Butlerblock - Player Report: Nathan, "Combat and you. Synthetic Combat Restrictions"

Butlerblock - Player Report: Nathan, “Combat and you. Synthetic Combat Restrictions”

What’s your BYOND key?


Round ID:


Your character name:

Prime Lurker (BUT-37)

Accused BYOND key:


Accused character name:


What rule(s) were broken?:

“Combat and you. Synthetic Combat Restrictions”

Description of the incident:

Throughout the round, Nathan carried a flame sentry(from what I could tell, everywhere they went), following marine pushes. On one particular marine flank near the end of the game in which marines were trying to flank a xeno siege on comms, Nathan followed the marines in and instantly placed a flame sentry due to their synth skills and turned it on, and then proceeded to spend their time during that battle repairing the sentry or warding xenos off of it with a baton. While it is not directly stated that a synthetic cannot deploy sentries, I believe that this scenario constitutes the synthetic indirectly using weaponry to combat and kill xenos.


Deploying a sentry does not give direct names, but I have included a screenshot of a sentry being deployed anonymously, and then soon after being repaired by the accused.


After a relatively short discussion with the accused and others in LRC, I would like to clarify that this report is purely claiming that Nathan did nothing wrong other than using a flame sentry as a medium of a ranged weapon. After understanding their thought process, I believe they did not break the rule of combat synthing outside of self defense and guarding.

Despite their justification of placing the sentry to guard marines while they heal/protect them, I believe that these ends do not justify the means, and that, under the current wording of the synthetic rules, a violation of the synth code had occured.

I would also like to note that I have nothing against InsaneRed, the player of Nathan, and that while they had good intentions, a rule had been broken. The only reason I did not approach them outside of a report is because I knew that it would not lead anywhere due to their previous nature within the discord, as proven in LRC.

I believe that one of the two things should 100% happen as a result of this report: Either A, InsaneRed is given at the minimum a warning, or B, the rules should be clarified to define what an indirect weapon constitutes(If the accused is shown innocent).


I participated in the round (played as lurker, I wasn’t harmed by the accused directly) and witnessed Nathan using the blue flame sentry in two occurrences:

Occurrence one: the synth and another marine were near secondary comms, north (FOB was south LZ). The accused put his flamer sentry in the grass south of the comms, facing also south. He and the marine were standing in the sentry zone of fire, in order (from my perspective) to bait backliners to attack them so the backliners would be ambushed by the hidden sentry. The accused stated in discord that he merely wanted to secure second comms for the nuke, but again, the sentry wasn’t covering the comms, rather than the backline (also comms weren’t repaired nor caded). And the placement of the sentry in the grass also gives away the intent to catch xenos by surprise, rather than to discourage them from attacking.

Occurrence two: mentioned by the OP. Xenos were besieging the second comms later in the round, and were resting behind a wall. The accused (and I suppose some force of marines) flanked them, the accused placed the sentry the way it immediately started to shooting resting xenos. Again, in discord the accused stated that he merely was securing the perimeter to protect marines, but again, I don’t believe this is true, as it was a flanking maneuver.

In any way, I agree with the OP that placing sentries in combat seems to me against the spirit of synth guidelines, even though it’s not stated directly.

Synthetics are forbidden from firing any weapons, including direct fire emplacements (M56Ds) and indirect weaponry, such as CAS, the M402 Mortar, and OBs. However, they are not opposed to other humans harming/killing others provided it follows Marine Law. If there is a threat within the bounds of Marine Law, they can physically defend themselves or other innocents by subduing the threat non-lethally.

It seems to me that the use of sentries in active combat (and in backline) falls under the use of indirect weaponry. I can understand how a synth moves the sentry in the FOB to a better position, outside of an active siege. But deliberately carrying a sentry for use in active combat strikes me as a violation of the rules. Hunting the backline with a sentry as a synth also seems like a clear violation of the rules to me.

Nothing personal to InsaneRed too, but it feels like an obvious attempt to circumvent the rules of synth combat to get an advantage in combat as a synth.

I want to mention this too, but this is the first time in years I see a synth deliberately carrying a sentry. I played engineer a lot of time and from what I have seen, if a synth finds a sentry, they usually give it away to the closest engineer immediately. For me, the fact the accused was carrying the sentry for the huge portion of the round clearly shows his intent to use it in combat.


Added report:synth

Pulling Logs