Event actors

[DuckManZach]

Design doc for event actors, a method of producing many consistent player-driven events for a round. Should the current design pillars be merged, this should be a major step in the right direction.

[Nyxilath]

Admittedly, I have mixed feelings on this.

I will start by saying that I do think it's generally a good idea to have some form of rotation of events within a given round, to ensure there's always something going on within the station. While I will clarify that not every event /should/ be a direct escalation from the event prior, as having contrast is important between emotional and mental highs and lows, overall having a system that introduces more to the station after the previous event reaches the conclusion is vital for the macro view of the station's evolution.

However, with the system suggested here with designating a semi-static number of players as that rounds event actors, I have one fear -

Consequence, or rather, the removal of consequence.

Not all consequences are bad - merely the lasting takeaways following choices made, but they key is that they need to be lasting. If we overinflate the rotation of events occurring on a given station, my fear is that this process will end up becoming too normalized, ironically conflicting with our Round Investment pillar. Why care about how security treats you when you can just cryo and go next, or vice versa, why care about interacting with these prisoners when you know they're just going to cryo the moment they hit genpop?

While I do think it is a good idea to begin to work towards developing a more dynamic system where rounds are greater than just 'What antag + subantag + ghost role combo did we roll today?' - I'm not entirely convinced that having a select group of individuals each round be that shift's event actor group is the direction we want to go, as I foresee a divide between the engagement of these actors and the rest of the crew when stakes are less present for said event actors.