Code of Honor - Starfleet

I've looked in my books and dug around on these boards and I haven't really found what I'm looking for. Does anyone have a specific set of guidelines on what the Starfleet Code of Honor Disadvantage would require of a player? I can guess at this point that Kirk wouldn't have it and Picard would, but beyond generally "following the rules" I'm not really sure I know exactly what rules you would need to stick to in order to not lose renown. Thanks for any thoughts or advice.

Oh, and it anyone has ideas or wrtie-ups of other Code of Honor examples feel free to drop them here. Thanks

page 93 Star Trek DS-9 RPG

StarFleet code of honor -4
Must uphold the ideals and policies of StarFleet, including the prime directive.

I always took it as a Defender (defend the weak), Honesty (always tell the truth) and Prime Directive (do not interfere with pre-warp cultures development) codes of honor rolled into one.

I don't have a list of the Directives, maybe someone else could list them.

a google search found these

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/S...nd_Regulations

http://www.st-minutiae.com/articles/...al_orders.html

If a PC takes it, I think you should get the character's player to outline a 3- or 4-point list of what they see their character believing the code of conduct to be. Keep it to a small number of points, since that establishes what the PC sees as the 'true priorities' of a Starfleet officer amongst the array of regulations and directives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King

If a PC takes it, I think you should get the character's player to outline a 3- or 4-point list of what they see their character believing the code of conduct to be. Keep it to a small number of points, since that establishes what the PC sees as the 'true priorities' of a Starfleet officer amongst the array of regulations and directives.

---

IMO all Star Fleet officers should have this disadvantage, it would be ingrained into them right from the first day of the academy. I would also make defining it both a Player and Referee's responsibility. I would never leave something as important as a Code Of Honor solely up to a player. 'True priorities' would be defined by Star Fleet (as in the referee) not by the officers (as in the players) serving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WaveMan

IMO all Star Fleet officers should have this disadvantage.

---

Apart from the admirals. They seem to lack it... lots...
;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WaveMan

'True priorities' would be defined by Star Fleet (as in the referee) not by the officers (as in the players) serving.

---

To paraphrase T.S. Eliot, they try to define and instill it, but between the intention of the instructors and the acts of the officers falls the shadow. To interpret that code in actual situations and attempt to live up to it is where the actual game happens. It says Star Trek on the book, after all. It's important for the player to define it because it needs to be a code that the player values and believes in, otherwise challenging that code in scenarios has no emotional weight in the game. You can't just tell a player to believe in the things their PC believes in emotionally.

Frankly, I think it's a dumb Disadvantage, because it gives you free points for having a psychological framework that everybody has—or at least, is assumed to have in Star Trek. It'd be better to put a 'Code of Honour' section at the top of the character sheet and just give them 4 extra build points at chargen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King

Frankly, I think it's a dumb Disadvantage, because it gives you free points for having a psychological framework that everybody has—or at least, is assumed to have in Star Trek. It'd be better to put a 'Code of Honour' section at the top of the character sheet and just give them 4 extra build points at chargen.

---

I can see the value of the Code disadvantage when it comes to a more concrete way of adjudicating renown. If Kirk goes against the rules he doesn't suffer, but Picard would because his respect is based in large part on his professionalism and discipline. Same thing with Klingons - Worf's struggles with Codes of Honor on the show (and the behind the scenes hits to his Renown between Klingon and SF communities) was a huge part of all his storylines. The Codes give you a great way of managing that kind of story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trr

I can see the value of the Code disadvantage when it comes to a more concrete way of adjudicating renown. If Kirk goes against the rules he doesn't suffer, but Picard would because his respect is based in large part on his professionalism and discipline. Same thing with Klingons - Worf's struggles with Codes of Honor on the show (and the behind the scenes hits to his Renown between Klingon and SF communities) was a huge part of all his storylines. The Codes give you a great way of managing that kind of story.

---

I think that Code of Honour should be mandatory, and separated out from the other optional traits. The idea of tying it to particular renown types (and having those work at cross-purposes) has merit, though.

I emphatically disagree. Characters like Janeway would likely have the Starfleet Code disadvantage, denoting an especially prominent adherence to Starfleet ideals, but characters like Paris and Torres, both of whom are Starfleet trained would not. Worf probably has it, which tends to conflict with his Klingon Code. It should be up to the player as to how dedicated his character is to Starfleet's ideals. Remember, PCs are supposed to be individuals with all that entails.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Owen E Oulton

I emphatically disagree. Characters like Janeway would likely have the Starfleet Code disadvantage, denoting an especially prominent adherence to Starfleet ideals,

---

Except for, you know, the whole genocide thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Owen E Oulton

Remember, PCs are supposed to be individuals with all that entails.

---

Yeah, that's why each player needs to outline their character's code of honour themselves.

the other way to look at is that ONLY those officers that show dedication and adherence to StarFleet principles and codes of conduct (as in the disadvantage Code of Honor StarFleet) would get promoted, those that don't would languish as ensigns and lieutenants (like Tom Paris).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King

Except for, you know, the whole genocide thing.

---

Say what? You must've been watching a vastly different Voyager than I did. Space must have only broadcast those episodes in the GTO...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Owen E Oulton

Say what? You must've been watching a vastly different Voyager than I did. Space must have only broadcast those episodes in the GTO...

---

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Neurolytic_pathogen

EDIT: Voyager's writing, on the whole, isn't particularly great for deriving ideas about the overall intentions of the writers in regards to a self-consistent world, especially given RDL's reports of what the environment of the writers' room was like.

Yes, but in all fairness, even the 'sainted' Picard wanted to inflict a genocidal virus upon the Borg via Hugh...

Not to mention anyone involved in the Section 31 attempt to kill off the founders.

Starfleet has had a few darker moments... But lets not JUST lay the blame on Janeway ;)

Which action was sanctioned by Starfleet in the person of Admiral Nechayev. Indeed Picard was castigated for not taking this action. Genocide does not apply in this case - the Borg are not a species, nor are they an ethic group. They are a computer virus which infects humanoids. Regardless of what you might think of it, it does not contradict Starfleet mores, and so would not conflict with the Starfleet Code.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Owen E Oulton

Which action was sanctioned by Starfleet in the person of Admiral Nechayev. Indeed Picard was castigated for not taking this action. Genocide does not apply in this case - the Borg are not a species, nor are they an ethic group. They are a computer virus which infects humanoids. Regardless of what you might think of it, it does not contradict Starfleet mores, and so would not conflict with the Starfleet Code.

---

Just because the Borg are a single person—or meta-person—doesn't make the destruction of them any less genocide.

Anyway, this goes to show that, if this were a game, Picard (who did end up realizing Guinan was right, after all) and Nechayev's players would have different Codes of Honour written on their character sheets. In the case of Sloan, his Code of Honour, which we can presume he believes in just as strongly, would put him squarely at odds with Picard. Indeed, the existence of Sloan would probably make Picard seriously question his commitment to Starfleet (a cornerstone of his own Code of Honour), if he knew that Sloan's activities (even before the whole bio-warfare thing) were being sanctioned by people in the command structure. Hell, after what he did to Remmick...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King

Just because the Borg are a single person—or meta-person—doesn't make the destruction of them any less genocide.

---

Well, it really does, by the definition of the word genocide. I don't live in a world where words magically mean what we want them to mean. IMNSHO, the Borg are not a person - they are a malevolent computer virus which enslaves people and destroys what makes them persons. True, a small minority can be restored, but it is utterly impractical to do so on any meaningful fraction of all infected non-individuals. They're like the Walking Dead, only more capable and infectious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King

Anyway, this goes to show that, if this were a game, Picard (who did end up realizing Guinan was right, after all) and Nechayev's players would have different Codes of Honour written on their character sheets. In the case of Sloan, his Code of Honour, which we can presume he believes in just as strongly, would put him squarely at odds with Picard. Indeed, the existence of Sloan would probably make Picard seriously question his commitment to Starfleet (a cornerstone of his own Code of Honour), if he knew that Sloan's activities (even before the whole bio-warfare thing) were being sanctioned by people in the command structure. Hell, after what he did to Remmick...

---

Picard and Nechayev may well have had differing Codes of Honour, but they are NPCs. The Code of Honour uses game mechanics to restrict a player's choices in a metagaming fashion. Codes of Honour are designed to be adopted as a choice by a player - even when one is received as a result of a Tour of Duty they can be swapped out and the points balanced. There is a carrot-and-stick built in... accept these game-mechanics restrictions and get extra points for character generation. To do what you're suggesting steps over the line from "rules lawyer" to what is commonly known as "rules nazi" (wish there was a term that didn't misuse the term Nazi, but there you have it). It is manipulative on the part of the GM to implement this sort of rule - tantamount to the oft-used term railroading.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Owen E Oulton

Well, it really does, by the definition of the word genocide. I don't live in a world where words magically mean what we want them to mean.

---

The Borg do, though. That's the whole point of the exercise of SF, to take unreal violations of accepted norms and see how they relate to everything else.

Quote:

---

IMNSHO, the Borg are not a person - they are a malevolent computer virus which enslaves people and destroys what makes them persons. True, a small minority can be restored, but it is utterly impractical to do so on any meaningful fraction of all infected non-individuals. They're like the Walking Dead, only more capable and infectious.

---

So I take it Day of the Dead wasn't your favourite movie of the bunch?

Quote:

---

It is manipulative on the part of the GM to implement this sort of rule - tantamount to the oft-used term railroading.

---

Demanding PCs in a Star Trek game be thought of as PCs in a Star Trek game by their players is railroading? Do you feel the same way about Sources of Stability in Trail of Cthulhu or Passions in Unknown Armies?

Putting aside my suggested rules changes, the Code of Honour doesn't actually restrict player action in any way. It merely adds a potential consequence for certain actions, and specifically in regards to a mechanic which represents a diegetic element of the game world, the exact opposite of a metagame restriction. It's actually more of a carrot-and-pool-noodle than a carrot-and-stick, since a negative Renown doesn't really ever bottom out in a permanent way like HP or SAN. (Interestingly, I can't find a suggested guideline in the TOS core for a lower maximum for Skill or Discipline Renown for Starfleet officers in play.)