he ignored me, opened the door and the dclass got his head blown off once he started sampling me. Obviously no ticket was made.

To the OP: If you have a clip, make a staff complaint and attach it, even if they don't remove your warn, at least you could get the other party also get a warn, dont get your hopes too high, specially if they are CL4+ roles which at most will get a slap in the wrist.

As per the suggestion -Support, its entirely a staff issue
 
When the researcher makes no attempt to communicate, RP or interact with me beyond "be good", and then the D-Class doesn't ask for any consent or attempt to RP, they get attacked. If they attempt to continue sampling after I have attacked them, the life they clearly do not value is forfeit. If that is against the rules, it shouldn't be.
 
flameprince said:
When the researcher makes no attempt to communicate, RP or interact with me beyond "be good", and then the D-Class doesn't ask for any consent or attempt to RP, they get attacked. If they attempt to continue sampling after I have attacked them, the life they clearly do not value is forfeit. If that is against the rules, it shouldn't be.
Click to expand...
It isnt against the rules, but since he probably encountered some high ranking MTF player and maybe the staff was trying to meet quotas... it aligned against him
 
Rule Suggestion Denied

Thank you for taking the time to make this suggestion.

After reviewing the suggestion and the discussion surrounding it, we will not be accepting the proposed change in its current form.

We do not believe limiting the Silver SCP Rule to a specific list of job roles would provide a suitable solution. Sampling permissions and the Silver SCP Rule are separate matters. Whether a particular role should be conducting sampling is generally determined by IC policy, departmental expectations, and the circumstances of the situation. The Silver Rule instead governs how SCP players are expected to approach interactions while contained.

That being said, the concern raised here is understandable.

The Silver SCP Rule is not intended to provide players with unconditional immunity when entering an SCP’s containment chamber. It does not mean that anyone may enter, make no meaningful attempt to roleplay, begin sampling, and expect the SCP to remain entirely passive.

The purpose of the rule is to prevent SCP players from immediately killing anyone who enters their chamber without allowing a reasonable interaction to take place. This expectation applies to both parties. Players conducting sampling should make an effort to communicate, establish the roleplay, and interact with the SCP rather than treating it solely as a source of materials.

For sentient SCPs, players should ordinarily communicate their refusal, issue a warning, or otherwise allow the situation to develop before escalating, where doing so is appropriate for that SCP. If those warnings are ignored and the other party continues the interaction without engaging in meaningful roleplay, the SCP may have a reasonable in-character basis to respond aggressively.

This will always remain dependent on the SCP involved and the specific circumstances. Some SCPs are inherently hostile, non-verbal, or governed by unique mechanics and roleplay expectations, meaning that one universal response cannot reasonably apply to every containment interaction.

For these reasons, the suggestion will be denied, although the concerns regarding inconsistent interpretation of the silver rule and the need for reciprocal roleplay have been noted and will be brought up during the staff meeting to be discussed.​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back