Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

Thread: Law of War

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO USA
    Posts
    1,352

    Post Law of War

    this discussion of Starfleet's non-military status has gotten me wondering... I have seen it said that the Federation is a loose interpretation of the United States and United Nations systems of government.

    Under the Law of Land Warfare, as recognized by those two institutions, a nation must define who it's combattants are... ie: who is it's military. In some nations police forces are considered combattants, in others they're not. Non-combattants are not allowed to participate in the fighting in any capacity. There are provisions for partisans, but in general a noncombattant who participates in battle becomes a criminal... or perhaps a spy, depending on the circumstances of their capture.

    If Starfleet isn't military, if Starfleet officers and enlisted aren't soldiers, how can they legally fight to defend the Federation?

    If the Federation takes the position that EVERY citizen can bear arms in defense of the Federation according to the dictates of their concience... then every citizen of the Federation is a legitimate military target.

    If (as I suspect) the Federation has designated Starfleet (and the various Planetary Defense Forces) as the Federation's combattants, then Starfleet is a military Armed Force even if it isn't their primary role, and even if they don't want the designation... just as the US Coast Guard is a military Armed Force even though it's not normally under the direction of the Department of Defense.

    In fact, I would suggest that the US Coast Guard is really the closest analogy to Starfleet in the modern era... they do scientific exploration, law enforcement, maritime safety, maritime qualification and licensing... and have a military mission as well, that they fulfill every day not just when the US is officially at war.

    ------------------
    "I'd rather die standing than live on my knees..."
    Shania Twain

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Cartography Heaven, AussieLand
    Posts
    2,482

    Post

    Thats simple they are the military, just user friendly termed the exploration corp

    ------------------
    SIR SIG a Aussie TREK Narrator

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Cartography Heaven, AussieLand
    Posts
    2,482

    Post

    Yeh right on Steve, least you know you've got some rights and a trial and such
    Not just a quick disrupter shot to the head

    ------------------
    SIR SIG a Aussie TREK Narrator

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Jacksonville, Arkansas, USA
    Posts
    1,880

    Post

    I just went to my annual Law of Armed Conflict briefing last week, so this stuff is still pretty fresh in my memory.

    Militia or resistance units formed of civilians can arm themselves and fight regular armies, but they must have some type of visible means of identification: hats, armbands, jackets, etc. If possible, the militia unit should try to make uniforms. But if militia or resistance personnel are captured, they are to be treated as criminals, not POWs.

    I'm sure the rights of POWs in ST are spelled out by treaties or conventions, but I'm also sure those rights are often ignored by the Federation's enemies.

    Starfleet should also have a code of conduct similar to the American military's Code of Conduct, which describes the obligations of our personnel in combat and when captured.

    Article I
    I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.

    Article II
    I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

    Article III
    If I am captured, I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.

    Article IV
    If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.

    Article V
    When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the best of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.

    Article VI
    I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.


    Anybody care to take a shot at translating that into Starfleet terms?

    ------------------

    <<<<

    LUGTrek isn't really dead. Not as long as we remember it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Geelong, Vic; Australia
    Posts
    1,131

    Wink

    How's this?
    I just knocked it together in about ten minutes - so feel free to edit and suggest changes. I was trying to capture the ideals of the Federation moreso than the military, while maintaining Federation open-ness to different cultures, mores and values (hence the elimination of specific religious references at the end - that wasn't meant to offend anybody).

    Article I
    I am a member of Starfleet, and a citizen of the United Federation of Planets, serving in the organisation which protects the Federation, guards our way of life, and is dedicated to preserving the peace, protecting freedom, upholding justice, revealing the unknown and, most importantly, defending the principles of truth and honesty. I am prepared to give my life in defence of these principles.

    Article II
    In times of conflict or war, I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist. I will never attack, nor order others to attack non-combatants, even if this endanger myself or members of my command.

    Article III
    In times of conflict or war, if I am captured, I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy. Likewise, I will treat all prisoners taken with dignity.

    Article IV
    If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.

    Article V
    When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the best of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to the United Federation of Planets and its allies or harmful to their cause.

    Article VI
    I will never forget that I am a United Federation of Planets Citizen, dedicated to freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles on which the Federation is founded. I will trust in my skills, my comrades, my beliefs and creed, and in the United Federation of Planets.


    ------------------
    "May I find you with peace, and leave you with hope."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO USA
    Posts
    1,352

    Post

    Originally posted by BerserkerSteve:
    Uh,just who is the Federation fighting that all this would matter?
    Which of their enemies has ever treated Fed civilians as anything but targets/slaves/drones/etc...?
    Besides,once the concept of total war fully matured(WW2,although it had been taking shape for awhile),the difference between civilians and soldiers became zero.
    (I would still rather get captured by the Feds than anyone else,though)
    Which is all beside the point. The Federation, at least on the face of it, plays by the rules. How can the Federation get outraged for an attack on civilian targets if everybody is a civilian? The Federation may have renounced war as a primary instrument of policy... but they know that everyone else hasn't.

    ------------------
    "I'd rather die standing than live on my knees..."
    Shania Twain

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    3,490

    Post

    Gentlemen...

    This area is for discussing evil Gamemaster/narrator schemes to make their players' lives miser... um, interesting. It is not for quoting great gobs of military trivia, however one tries to connect it to Trek. Please connect your discussions to gaming Star Trek, or take them over to the Star Trek Chat or General Chat forums.

    Owen E Oulton, CoModerator

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO USA
    Posts
    1,352

    Post

    Hmmm... I would have thought that the underlying philosopy of Starfleet, as it applies to each individual campaign, would be of vital importance to Narrators in setting the tone and style of play...

    But so be it, you're the moderator.

    Besides, somebody from Paramount might notice the word "military" used in conjunction with "Starfleet" on this board... then we'd all be in trouble.

    Would a topic discussing some Narrators' tendency towards resricting their players to a narrow set of choices based on a pre-concieved plan for how a series should develop (rather than letting creativity flow and allowing those playing, and supposedly enjoying, the game to define it's course) be appropriate for this forum?

    ------------------
    "I'd rather die standing than live on my knees..."
    Shania Twain

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Jacksonville, Arkansas, USA
    Posts
    1,880

    Post

    Sorry 'bout that, Owen. I thought Narrators might like to have a set of guidelines on how military and/or Starfleet characters should act in combat and in confinement. If you want to move this thread, OK by me.

    Aldaron, that's a nice rewrite. I may have to print that out for the civilian gamers in my group.

    ------------------

    <<<<

    LUGTrek isn't really dead. Not as long as we remember it.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    3,490

    Exclamation

    "I was kind of surprised to have the moderator wanting us to relocate our discussion. It was staying on track(well,better than most of these discussions do!),everyone was staying civil,and the "horrible" military information was rewritten into a usefull StarTrek format."

    My primary suggestion was to relate the discussion to running a campaign. None of the last few posts relate in any way I could discern to integration of the info contained into a gaming campaign. Making the info relevant to Star Trek in general is insufficient - that's what the Star Trek Chat forum is for. To be on topic here in the Narrator's Ready Room, it must relate to techniques and philosophy behind being a Gamemaster (or Narrator, to use the official LUG term) of a Star Trek campaign.
    I find your final comment personally insulting - I am an ex infantry soldier. I am not anti-military, nor do I consider militaria "horrible." I am as proud of my military service as anyone here. BUT, this is not is not the place to dredge up military trivia.

    Now, there are a number of angles from which one can approach the above material, and the approach one takes should determine what forum a discussion belongs in. For instance, as a general discussion of military law, it would naturally go into General Chat. Discussion of how Starfleet and the Federation interpret such laws, or how the Klingons do, or the Romulans, would go into Star Trek Chat. Discussion of how one would encourage one's players to act according to a set of Starfleet principles would go here. Specific game mechanics questions about whether this would be Code of Honour: Starfleet Code or Code of Honour: Defender (or whatever) would fit best in Questions & Mechanics. The Boards are, I think, nicely balanced as Don has them set up, with a specific place for each type of discussion, but they only work efficiantly if discussions take place in the appropriate forums.

    As I indicate above, much of the info presented can indeed be related to running a game, but it hasn't been. I'd like to see people try to do so. If I'd thought it couldn't be, I'd simply have locked it down here and transferred it to a more appropriate forum. In point of fact, my CoModerator Dan Stack contacted me and asked whether or not that might be a good idea (not that I'm trying to make Dan the heavy here) and I opined that the thread could be brought more on topic. Did I make the wrong call?

    Owen E Oulton CoModearator

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    3,490

    Post

    "I thought Narrators might like to have a set of guidelines on how military and/or Starfleet characters should act in combat and in confinement. If you want to move this thread, OK by me."

    No, I don't think there's a need to move it, just to take it that next step, as I remark in my immediately preceeding Moderatorial opinion...

    So, now you've got a Starfleet Code of Ethics... How do you get your players to work with it? How does it interact with the various character types and various Traits. I'm certain you've met both complete goof-offs and oppressive martinets in your military service - I know I did in mine. The same range of types is likely to be found in Starfleet, and certainly will be in any gaming group. What do you do when someone takes the Disad Code of Honour: Starfleet Code which would (one assumes) contain much of the "meat" of your post (hey, it's good for a few extra DPs), but never really makes any attempt to role-play it?

    Another question is "How does one go about adapting real-world patterns for gaming?" While I'm not really keen on the "substitute Starfleet for US Army and UFP for USA" model (anyone else find that F-14 Tomcat Federation Fighters kinda ruined any "Trekkishness" there might've been in Starfleet Battles?), Aldaron has made a good start, especially with his point about eliminating religious references. I'm not anti-religious, or anti-Christian, but it does go a ways to fitting the material into the Trek milieu, by taking into account some fundamental things about the Federation; for instance, it is a society made up of many different cultures, not all of which will see eye-to-eye on many of these things. Vulcans would likely wish to know why they should make the invocation "so help me God," when there is no empirical evidence that such a being exists, that such an invocation would elicit the desired help, or that such help would be beneficial (you know Vulcans). Tellarites might want to know why the Human God is being invoked, but no mention is being made of Grunthos the Flatulent.

    This last is one of the things I find most aesthetically satisfying about creating a gaming universe, or filling in an existing one like Trek. The trick is, IMNSHO, to take the familiar and look at it from a completely different point of view, then restate it so that it retains its meaning while becoming relevant to an alien mentality..

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO USA
    Posts
    1,352

    Post

    Originally posted by Owen E Oulton:

    I find your final comment personally insulting - I am an ex infantry soldier. I am not anti-military, nor do I consider militaria "horrible." I am as proud of my military service as anyone here. BUT, this is not is not the place to dredge up military trivia.

    <SNIP>

    In point of fact, my CoModerator Dan Stack contacted me and asked whether or not that might be a good idea (not that I'm trying to make Dan the heavy here) and I opined that the thread could be brought more on topic. Did I make the wrong call?

    Owen E Oulton CoModearator
    No... actually you didn't. Tho you haven't mentioned it, I started the thread and I was the first to take exception to your suggestion. Frankly, I was having a bad day at work and posted a reply that was more confrontational than it should have been.

    I do think that the moral dilema and contradiction (even hypocrisy) that Starfleet servicemembers might find themselves in with Starfleet's insistance that it isn't a military is a vital consideration in any but the most "ivory tower" campaign.

    I also think that the limitations this causes Starfleet servicemembers to work under when the balloon _does_ go up bears thinking on.

    However, I do agree that this thread has drifted beyond that, and I apologize for my earlier tone and ask that future posters abide by the moderator's suggestion by examining how these issues impact a narrator and his <her> game.



    ------------------
    "I'd rather die standing than live on my knees..."
    Shania Twain

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    MetroWest, MA USA
    Posts
    2,590

    Post

    Owen summed things up pretty well. I was going through the morning threads and in addition to looking for threads that I immediately know need moderation, there are those which I worry could be drifting off-topic. I e-mailed Owen to get his views and we pretty much agreed that a gentle nudge to keep things game-related may be an issue.

    So, to practice what I preach. The rules listed describe the behavior of Federation Prisoners of War. How would one narrate such a game? The best example in the show, "Chain of Command" treated Picard rather brutally. Would anyone treat a player character like that? How would one handle that? Discuss it with the player in advance?

    A less intense version of this could be seen in DS9 (episode name escapes me) where Bashir, Worf, Martok, etc. are at a Jem Hadar POW camp. That might be more easily transferrable to an adventure. I nice meeting with a Weyoun -- "I just want to end this war, for both sides. Surely there's no harm in you helping me do that..." What would a player playing a pacifist Vulcan do in such a case?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Geelong, Vic; Australia
    Posts
    1,131

    Post

    Narrating torture sessions are very difficult - I've done it only twice in 18 years of gaming, and both were exceptional role-playing sessions, but left both myself and the player involved feeling almost "dirty".

    One of these sessions was a Star Wars game, where the PC was a Rebel agent captured by the Empire. The other was an AD&D game, where a PC Cleric had been captured by an opposing religious group (it was a sort of Spanish Inquisition type thing, getting him to confess that his god was impotent next to theirs).

    I discovered very early on that there is little point in "standard" descriptions of torture. Reducing hit points (or wound levels, or whatever) simply doesn't work because the player is confident that their character will escape and eventually recover.

    The only way around it is to represent torture in a broad manner, so that each day the character loses not recoverable hit points, but non-recoverable attribute points. That way, even if they do escape, they will never be the same again. It could be straight strength or vitality, or you could be more devious and do it similarly to Chain of Command and have the character lose Presence points (reflecting their lowered confidence, etc).

    The most important point, however, is don't do it at all unless it's absolutely necessary to the plot. It's bizarre, I know, but I found it quite disturbing. I can (as a gamemaster) blast characters all day, wipe out millions with orbital bombardments and it doesn't bother me in the slightest.

    Refereeing a torture session, however, left me feeling as if I really had tortured someone.

    Maybe I'm just overly sensitive or possess a weak stomach, but I don't recommend it.

    ------------------
    "May I find you with peace, and leave you with hope."

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    3,490

    Post

    I dunno if I'm all that comfortable with the concept of permanently lowering attributes - it's a very D&D-ish way of handling things, but there are other ways of simulating the lasting effects of torture/delayed stress flashbacks, et cetera... Disadvantages. There's all sorts of Disads a character can acquire, from physical impairments to phobias, etc... You can put restrictions on how easy it will be to buy one off. The ICON system, IMNSHO, is the first system to actually use the Advantage/Disadvantage system in a reasonable fashion.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •