Does a 10+ Code of Honor require a call to violence?

[oneofmanynameless]

My GM is trying to price a code of honor I wrote and isn't sure what to price it as. The code is pretty detailed and restrictive but, while it does include several lines that restrict when you can fight, it doesn't include anything which forces you to get into fights, which most 10+ point code of honors do.

My question is whether or not a code of honor needs something that requires you to get into fights in order for it to be worth more than 5 points? If so can you show me any examples from any sourcebooks (my GM wants something official on this.)

For what it's worth, the CoH I put forward is below:

• Anything shared in private is in confidence, regardless of your relationship with the person who shared it, and cannot be shared without their express permission unless keeping it a secret endangers you or your close friend or family.
• Never intentionally do anything that causes, or even threatens to cause, injury to the uninvolved - particularly if they are "ordinary folk".
• Take responsibility for what you do while intoxicated, but don't hold anyone else responsible for what they do while intoxicated.
• Never take advantage of anyone in an intoxicated state, be they romantic interests or enemies.
• Always repay good deeds with good deeds.
• Don't brag about something unless you know beyond a doubt you're the best at it.
• Always treat animals and children with unconditional love, although you may defend yourself from wild animals who attack you.
• Never commit to anything important (relationship or otherwise) until you've learned everything about it and are sure it feels right for you.
• Do not judge other people's perspectives unless those perspectives are creating a negative impact on the world.
• Appreciate Criticism, even if it's difficult to endure.
• Respect the sanctity of other's free will and never do anything that fundamentally undermines it.
• Don't let the past or future get in the way of the present.

[Not]

That's a lot of things. Maybe it's a 5 point code of honor and five quirks?

[jason taylor]

Most CoHs are a way to keep order through peer pressure. Therefore they have a reason for encouraging violence in some cases("prove I'm not bluffing", etc) as well as for forbidding it in others(no society can tolerate a total psycho, and those that came closest usually directed it on outsiders). Thus there is a balance. Clearly the one most skillful at violence will gain the fear of the others and so will have "honor" in the most gross and raw sense. However if there is to be a functioning civilization there has to be a restraint. Which means CoHs sometimes encourage violence and sometimes restrain it. The ideal of course is to be known to be good at violence but also known to be restrained in it's application; "fierce in the field and meek in the hall", and many CoHs recognize something of the kind to a greater or lesser degree.

Many of the rules regarding the acceptability of violence are actually for quarantining it. That is why there are so many elaborate rules about when and how violence is to be used. For instance if a given tribe assumes the immunity of women the obvious reason is to keep reproduction from being inhibited. A less obvious but equally valid reason is to allow a diplomat class to be set up.

A CoH that has no place where violence is required probably would not be mainstream in society. It can be pictured in a local religion. Or it can be for an ethnicity or sodaliity that fulfills a certain niche which is incompatible with violence and which provides services for security.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by oneofmanynameless

My question is whether or not a code of honor needs something that requires you to get into fights in order for it to be worth more than 5 points?

Definitely not! Whether you call your behavior code "Code of Honor," "Disciplines of Faith," "Vow," or something else (like "Fanaticism" or "Pacifism") is a matter of personal preference; there's nothing intrinsic to those traits that makes them appreciably different from one another. And you can find plenty of published examples of entirely peaceful, even pacifistic, codes of these kinds at -1, -5, -10, and -15 points. Indeed, you could declare "My Pacifism (Cannot Kill) [-15] isn't conditioning but a consciously chosen Code of Honor [-15]." Job done.

[oneofmanynameless]

Originally Posted by Not

That's a lot of things. Maybe it's a 5 point code of honor and five quirks?

Which parts would you make into the CoH and which parts would you make into the quirks?

Originally Posted by Kromm

Definitely not! Whether you call your behavior code "Code of Honor," "Disciplines of Faith," "Vow," or something else (like "Fanaticism" or "Pacifism") is a matter of personal preference; there's nothing intrinsic to those traits that makes them appreciably different from one another. And you can find plenty of published examples of entirely peaceful, even pacifistic, codes of these kinds at -1, -5, -10, and -15 points. Indeed, you could declare "My Pacifism (Cannot Kill) [-15] isn't conditioning but a consciously chosen Code of Honor [-15]." Job done.

Thanks!

Originally Posted by jason taylor

Most CoHs are a way to keep order through peer pressure.

In terms of how they get propagated in society, sure. But plenty of people have personalized sets of rules that they made up, or adapted from multiple different other places, but take very seriously enough to be considered full disadvantages.

You do make a really interesting point about why so many CoH's have rules about violence though.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by oneofmanynameless

My GM is trying to price a code of honor I wrote and isn't sure what to price it as. The code is pretty detailed and restrictive but, while it does include several lines that restrict when you can fight, it doesn't include anything which forces you to get into fights, which most 10+ point code of honors do.

My question is whether or not a code of honor needs something that requires you to get into fights in order for it to be worth more than 5 points? If so can you show me any examples from any sourcebooks (my GM wants something official on this.)

For what it's worth, the CoH I put forward is below:

• Anything shared in private is in confidence, regardless of your relationship with the person who shared it, and cannot be shared without their express permission unless keeping it a secret endangers you or your close friend or family.
• Never intentionally do anything that causes, or even threatens to cause, injury to the uninvolved - particularly if they are "ordinary folk".
• Take responsibility for what you do while intoxicated, but don't hold anyone else responsible for what they do while intoxicated.
• Never take advantage of anyone in an intoxicated state, be they romantic interests or enemies.
• Always repay good deeds with good deeds.
• Don't brag about something unless you know beyond a doubt you're the best at it.
• Always treat animals and children with unconditional love, although you may defend yourself from wild animals who attack you.
• Never commit to anything important (relationship or otherwise) until you've learned everything about it and are sure it feels right for you.
• Do not judge other people's perspectives unless those perspectives are creating a negative impact on the world.
• Appreciate Criticism, even if it's difficult to endure.
• Respect the sanctity of other's free will and never do anything that fundamentally undermines it.
• Don't let the past or future get in the way of the present.

While no, it doesn't require willingness to kill to break 10 there are other issues. In particular high value Codes should not have escape clauses. "Keep confidences unless it becomes dangerous", "Don't judge people's perspectives unless those perspectives are really bad", "Don't brag except about the stuff you're really awesome at", "Love animals unconditionally except for that one condition"...these are not elements of a high value Code of Honor. High point value Codes are rigid and uncompromising.

Then there are the things that aren't part of a Code of Honor at all. Codes do not command your emotions. They command your actions. You can't have a code of honor to "love children". You either love children or you don't. You either appreciate criticism or you don't. A code of honor involving criticism would be something like "Always express gratitude for criticism". It doesn't require you to feel gratitude (because the only feeling that can be impelled by a Code is a feeling of obligation), just to be polite (as defined by your Code) in response to it.

Nor do Codes impel you to be prudent. "Do careful research before making an important commitment" is not part of a Code. It's just good advice. Same with "Don't let the past or the future get in the way of the present.

Lastly a Code should have some thematic unity to it. It should be the Lawyer's Code of Honor, or the Knight's Code of Honor, or the Cynic's Code of Honor, or the Party Animal's Code of Honor.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

In particular high value Codes should not have escape clauses.

Agreed. One could look at Code of Honor as starting at a basic -15 points but losing -5 points for either of "escape clause" or "applies to a limited target group," or losing -10 points for both.

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Nor do Codes impel you to be prudent. "Do careful research before making an important commitment" is not part of a Code.

Here, however, I disagree. Code of Honor absolutely can compel you to engage in due diligence, to use maximum safety measures, or something similar; this is part and parcel of many professional codes, such as those that bind ethical doctors and lawyers. Many tasks would be cheaper, easier, and faster if you could permit yourself to throw caution to the winds . . . so if you must always do things the slow-and-sure way, that should be worth points. If doing things the quick-and-dirty way is grounds for disciplinary or legal action against you, there's even an external society compelling prudence.

—

Another way to look at this would be to turn to Code of Honor on p. 9 of GURPS Power-Ups 6: Quirks and apply its standards. A Code of Honor starts at -15 points but is bumped down one step to -10, -5, -1, and finally 0 points for each of casual, diluted, low-risk, and narrow that applies. My earlier "escape clause" overlaps "casual" and "diluted," while "limited target group" is essentially the same as "narrow."

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Not

That's a lot of things. Maybe it's a 5 point code of honor and five quirks?

Agreed. Too much of it is pure Quirk level and the rest is in the Pirate's Code level.

[Not]

B.127: "The point value of a particular code of honor depends on how much trouble it is liable to get you into and how arbitrary and irrational its requirements are." It goes on to say that sometimes requires suicide gives -15, but doesn't price danger specifically.

You might look at the pricing of overconfidence, megalomania and on the edge for a guide as well.

Looking at your list, they don't require much irrationality or danger. I might price the package at Vow: Don't be a Dick [-5], but many of those seem like valid quirks as well.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by oneofmanynameless

In terms of how they get propagated in society, sure. But plenty of people have personalized sets of rules that they made up, or adapted from multiple different other places, but take very seriously enough to be considered full disadvantages.

Wouldn't personalized rules be Vow?