Blackbeard Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 (edited) What you want to see? - the SCP's may attempt to break out rule removed Why should we add it? - One, its a pain in the neck as a MTF, and players over extend it and abuse it, causing for some really bad warns, as well as outplay on the situation whenever a player playing a SCP does this, this rule is very, very hidden in the MOTD and only a few players know of it, but its becoming to out of hand, recently today one of our staff members was warned because of this rule, I generally say this rule needs to be removed so its easier for MTF to do their job, and the protection from a player getting in trouble. What are the advantages of having this? -MTF wont have as much of trouble dealing with SCP's who refuse to comply with MTF or anyone like that, most people dont know their lore so people automatically assume its okay just to break out when ever, and it is such a pain to deal with and gets people in trouble for doing their job. Who is it mainly for? -Everyone so everyone can stay safe, and enjoy the gameplay so its not such a bad experience. Links to any content - N/A Edited February 26, 2019 by 420 Blackbeard™ Retired Super Admin Blackbeard (SCPRP) | Retired Director of Containment: Blackbeard | Retired Director of Task Forces: Blackbeard | The One and Only Omicron-9 Commander | Retired O5-6 "The American" (SCPRP) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
th3 Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 I mean with 096 if he has a bag over his head he cant struggle as he is passive. SCPRP Head of Staff Lead Discord Administrator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berserkrpups Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 I like the idea but lets say 682 gets breached it is kinda awkward to see this fat lizard not being able to break out of cuffs and eating the containment team although I see good use in some SCP's like 096 since most of them don't really follow the rules all that often. Big Body Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimzonEmpire Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 19 hours ago, ߷Berserkerpups߷ said: I like the idea but lets say 682 gets breached it is kinda awkward to see this fat lizard not being able to break out of cuffs and eating the containment team although I see good use in some SCP's like 096 since most of them don't really follow the rules all that often. He’s technically tranqed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethical Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 On 2/25/2019 at 11:03 PM, th3 said: I mean with 096 if he has a bag over his head he cant struggle as he is passive. On 2/26/2019 at 12:19 AM, Berserkerpups said: I like the idea but lets say 682 gets breached it is kinda awkward to see this fat lizard not being able to break out of cuffs and eating the containment team although I see good use in some SCP's like 096 since most of them don't really follow the rules all that often. +/- support Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infected Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) +/- Support. + Much harder for MTF/NTF/A1 to do their job when containing SCP’s. + Every since people learned they can break out many have acquired binds to make it EXTREMELY easy to escape the cuffs. - Previously said, it would be kinda awkward for a fat, slimy lizard being dragged down the halls as it’s looking at everyone that passes by. - Ruins the whole “giant” or “strong” SCPS purpose, imagine the ingame 682 is in cuffs and just sits there like, “ay B let me out these cuffs” when in reality he would be able to snap the cuffs and eat the person whole. Ok, if this rule doesn’t get removed you could maybe put limits to which scps can and cannot escape, 682 can he is big, ugly, strong, and slow. Then you have 096, passive when not angered, lazy, and overall doesn’t really do anything unless looked at. Edited March 10, 2019 by Weareinfected Adding onto my previous support Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conner Tyson Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 +/- Support. As many people have said on this already, It would be odd to have 682 restrained and being dragged through the hallway by one person. I would only support this if it only applied to smaller SCPs like 049 and 066. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackbeard Posted March 10, 2019 Author Share Posted March 10, 2019 On 3/8/2019 at 2:33 AM, Weareinfected said: +/- Support. + Much harder for MTF/NTF/A1 to do their job when containing SCP’s. + Every since people learned they can break out many have acquired binds to make it EXTREMELY easy to escape the cuffs. - Previously said, it would be kinda awkward for a fat, slimy lizard being dragged down the halls as it’s looking at everyone that passes by. - Ruins the whole “giant” or “strong” SCPS purpose, imagine the ingame 682 is in cuffs and just sits there like, “ay B let me out these cuffs” when in reality he would be able to snap the cuffs and eat the person whole. I guess for 682 you could claim he is either dizzy from still being tranquilized, or you could put on "electrical restraints", but in that case, if this was still applied to 682 he could just break out the cuffs over and over and over, and that would just either lead to all the MTF being dead or him escaping. You could also maybe for 682 put a mouth restraint on or something like that. But the whole reason this is even a suggestion is just because people dont care for the lore of someone, nor listen to you when you say you the SCP should be passive, they end up bringing up this rule and just totally failrping, it really just should be totally removed because this rule could make SCPs heavily op. MTF already have a hard enough job trying to contain multiple SCPs during a breach, so them just breaking out over and over again just leads to a mega pain, and really just should be removed in total. Retired Super Admin Blackbeard (SCPRP) | Retired Director of Containment: Blackbeard | Retired Director of Task Forces: Blackbeard | The One and Only Omicron-9 Commander | Retired O5-6 "The American" (SCPRP) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefty Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 On 2/25/2019 at 8:19 PM, Berserkerpups said: I like the idea but lets say 682 gets breached it is kinda awkward to see this fat lizard not being able to break out of cuffs and eating the containment team although I see good use in some SCP's like 096 since most of them don't really follow the rules all that often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knuckles Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 Lets think about 682 lore: He is overwhelmingly strong and frequently attempts to breach. If balancing wasn't required then tranqs wouldn't even work on him. Directly from his SCP entry: Due to its frequent attempts at containment breach, difficulty of containment and incapacitation This implies a regular tranq wouldn't even work on it. If it wants to attempt to break out as an attempt to RP it should be allowed to When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don't want your damn lemons what the hell am I supposed to do with these?! Demand to see life's manager. Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons. Do you know who I am?! I'm the man who's gonna burn your house down... with the lemons. I'm going to get my engineers to invent me a combustible lemon, that burns your house down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
th3 Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 My understanding of this is that any scp that was tranqed couldn’t move for the proceeding 5 minutes. For 682 it would be like being put in his acid. My concern as mentioned before is that SCPs try their hardest to not be recontained even though at that point it’s ruining other people’s experience. SCPRP Head of Staff Lead Discord Administrator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igneous Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 Accepted! Please allow up to a week for any suggestions you have requested to be added in game or on the forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts