Disad: Sense of Duty Question - Overlapping multiple 'senses of duty'?

[Captain Joy]

Originally Posted by whswhs

GURPS Social Engineering has some guidelines for when you take multiple SoD, on p. 43. You might find them worth a look

I don't have this (yet), so I'm curious how it will affect Qoltar's stance on this matter.

In my Star Trek campaign, all Starfleet officers are required take Sence of Duty (Federation) for -10 character points. Because of this, they are not allowed to take Sence of Duty (team mates) for -5 points because all their team mates are members of the Federation and fall under the umbrella of the Sense of Duty (Federation) disadvantage. I believe this is the RAW interpretation; but again, I haven't consulted GURPS Social Engineering.

Originally Posted by Qoltar

When the ENTERPRISE 1701-D was under the command of Captain Jellico - Riker had a 'sense of Duty' to the Federation/Starfleet but likely felt NO 'Sense of Duty' towards Captain Jellico.

I have no problem with a character having a Sence of Duty to a group, yet not having warm fuzzy feelings for individuals within that group because said individuals push the character's buttons. I think Riker did still feel a Sense of Duty to Jellico as a member of the Federation. I think if it came to it, Riker would still have gone to great lengths to safeguard Jellico's personal safety.

[cbower]

Originally Posted by Qoltar

Sense of Duty (FEDERATION/Starfleet) (Large Group) [-10]
Sense of Duty (USS COCHISE, crew of the Cochise) [-10]

What do you guys think?

If it can create a situation where there would be an interesting conflict between these SoDs, I'd probably allow a PC to take both, though I'd call the second one -5 points.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by cbower

If it can create a situation where there would be an interesting conflict between these SoDs, I'd probably allow a PC to take both, though I'd call the second one -5 points.

You don't need to allow two SoDs to get that, though.

Say you have SoD (family). Your spouse is gravely ill and needs your care and your money to pay for treatment. But your child has vanished on the way home from school, and you need to search or to hire professional searchers, which also costs a lot. You have to choose which to prioritize. Any SoD with more than one person can generate such choices. But it wouldn't be fair to have a two-point SoD for a spouse and for each of, say, three children for a total of 8 points. The ability to have conflict between helping different persons is inherent in SoD; having specified persons is just a feature.

Bill Stoddard

[cbower]

Originally Posted by whswhs

You don't need to allow two SoDs to get that, though.

Say you have SoD (family). Your spouse is gravely ill and needs your care and your money to pay for treatment. But your child has vanished on the way home from school, and you need to search or to hire professional searchers, which also costs a lot. You have to choose which to prioritize. Any SoD with more than one person can generate such choices. But it wouldn't be fair to have a two-point SoD for a spouse and for each of, say, three children for a total of 8 points. The ability to have conflict between helping different persons is inherent in SoD; having specified persons is just a feature.

Bill Stoddard

That's a good point. I'll likely run with that in the future.