|
Post by Gigermann on Mar 25, 2018 22:48:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Apr 2, 2018 18:23:29 GMT -6
Lots of decent photo-manips here...I mean, hey, if we need Captain Bond then ...
|
|
|
Post by CommJunkee on Sept 4, 2018 21:48:58 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Sept 5, 2018 10:05:37 GMT -6
I don't even like Tarantino and I dig the way they cut that trailer...
|
|
|
Post by CommJunkee on Sept 24, 2018 15:22:20 GMT -6
Risk is our business. LOL Flagrant disregard for the safety of the ship and crew. Suck up your Article 15! One would appeal to the masses... the masses that no longer have to worry about a threat from virus-X. <pbthpbth...> I'll take the Article 15 then shove it up command's ass, then see it buried by popular opinion within command, not to mention science and medical communities (no one is going to make it stick, not without telling a whole race... uh we totally boned the people who cured you, and made virus-X a non-factor). Try curing cancer (which is kinda the PC's job) and then have it get out that they had the book thrown at them. LOL! Besides, Kalem and Yalovi just went into history LOL. "Our job is risk." I get that the adventure path, probably didn't even consider this as an option. But, to penalize PCs by saying a fully equipped starship doesn't have the proper facilities to do what we were doing? Really is quite the stretch. Not to mention that both PCs are familiar with tackling such tasks (at least one has cured a disease before), the doc was more supportive in the endeavor. YES... this is trek-yadayadayada... what the f-ever. We know the PCs were not having it if there was any risk (no hot-room/lab/what-have-you on a ship that maintains a science team? Yeah, what the f-ever...). Isn't this an indecent response vessel, so a maximum mission flex kinda-ship? Besides, we had established quarantine procedures in the prior adventure, not to mention the shear fact that the current mission has us going to an outbreak site. OH and this is TREK so there is technology enough to make such a thing so routine it - it is so much hand-wavium to say we would have risked infecting the entire crew, much less ourselves. So, yeah... I think we would have had the right tools, the right training, and the right amount of authority to do what was done. You don't go down to the motor-poor and jump the lead there because he or his folks were performing their job, doing preventative maint, and oh - looking int o entirely motor-pool centric tasks... There is an assumption that the science officers does F-all when were aren't engaged with something in our faces... the doctor is studying, checking on the health of the crew, and when not engaged in other duties doing research to make sure the crew stays healthy. Jumping the crewmember's shit for doing their job, and having a micromanaging command does not make for a happy much less effective crew. The Captain is ensuring the mission is moving forward, the XO helps, the department heads ensure their departments are doing what they are tasked with.
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Sept 24, 2018 15:28:23 GMT -6
Try curing cancer (which is kinda the PC's job) and then have it get out that they had the book thrown at them. If they had murdered some babies in the process, you bet. There's no reason to alert the public about it. They endangered the ship; it's an internal matter—potentially a Navy (err…Starfleet) matter. Nobody else would care. Fortunately the only thing they did "wrong" here was not alert anyone else to what they were doing.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Sept 24, 2018 16:21:30 GMT -6
And exactly as we freaking stated during the game, the most logical course of action that the captain would take in something like this is to do what happened to Kirk: they get a reprimand and an commendation at the same time. I'm playing a pseudo-Vulcan character - of course he's going to recommend punishing them for not clearing their actions with their chain-of-command. That doesn't mean the captain has to agree with that suggestion.
For that matter, this gives LabRat's character an opportunity to challenge one of her Values - the ... Science first, permission later? - which is supposed to be the point of the game, I thought.
|
|
|
Post by CommJunkee on Sept 24, 2018 18:15:04 GMT -6
Touche, example only, and such a thing was not in the scope. Had there been such a quandary the task would have been DOA.
This right here is what is ticking me off What f-ning danger?!?!! This is the 24th century (I think?). There are freaking force fields, holo-decks and all matter of marvoulous crap. "Its Star Trek, it doesn't make sense." Well f-ing make it make sense. You have to be kidding if you don't think a lab is already part of this ship. It is an incident response vessel for pity sake. What risk, outside of fiat (again make it make sense), should there have been? I call foul if one couldn't simply assume the science team didn't have a function lab (or hell, the holo-deck, or the computer capacity to run high risk simulations). This point is what really has my goat. I don't care for the, "You have all this cool stuff, but not what you need. You have a science team, but they don't actually science. You are a doctor, but forget about doing any research unless the book says so."
So our leadership doesn't trust their assigned section leads to do their jobs? Science a solution to the upcoming problem we KNOW we are going to face? NOT take initiative (screw that risk noise, see above). It is easy to say, just say something, but one is delusional if they thing an O-6, has the time to be bothered with such trivialities. I have worded for both, O-6s and general officers, if the work and mission is moving forward, they could give a flying-f, what was happening in the background (unless it was hurting or compromising the mission). XO, closest comparison, Director of Operation, is interested in making sure departments where doing their jobs, and day-to-day ops were going smoothly. Case as above, it wasn't kept secret, why should it have been (don't give me the risky thing, I am going to refuse it on the grounds we have super science), it may have come up as part of a meeting, Yalovi wouldn't have been concerned. Heck, if there was a task log, it would have been there for the XO and Capt to see. Direct questions would have brought it out, "What is the science department working on these days?" Unless we had some other pressing task to science the crap out of what elsewas there? We had almost a month before we even made it to the supply point. No, I am not buying it. Yes, we mentioned not DIRECTLY informing the Captain what we were going to start doing, but then again... why? All best ideas come immediately at the Cpt's table? Inspiration like came while sitting on the toilet, while wonder why there wasn't a vaccine in the first place. Or while studying the stuff and thinking... "huh, this isn't so dissimilar from that virus-Y, awhile back, I bet I can manufacture a vaccine. Hey, doc want to help?" Then they get to work. Science first, permission later... But ultimately, it fell right in the PCs scope of work AND responsibility.
I totally can get behind the character values, Shelley played that well. I can see the character embrace the value (gets a reward too). I can see the alternative as well the, "Should I have done that?" Questioning a value. I even get the whole hardass by the book Vulcan wannabe. But even reality would assumes what we were doing would have been in the open, and not purposefully concealed (we weren't sacrificing kids, experimenting on fellow crewmen, etc). Besides section logs are available to the commander, as was the opportunity to ask, "What's going on?"
Problem here was likely just PCs making alot of assumptions, I know I am. The scenario either did not anticipate the PCs taking this course of action, or expected it to come about differently. It did seem to be entirely ad-libbed by the GM. Which likely only added to the confusion and frustration. (Well, I am frustrated). One point of concern I have is this particular system (many struggle with this) seems to have a hard time keeping every PC relevant when we are not in crisis. But that is just my opinion.
All things being said, I HATED the whole, 'the ship was risked because of what you did'. Hard, absolutely, crank it up, I totally understood the needing SO many successes, but risky, not a chance (I even forgot that a treatment was already available), failure would have been answered with no, didn't work, and complications requiring more time. We had x amount of time before we got to the mission area, if we didn't succeed in time, failure was just wasted time.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Sept 24, 2018 18:23:07 GMT -6
Oh, for fuck's sake. I'm done with this stupid fucking argument.
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Sept 24, 2018 18:57:08 GMT -6
You seem to have forgotten/missed the part about the power spike in the structural integrity field that could have resulted in physical damage to the ship, and if severe enough, loss of life/limb.
Otherwise, yeah—enough stupid arguments.
|
|
|
Post by CommJunkee on Sept 24, 2018 19:31:23 GMT -6
You seem to have forgotten/missed the part about the power spike in the structural integrity field that could have resulted in physical damage to the ship, and if severe enough, loss of life/limb. Otherwise, yeah—enough stupid arguments. Totally willing to drop it. But let me correct you, the whole power issue was a direct result of a botched roll, based on actions taken outside of the 'research'. There were NO complications directly attributed to our task, the 'risk takers' competed all actions without issue. But thems the dice for ya.
|
|
|
Post by LabRat on Sept 25, 2018 10:15:30 GMT -6
I wasn’t really going to say anything, but things have been stewing since last night. In order for me to get past this brain nugget, I decided to post my thoughts. So, some background. Mera is probably the closest character I’ve played that mirrors myself, IRL. Someone who does science, but has authority issues? Yeah, you have me pretty much pegged. In addition, I specifically made character creation choices that went against the typical grain of someone in Starfleet because it was a coverup for my lack of knowledge about the setting as a whole. It was a CYA move in case my character did something weird to reflect a lack of player knowledge. So I made her with a touch of maverick in her, brought on from her experience as part of the resistance of the occupation of Bajor. For me, this was a character that I could play in this type of setting.
When I left on Friday, I was excited. There was SO MUCH that can happen due to the simple act of asking for forgiveness rather than permission. I felt that this was one of the role-playing moments that the GM wanted from us as players in order to bring life into the campaign. Because of Mera’s actions we get to understand some dynamics of the crew and their relationship with one another. What type of Captain is Blackthorne going to be in dealing with insubordination that produced a really great thing? Is Ash now going to keep Mera in his sights from now on since she thwarted authority? Is Ash going to accept the Captain’s decision if it doesn’t align with his own and will that affect their relationship? Mera is going to give Ra-Yalovi a way out by telling him that he doesn’t have to take the fall with her because he didn’t know she didn’t get this authorized. But will he take it, or stand with her in solidarity? Will Halsey hold a grudge because she caused that power spike? As for Mera herself, I feel like I played the hell of out her character, and don’t really regret my decisions even if there are negative consequences. This may be a moment for character growth for her. There are a ton of player opportunities here from that one little breech in protocol that can flesh out the group dynamics and have a great opportunity for role-playing, and to me, that’s a really cool thing.
However, I don’t want people upset over my character choices or how I do things that make my character more interesting. It hasn’t set well with me that my challenging the mindset of Trek has been the catalyst for some external conflict on the boards, especially since I wasn’t even part of that conflict. Ultimately, this isn’t worth doing if it is going to cause issues. I’m not here to piss in anyone’s sandbox, but at the same time, I don’t want role-playing opportunities squelched over logistical or cannon issues. We are playing Star Trek, complete with all of its strengths and faults, and should be accepted for what it is. At the same time, I am going to keep playing Mera as how I think she should be played, but if anyone thinks that’s going to be a problem, then let me know. I’ll tweak her to be more in line with Trek ideals. Hopefully that will minimize conflict.
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Sept 25, 2018 10:47:36 GMT -6
Ultimately, this isn’t worth doing if it is going to cause issues. Nobody did anything wrong in game—everyone's playing their characters. It is, as you say, an opportunity for some (in-game) drama. Ignore the argument. Mark's just having a senior-moment.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Sept 25, 2018 10:52:37 GMT -6
I’ll tweak her to be more in line with Trek ideals. Hopefully that will minimize conflict. No. Don't change your character. You're not the one with the issue here. You did nothing wrong. And that right there is 100% where my mindset was as well. Depending on how the captain went, it was entirely possible that this could also be a growth experience for CDR Ch'volneth. Which is probably why I got so freaking frustrated with CommJunkee's reaction and walked away before I said something that I would really regret later. I said I was done with this ... discussion, but I guess I couldn't just walk away without some further remarks. I'm going to try to remain dispassionate with my responses. This right here is what is ticking me off What f-ning danger?!?!! This is the 24th century (I think?). There are freaking force fields, holo-decks and all matter of marvoulous crap. Yes, they have fabulous technology ... which fails all the freaking time. Probably half of the episodes of the various series deals with some sort of tech failure or dealing with the blowback from actions one character or another took. When I first read that angle of the argument, I was reminded of Guy in Galaxy Quest: "did you guys even watch the show?" Yes, the ship is going to have labs. Yes, this is entirely something within the characters' and ship's capabilities. But the GM intentionally and specifically asked LabRat if she was advising her chain of command of the whole experiment. And, upon looking at her Values, she (correctly) told him with glee that she was not. All throughout the entire experimentation thing, we repeatedly commented and joked about how the two characters were not passing on info and how the other officers would react. Frankly, until you started bitching about this, I thought it was a fait accompli that everyone understood that the entire "XO pushes for disciplinary action" was intended to be DRAMA! moment. But instead, you acted like you took my remarks personally and, IMO, overreacted.
|
|
|
Post by CommJunkee on Sept 25, 2018 12:17:54 GMT -6
Look, I am sorry if I made anyone feel they were doing something wrong. That is entirely NOT what I am having trouble with. I am having trouble with Star Trek, and the idiosyncrasies of it. It's military, but it's not. It's high tech, but it's not...
Tell me no one else goes back over things in their head afterward and picks at the flaws in logic? No one here do that to a movie? Pardon me for point out my troubles, and trying (poorly I feel) to help explain them - I was not trying to piss anyone off, just... I don't know... vent.
No, I am not as familiar with Star Trek as I seem. Other than the movies (watched maybe once and while ago at that), some of the major characters, and a few episodes here or there... Along with the criticism of others, what I do know makes no damn sense (except as elements to manufacture drama-which I realize is what is being attempted here). Maybe it is all because I am not jazzed about Star Trek as I should, I am trying. Its easy to mock 'cause it really doesn't make sense or don't try very hard (other than to create drama). Its like a disaster movie in episodes, Murphy's Law on a star-ship. Gaa... I am really just venting my frustrations, not trying to piss anyone off here.
THAT is what I am having trouble with. Nothing any one did, or how they played (of which I think everyone played excellently, and I was greatly amused <then I thought too much about it after the fact>).
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Sept 25, 2018 12:37:14 GMT -6
I am having trouble with Star Trek, and the idiosyncrasies of it. It's military, but it's not. It's high tech, but it's not... Tell me no one else goes back over things in their head afterward and picks at the flaws in logic? No one here do that to a movie? Don't get me started with Trek and its dumbness / illogicality. But yes, I do the exact same thing and it causes me no end of grief (well, technically it is me voicing my problems with the logic [and probably my approach])... maybe it is because I grew up with TOS/Voyager/DS9 and have already realized its "idiosyncrasies" and got over them to the point where I just roll my eyes, mentally say "that is stupid" and move on, but I can do that easier than with fantasy tropes, etc, possibly because of my lack of familiarity / enjoyment of them.... hmm... something to think about later maybe? Anyway... yes, I have the same problems with Trek and "over-analyzing" everything and it sucks to no end.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Sept 25, 2018 12:54:07 GMT -6
Yeah, I have all sorts of trouble with the Trek setting from time to time - OMG, don't get me started again on the whole "Star fleet isn't a military" nonsense - but like WxMAN, I grew up with the various series so I've learned to just shrug and move on. Although, to be fair, as I've gotten old, I've focused more on the various narrative and screenwriting elements. I tune out pretty much all technobabble because it always sounds like garbled nonsense and made-up words - cue Thor's "all words are made up" reply from Infinity War - or just doesn't make sense. Any time you start thinking "this doesn't make sense," remember we're playing in a setting where the Captain (O-6), his XO (O-5), and his Chief Medical Officer (O-4) routinely went on highly dangerous away missions together, sometimes taking along the boat's Chief Engineer (O-4) with them, instead of ... you know ... having a dedicated team of specialists for that job.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Sept 25, 2018 12:58:32 GMT -6
Also? The Rule of Drama is in play: If the potential for conflict is visible, then it will never be passed over.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Oct 1, 2018 9:41:05 GMT -6
In honor of our ship... Attachments:
|
|