For other non-gameplay topics, especially those related to Star Trek and the Star Trek CCG, non-gameplay surveys, trivia questions and puzzles, constructive commentary and more.

In my example, does the high INTEGRITY Jem'Hadar First obey the order given?

Yes. NOT following the orders of a Founder or Vorta would be low INTEGRITY for him.
8
36%
No. High INTEGRITY means the Jem'Hadar knows following the order would be morally wrong.
1
5%
It depends upon other circumstances.
7
32%
She's so mean, but I don't care. I love her eyes and her wild, wild hair.
6
27%
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#533194
I mean in terms of the game term, not what actual integrity is. Otherwise, this topic is in the wrong forum and we'd be here all day.

Does INTEGRITY, as a game concept, reflect an objective right and wrong in the universe, or does it reflect morality in one's own culture?

Here's a hypothetical example: The Dominion (perhaps being advised by the Cardassians) have taken over a planet and put all the adults to forced labor while the children are being held hostage by Jem'Hadar troops led by a First with 9 INTEGRITY. This is in 1E terms. Adjust as necessary for 2E's lower attributes.

There's a slave uprising and the First is ordered to show that the Dominion means what they say by killing the hostage children. Does the First obey the order?

On one hand, it can be argued that for this Jem'Hadar, the Founders are literally their gods and the Vorta their divinely appointed messengers, so NOT following the order would show low INTEGRITY.

On the other, using Premiere Jean-Luc Picard as an example of a 9 INTEGRITY personnel, he certainly would never follow the order (nor gone along with this in the first place). If INTEGRITY is INTEGRITY regardless of affiliation, the First can't either.

It should be noted that while there aren't any 9 INTEGRITY [Dom] personnel, there are some 8s. Some of them are rebelling against the Founders, but not all.
User avatar
North American OP Coordinator
By The Ninja Scot (Michael Van Breemen)
 - North American OP Coordinator
 -  
1E World Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E World Champion 2023
Tribbles World Champion 2022
The Traveler
1E North American Continental Champion 2023
2E North American Continental Champion 2023
  Trek Masters 1E Champion 2024
1E American National Champion 2023
1E Canadian National Champion 2023
2E Canadian National Champion 2023
2E  National Runner-Up 2023
2E American National Second Runner-Up 2023
1E The Neutral Zone Regional Champion 2023
2E The Neutral Zone Regional Champion 2023
#533195
Boffo97 wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 9:11 am I mean in terms of the game term, not what actual integrity is. Otherwise, this topic is in the wrong forum and we'd be here all day.

Does INTEGRITY, as a game concept, reflect an objective right and wrong in the universe, or does it reflect morality in one's own culture?

Here's a hypothetical example: The Dominion (perhaps being advised by the Cardassians) have taken over a planet and put all the adults to forced labor while the children are being held hostage by Jem'Hadar troops led by a First with 9 INTEGRITY. This is in 1E terms. Adjust as necessary for 2E's lower attributes.

There's a slave uprising and the First is ordered to show that the Dominion means what they say by killing the hostage children. Does the First obey the order?

On one hand, it can be argued that for this Jem'Hadar, the Founders are literally their gods and the Vorta their divinely appointed messengers, so NOT following the order would show low INTEGRITY.

On the other, using Premiere Jean-Luc Picard as an example of a 9 INTEGRITY personnel, he certainly would never follow the order (nor gone along with this in the first place). If INTEGRITY is INTEGRITY regardless of affiliation, the First can't either.

It should be noted that while there aren't any 9 INTEGRITY [Dom] personnel, there are some 8s. Some of them are rebelling against the Founders, but not all.
ikat'ika and Founder Architect Both of these personnel, one of whom is non-unique, can have Integrity > 9 (one for a turn, one potentially forever) in 2E (and in 1E as well with the Founder Architect.) And, if we're talking about 1E, since anyone can become more imbued with INTEGRITY by being around a Kukalaka or some via Lower Decks, I don't think that much into the numerical value in terms of who has more Integrity, just that it is for that particular version of that particular card in the context of a card game.

Michael,
:twocents:
User avatar
 
By SudenKapala (Suden Käpälä)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#533198
EDIT: Oh. :(

Damn. :neutral:

In my enthusiasm for what I thought was the subject, I wrote an entire essay (retained below) before really reading the whole OP.

This board was a nice place, the last few months... time I made myself scarce again. 8)

In the end, because it concerns the JH, my vote is the same -- it's horrible, but the kids' lives would be forfeit.

But I do think -- and here, big chunks of my below original post do come in handy -- that culture, morality, character and situation often play very large roles. Look at the Klingon that eradicated a planet's biosphere (INT 8 ) and the Romulan who wanted to make the universe a better place (INT 2).

Also, comparing [Fed] Picard with a [Dom] genetically engineered-to-be-docile clone is not valid, IMO. Context is for kings...?

ORIGINAL POST: To my knowledge, much has been said about this in various discussions, at least concerning Dorian Collins, Alidar Jarok and Nu'Daq.

If you like I can try to find those discussions. At least one such thread might have evolved, I think, from the Jera/Tomek [Holo] / [1E-AU] topic...?

I find your general question highly interesting and I have, in the past, fervently defended my ideas about it -- but have also, in the course of all that, accepted that INT can't ever be truly grasped or logically (and, most importantly, consistently!) explained, just like some other elements of the game. (Just a random example: Riker, in the episode, shows to be a better ENGINEER and/or have more Comp Skill than Narik. But that doesn't necessarily make either card faulty.)

The same goes for many other human or natural (and thus complex and fluid) aspects that are funneled into a game or even into professional models or theories (e.g., psychology; and, to lesser extent, educational certification; etc.).

Still, the attempt to capture "real" life in cards or game systems is what attracts me to RPG and various other (card) games.

I think the fact that both Decipher and the CC have fielded some cards that are -- naturally! -- highly inconsistent when implementing these impossible-to-get-objectively-right (because no such thing) aspects, makes for a murky view on what, exactly, some game elements truly represent. And that is logical; and logically, it vexes detail-driven people like us (I daresay); and I think we should best accept it gladly, and play the cards as-are. (Except Dorry Collins. Make her great again!)

That said... I will vote for what I think is correct in your specific question; because I think I still can justify a thought-through personal answer when such a detailed case is presented. (E.g., the respective race / relations / ethics / aims / situation are all quite well documented in the franchise and in the OP.)

I think we've seen most Jem'Hadar look down upon other species, and even the Vorta and themselves, as totally unimportant in comparison to the founders. They only value life in that strict order. They might protect, say, a Ferengi child from a Dosi bully out of honour. But given the hypothetical order, I think neither child would be left standing.

But, aside from the above, I also think that it really hinges on the character's character as well as the situation/moment. Riker and Sisko both have a justifiable INT 8 and Honour. One might have a senator assassinated false evidence forged if need be... and the other might not, ever.

Perhaps that explains why Keevan was able to survive even though his First knew he was being betrayed into suicide, while the Iconian Weyoun was conversely killed for only doubting/lying to his men...? Which technically is inconsistent, but because we came to know those JH a bit, we can accept it. (Or, I can.)

/ORIGINAL POST
Last edited by SudenKapala on Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:38 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#533201
Ah, yes. I forgot about the Dorian Collins mess.

Although I'm glad I went back and reviewed your thread on that because while I'm not sure I agree (at least not totally) with James' reasoning that lack of discipline justified her INTEGRITY being lower than normal (if maybe not THAT low), it's at least *A* justification.

And it applies here since one could definitely argue that Inte'Grity (as I'm nicknaming our hypothetical friend that I created) would show a lack of discipline by ignoring his orders, thus strengthening the argument that he would actually show a lack of INTEGRITY (via a lack of discipline) by refusing to follow his orders.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#533346
Boffo97 wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 9:11 am Does INTEGRITY, as a game concept, reflect an objective right and wrong in the universe, or does it reflect morality in one's own culture?
It *should* reflect the stated principles of their culture. (And specifically *their* culture, not the Federation). Then the score is a measure of how well they, well, measure up to that standard.

If I was to pick an affiliation that (1E at least) handles INTEGRITY well, I'd pick Klingons - they're all about Honor and Glory of Empire and etc, and high INTEGRITY Klingons actually believe and do that stuff, while low INTEGRITY Klingons say the words and then backstab people.
User avatar
 
By Cartagia
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#533484
AllenGould wrote:
Boffo97 wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 9:11 am Does INTEGRITY, as a game concept, reflect an objective right and wrong in the universe, or does it reflect morality in one's own culture?
It *should* reflect the stated principles of their culture. (And specifically *their* culture, not the Federation). Then the score is a measure of how well they, well, measure up to that standard.

If I was to pick an affiliation that (1E at least) handles INTEGRITY well, I'd pick Klingons - they're all about Honor and Glory of Empire and etc, and high INTEGRITY Klingons actually believe and do that stuff, while low INTEGRITY Klingons say the words and then backstab people.
Would you then say that the Ferengi represent it the worst? Because they are backstabbing charlatans, but that is what their culture wants them to be.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#533487
Cartagia wrote: Tue Nov 03, 2020 6:34 pm
Would you then say that the Ferengi represent it the worst? Because they are backstabbing charlatans, but that is what their culture wants them to be.
Depends how you look at it - I believe there's a few mentions where the "public face" of the Ferengi is "free enterprise" businessmen, so the fact that most Ferengi we see are backstabbing used-car salesmen types would account for the low INTEGRITY.

(Similar would be Romulans, who espouse high ideals and then it's all backstabbing and plots.)

Short version: high INTEGRITY is not necessarily a survival trait in all species. ;)
User avatar
Shipping Manager
By SirDan (Dan Hamman)
 - Shipping Manager
 -  
ibbles  Trek Masters Tribbles Champion 2023
#533492
AllenGould wrote:It *should* reflect the stated principles of their culture. (And specifically *their* culture, not the Federation). Then the score is a measure of how well they, well, measure up to that standard.
I don't buy it though. I think integrity is a scale from 0-10ish, based on how closely a personnel represents the moral standards of the ideal Federation captain.

Bonus points if you are true to yourself or your people, but you'll still be judged by human (American? Norfolkian?) standards.
User avatar
 
By Iron Prime (Dan Van Kampen)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#533509
AllenGould wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 12:30 pm It *should* reflect the stated principles of their culture. (And specifically *their* culture, not the Federation). Then the score is a measure of how well they, well, measure up to that standard.

If I was to pick an affiliation that (1E at least) handles INTEGRITY well, I'd pick Klingons - they're all about Honor and Glory of Empire and etc, and high INTEGRITY Klingons actually believe and do that stuff, while low INTEGRITY Klingons say the words and then backstab people.
+1 to Allens post, with one caveat; I think we still color everything just a little blue because the shows are from a Federation/human perspective. And we just can't seem to every totally shake our own perspective...
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#533520
In thinking about it, I think we have at least two major complications here:

1. A non "main" personnel could represent the personnel as depicted in the episode, or it could represent the personnel in general. Maybe 2 INTEGRITY Alidar Jarok was only "conscientious" when it came to hearing about an unnecessary war and not wanting it. Maybe he only cared about Romulan casualties.

2. Decipher seems really inconsistent with the meaning. I could buy the idea that INTEGRITY is dependent upon one's culture and for the Dominion, that means obedience to the Founders. But what about Goran'Agar? He has an 8 INTEGRITY despite abandoning the Dominion and taking a squad of other Jem'Hadar with him. That's INTEGRITY by viewer standards, but not Dominion standards.
User avatar
 
By Iron Prime (Dan Van Kampen)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#533525
Boffo97 wrote: Wed Nov 04, 2020 11:46 am

In thinking about it, I think we have at least two major complications here:

1. A non "main" personnel could represent the personnel as depicted in the episode, or it could represent the personnel in general. Maybe 2 INTEGRITY Alidar Jarok was only "conscientious" when it came to hearing about an unnecessary war and not wanting it. Maybe he only cared about Romulan casualties.

2. Decipher seems really inconsistent with the meaning. I could buy the idea that INTEGRITY is dependent upon one's culture and for the Dominion, that means obedience to the Founders.
But what about Goran'Agar? He has an 8 INTEGRITY despite abandoning the Dominion and taking a squad of other Jem'Hadar with him. That's INTEGRITY by viewer standards, but not Dominion standards.
Yeah, they really seem to want to have it both ways...
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#533526
Boffo97 wrote: Wed Nov 04, 2020 11:46 am Decipher seems really inconsistent with the meaning.
And the usage, especially in the beginning. Firestorm being the obvious and classic example - anyone care to Trek Sense how being So Very Correct protects you from (checks episode) high energy plasma? ;)
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#533532
AllenGould wrote: Wed Nov 04, 2020 1:37 pm And the usage, especially in the beginning. Firestorm being the obvious and classic example - anyone care to Trek Sense how being So Very Correct protects you from (checks episode) high energy plasma? ;)
I always read that dilemma that, since the lore talks about working together, INTEGRITY is a stand-in for how well you can work as a team, putting your individual needs below that of the group.

Of course that wouldn't explain why the selfish jerks (INTEGRITY < 5) would be the only ones to suffer from their inability to play nicely with others, so it remains a bit conceptual.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#539087
Necroposting because I missed this somehow, but I have broken this tie. You are welcome.
2. Decipher seems really inconsistent with the meaning. I could buy the idea that INTEGRITY is dependent upon one's culture and for the Dominion, that means obedience to the Founders. But what about Goran'Agar? He has an 8 INTEGRITY despite abandoning the Dominion and taking a squad of other Jem'Hadar with him. That's INTEGRITY by viewer standards, but not Dominion standards.
INTEGRITY isn't quite about following orders. (Although it's close enough to that that I voted for that in your poll.)

INTEGRITY is about having a personal code of conduct, one that transcends your own simple self-interest, and following it. Whether that code is absolute loyalty to the Dominion (your hypothetical First) or absolute loyalty to the good of the men under his command (Goran'agar), it doesn't matter: the question the INTEGRITY attribute answers is, "Do you obey your code?" whatever that code happens to be.

Kivas Fajo may very well be Trek's best example of someone who is simply, totally, utterly lacking any kind of code of conduct. He is a creature of pure selfishness, and so appropriately has NO INTEGRITY -- even though people like Dukat have committed crimes far more morally reprehensible.

This is why I argued passionately that Khan Noonien Singh should have INTEGRITY 9. (Movies Khan, by contrast, is selfish, with constantly shifting self-justifications. He does not follow his own code nor show any loyalty even to his most loyal servants, so he's appropriately given INTEGRITY 3.)
User avatar
 
By SudenKapala (Suden Käpälä)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#539089
This subject, somehow, never ceases to draw me in.
Regarding to what you wrote... I think most of it is sound. A surprisingly compact hypothesis, that of course is too compact to encompass all quirky values that have been given to cards to date (and not only Decipher cards -- but I've argued that case enough... for a while). :P

Just one thing Wowbagger said, I wanted to ask about now...

Am I the only one in this?
Kivas Fajo
may very well be Trek's best example of someone who is simply, totally, utterly lacking any kind of code of conduct. He is a creature of pure selfishness, and so
appropriately has NO INTEGRITY -- even though people like Dukat have committed crimes far more morally reprehensible.
It always bugged me that Lore and Kivas' INT wasn't swapped. Not much difference, numerically; but game-wise, not possible to "soften Kivas' heart" in any way (i.e., w/ a cute teddy bear), while Lore is susceptible (
what's that positive word for that? Receipient of?
) to Kukalaka and all other INT raisers.

To me, it's always felt that a flawed machine -- or, arguably, more perfect than Data, in a way -- should get that more technical and finite "0" INT, and have it raised only by a chip.

I'm not arguing from story-/character POV, here. Just game-wise. From character, I'd be fine with both of these horrible beings get 1 or 2.
0 would be fine for me, but only for Lore; but I guess I
do like the one "NO INT" in the game so much as to find that the best option for him. But that sentiment's not much to do with his behaviour or ethics.

Does anybody have an idea why this was (not) done the way it was(n't), obviously very fairly consciously (coz from the same set)?
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

Happy birthday to @Takket ! :D :thumbsup: […]

Opponents turn

Remodulation