Rewrote Security's Department Design Document by SolventMercury · Pull Request #617 · space-wizards/docs

SolventMercury · 2026-03-16T15:19:10Z

This doesn't precisely adhere to the design doc outline, but I was told the outline wasn't that good anyways. I tried to put more work in on reasoning out the design principles for security. There was a lot of material to cover, so be sure to let me know what I missed.

I know everyone wants docs about stuff like security's arsenal, but I figured I'd start here first.

keronshb · 2026-03-16T15:34:37Z

src/en/space-station-14/departments/security.md

+
+First and foremost, security players are bound to Space Law, and they themselves *MUST* adhere to it as a matter of compliance with the server rules, just like command. Space Law is both a foundation for security's roleplay and a carefully-crafted tool for limiting the department's authority to what is most conducive to engaging gameplay. Serious violations of Space Law by security *cannot* solely be handled in-character - as both the enforcers and arbiters of the law, an abuse of security's authority is extremely difficult to rectify by other members of the crew and almost invariably leads to absolutely misery for anyone who is subjected to it.
+
+The rest of the crew is *not* required to follow Space Law to play on the server - instead, the consequence for breaking the law is that if they're caught, security can punish them for their crime. Space Law lists out all the possible crimes that security can punish, ranging from tresspassing to murder, and also lists the associated punishment for any given crime. The goal is, again, to facilitate a cops and robbers dynamic, complete with fugitives, detectives, and prison sentences.


This puts too much pressure on players to follow space law if they're sec/command and ends up being ban bait in a way.

I don't disagree, but the band for sec/command players to violate the law without violating server rules is narrow enough that writing it into the doc felt a bit precarious. I basically just want to be 100% sure I nip all the "crooked cop" stuff in the bud.

I thought about it, and just adding "Security aren't supposed to be crooked cops" explicitly is probably better - I should be communicating my actual goals, after all.

keronshb · 2026-03-16T15:36:05Z

src/en/space-station-14/departments/security.md

+
+The second job of security is to enforce Space Law and the will of command, in that order. This takes a lot of forms, but broadly, one of security's objectives is to ensure that players in other departments cannot violate the law freely, punish those that attempt to, and to ensure that when a member of command makes an order, other players have to actually do what they're told. While this job does tie closely into security's third and fourth jobs, this principle is more about maintaining a general level of decorum and order among the station.
+
+First and foremost, security players are bound to Space Law, and they themselves *MUST* adhere to it as a matter of compliance with the server rules, just like command. Space Law is both a foundation for security's roleplay and a carefully-crafted tool for limiting the department's authority to what is most conducive to engaging gameplay. Serious violations of Space Law by security *cannot* solely be handled in-character - as both the enforcers and arbiters of the law, an abuse of security's authority is extremely difficult to rectify by other members of the crew and almost invariably leads to absolutely misery for anyone who is subjected to it.


As with below, forcing Sec to follow space law to a T ends up being problematic. If they decide to give a lesser punishment and rules lawyers or admins misinterpret it as not following space law - it ends up as a poor experience for the player.

That isn't how Space Law works - Space Law designates maximum punishments, not minimums. You're only breaking the law if you go over the maximum. I'll try and add detail to the section where I mentioned it, but my goal here is just to say that security aren't allowed to do crimes.

keronshb · 2026-03-16T15:37:53Z

src/en/space-station-14/departments/security.md

+
+### Upholding the Law
+
+The second job of security is to enforce Space Law and the will of command, in that order. This takes a lot of forms, but broadly, one of security's objectives is to ensure that players in other departments cannot violate the law freely, punish those that attempt to, and to ensure that when a member of command makes an order, other players have to actually do what they're told. While this job does tie closely into security's third and fourth jobs, this principle is more about maintaining a general level of decorum and order among the station.


Security are not space cops, they're glorified mall cops. Captains/HOS can override specific sections of space law and it's up to the other members of command, sec, and the station to see if that's fine.

Fair enough, that's an exception I hadn't considered.

Rewrote this to deprioritize law and make it moreso that sec is focused on catching people who are disruptive rather than just always gunning for anyone who technically violates the law. Will probably also elaborate on the "mall cop" point in the Design Ethos section too...

keronshb · 2026-03-16T15:39:11Z

src/en/space-station-14/departments/security.md

+
+The first of security's jobs is unglamorous and rarely sees active discussion, but it is important nonetheless. At its core, Space Station 14 is a game about player interactions, and one of the core principles that fosters those interactions is that nobody should have everything. Players will often need to ask each other for entry into another department, or for help with a task they cannot do themselves. These interactions, however, cease to exist if everyone can just break in and take whatever they want without consequence. Part of security's job is to restrict access to certain marked, job-specific items, e.g. the bartender's shotgun, atmos' hardsuits, radio keys, ID cards, and *especially* their own arsenal of weapons. This both ensures that the crew are not deprived of the tools they need to do their jobs and that *only* those roles have them by default. Even outside the context of antagonist gameplay, this is necessary to force interaction into the round and to prevent the experience from devolving into a wasteland of NRP powergaming.
+
+Security's control of equipment also extends to antagonist items. The threat of having irreplaceable tools confiscated should push antagonists to avoid capture, maximizing conflict in the round. Security should always have the ability to remove confiscated antagonist equipment from play, not only for the sake of roundflow, but to ensure that security's gameplay aligns with desired design outcomes. Otherwise, if security expected a released antagonist to be as powerful as they were before they were caught, security players might contrive reasons to jail antagonists for as long as possible, artificially lowering the stakes and unduly harming the jailed player's round.


This section makes me very weary. Maximizing conflict in the round == Speedrunning a redtext. That is not desired.

I guess I also need to flesh this part out then - I'm not saying antags shouldn't have counterplay, we have items like the smuggler's satchel and storage implants for a reason, but basically once an antag gets their contraband seized, it should be very difficult to get back.

I don't agree it should be difficult or easy to get back. The game is partially based around incompetence - not everything is 100% foolproof unless it needs to be (round ending stuff like the tesla escaping).

Making items too difficult to get back == Antags will start to go omega hard on security players and the station itself and start bombing, round removing, mass murder, etc. It turns to "we play for fun" into "I play to win" and it's a race on both side that escalates exponentially.

I find myself disagreeing just on the basis that I do think I'm describing the current state of the game, and I don't really see the problems you're mentioning. I've hardly ever seen anyone get their goodies back out of the Warden's no-fun box (contraband crate), and doing so basically always requires violence from an antagonist that has already lost some of their gear. Do you think it should be easier than it is now?

Arguably yes. I've seen this kind of behavior playing SS13 for an extremely long time now. You basically can't give the equipment away for free, but also making it impossible to recover isn't desirable as it leads to the aforementioned all or nothing play.

Honestly, I do think the current state of the game makes prison breaks and recovering contraband too difficult and the punishments are too harsh - I wouldn't be against seeing more (non-destructive) ways for that kind of play to happen.

Removed this paragraph for now while I think about what to do with it.

SolventMercury · 2026-03-16T16:58:49Z

Thinking about it, I might think about addind sections detailing subroles, brigging, the armory, and antag contraband. Feedback on what's here already still very welcome!

Mot2332 · 2026-03-16T18:22:12Z

Two things:

Might want to add some kind of section on social deduction, since a lot of conflicts with antagonists is anchored on social deduction by security to figure out I.E.: Paradox clone, Traitors, Revolutionaries, Corrupt Silicons, etc..

On security not having information, it should be pointed out that if an antagonists does their antagonism and that security is not able to follow up on it through lack of information, then unless the antagonist decides to expose themselves, that is the end of that plotline for the shift.

Or in other words, that is the end of that antagonism, their role is over, and security is unable to interact with it. Particularly bad when it comes to stealth, as doing things without anyone seeing, or noticing, or even being able to do anything about it just means that your role as round antagonist is done without giving other roles a chance to interact with it.

Also goes hand in hand with social deduction.

Rewrote Security's Design Document

9121edc

github-actions bot added the English label Mar 16, 2026

keronshb requested changes Mar 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

SolventMercury added 2 commits March 16, 2026 09:18

Clarifications & Removed a paragraph on Contraband

4ea516e

Mall Cops

0e8a681

SolventMercury marked this pull request as draft March 16, 2026 16:57


		First and foremost, security players are bound to Space Law, and they themselves MUST adhere to it as a matter of compliance with the server rules, just like command. Space Law is both a foundation for security's roleplay and a carefully-crafted tool for limiting the department's authority to what is most conducive to engaging gameplay. Serious violations of Space Law by security cannot solely be handled in-character - as both the enforcers and arbiters of the law, an abuse of security's authority is extremely difficult to rectify by other members of the crew and almost invariably leads to absolutely misery for anyone who is subjected to it.

		The rest of the crew is not required to follow Space Law to play on the server - instead, the consequence for breaking the law is that if they're caught, security can punish them for their crime. Space Law lists out all the possible crimes that security can punish, ranging from tresspassing to murder, and also lists the associated punishment for any given crime. The goal is, again, to facilitate a cops and robbers dynamic, complete with fugitives, detectives, and prison sentences.


		The second job of security is to enforce Space Law and the will of command, in that order. This takes a lot of forms, but broadly, one of security's objectives is to ensure that players in other departments cannot violate the law freely, punish those that attempt to, and to ensure that when a member of command makes an order, other players have to actually do what they're told. While this job does tie closely into security's third and fourth jobs, this principle is more about maintaining a general level of decorum and order among the station.

		First and foremost, security players are bound to Space Law, and they themselves MUST adhere to it as a matter of compliance with the server rules, just like command. Space Law is both a foundation for security's roleplay and a carefully-crafted tool for limiting the department's authority to what is most conducive to engaging gameplay. Serious violations of Space Law by security cannot solely be handled in-character - as both the enforcers and arbiters of the law, an abuse of security's authority is extremely difficult to rectify by other members of the crew and almost invariably leads to absolutely misery for anyone who is subjected to it.


		### Upholding the Law

		The second job of security is to enforce Space Law and the will of command, in that order. This takes a lot of forms, but broadly, one of security's objectives is to ensure that players in other departments cannot violate the law freely, punish those that attempt to, and to ensure that when a member of command makes an order, other players have to actually do what they're told. While this job does tie closely into security's third and fourth jobs, this principle is more about maintaining a general level of decorum and order among the station.


		The first of security's jobs is unglamorous and rarely sees active discussion, but it is important nonetheless. At its core, Space Station 14 is a game about player interactions, and one of the core principles that fosters those interactions is that nobody should have everything. Players will often need to ask each other for entry into another department, or for help with a task they cannot do themselves. These interactions, however, cease to exist if everyone can just break in and take whatever they want without consequence. Part of security's job is to restrict access to certain marked, job-specific items, e.g. the bartender's shotgun, atmos' hardsuits, radio keys, ID cards, and especially their own arsenal of weapons. This both ensures that the crew are not deprived of the tools they need to do their jobs and that only those roles have them by default. Even outside the context of antagonist gameplay, this is necessary to force interaction into the round and to prevent the experience from devolving into a wasteland of NRP powergaming.

		Security's control of equipment also extends to antagonist items. The threat of having irreplaceable tools confiscated should push antagonists to avoid capture, maximizing conflict in the round. Security should always have the ability to remove confiscated antagonist equipment from play, not only for the sake of roundflow, but to ensure that security's gameplay aligns with desired design outcomes. Otherwise, if security expected a released antagonist to be as powerful as they were before they were caught, security players might contrive reasons to jail antagonists for as long as possible, artificially lowering the stakes and unduly harming the jailed player's round.

Conversation

SolventMercury commented Mar 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

SolventMercury commented Mar 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Mot2332 commented Mar 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

SolventMercury commented Mar 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading