Quote from: David R1. What is the function and implication of the Prime Directive if one agrees that the Federation is a communist system?

At face value, it's for the benefit of the developing culture, so that their development is not unduly polluted by external influences.  On a practical level, though, it's to keep them from rocking the boat of the utopian, communist society.  Tabs can be kept on the interdicted planet until they are deemed amenable to the social and economic overtures of Federation Communism.

Quote2. I've always gotten a "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" vibe from the later series of Trek , which I assumed was a reaction against the Utopian nature of the Federation.

Clearly the Federation would benefit from a continued application of the Prime Directive where you and your malcontent kind are concerned.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaClearly the Federation would benefit from a continued application of the Prime Directive where you and your malcontent kind are concerned.

I'm worried. My players keep on quietly muttering, "we can do sooo much damage to this setting"....:eek:

Regards,
David R

Another thing. One of the ideas being discussed is the possibility of the bridge crew (the pcs) of a vessel being Maquis and  covertly furthering the objectives of the "Struggle" within Star Fleet. One of the issues that came up was the use of Holodecks. I kinda of like this idea and was wondering if it would be too cheesy to have some "holodeck" adventures....probably based on Arthurian mythology. Would this detract from the game?

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RI'm worried. My players keep on quietly muttering, "we can do sooo much damage to this setting"....:eek:

Now, now.  Everyone needs to agree to play nicely.  In all seriousness, everyone has to agree to play "Star Trek".

QuoteOne of the issues that came up was the use of Holodecks. I kinda of like this idea and was wondering if it would be too cheesy to have some "holodeck" adventures....probably based on Arthurian mythology. Would this detract from the game?

No more than it would if your group decided to take a week off from the Star Trek campaign to play, say, D&D or Call of Cthulhu.  In other words, if your group ever wants to take a session or two off to play another game, do so, but you can do so under the guise of a holodeck adventure.

!i!

Quote from: David R2. I've always gotten a "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" vibe from the later series of Trek , which I assumed was a reaction against the Utopian nature of the Federation.

Great link, estar!  I think I've seen that argument before, but not in such a detailed form.  My only critique of his thesis is the fact that given the TNG assumption that literally anything (with the apparent exception of Latinum) can be created through replicators, and with it the death of scarcity, I am not sure that any current understanding of economics would apply.

As for the question of the "rotten vibe" of the TNG Federation, I totally got it too.  In my opinion, one of the problems with TNG was Rodenberry's overtly utopian vision.  It made the series, particularly the first season or two, boring as fuck.  There wasn't enough for the protagonists to overcome within themselves.  

I think that in a Maquis-centered campaign I would focus on that theme.  In shades of Aldous Huxley, one could argue the average citizen of the Federation has been lulled into lazy mediocrity because they do not have to struggle for anything.  All of their needs are trivially provided by almost magical technology.  Those few who felt restless in this confining comfort, those possessing the need for exploration of themselves as well as the universe, would naturally gravitate to careers in Starfleet.  Out on the frontier, faced with adversity and the exhilaration of overcoming it and learning something about one's self, many of these Starfleet officers would naturally come to feel a separation from the rest of the inhabitants of the Federation who sit in utopian luxury on the core worlds and are blissfully unaware of the sacrifices made to protect them.  This would be the genesis of the support for the Maquis within Starfleet's ranks.  Many in Starfleet would simply have more in common with the Maquis than the citizens of the Federation.

One of the defining conflicts of TOS was the struggle with one's nature to become better.  I am particularly reminded of my favorite episode of any of the Star Trek series, the very first pilot, "The Cage".  Perhaps in the fate of the Talosians, trapped in others' dream worlds because their technology robbed them of their ability to challenge themselves, we can see the eventual fate of the entire Federation.


TGA

Quote from: The Good AssyrianThose few who felt restless in this confining comfort, those possessing the need for exploration of themselves as well as the universe, would naturally gravitate to careers in Starfleet.

Ah, but couple with this the oft-stated assertion that Starfleet accepts only "the best of the best".  There are still lots of people out there with the need to do something, but just don't make the cut of the 98th percentile.  What do they do with their lives?  It reminds me a bit of the movie Gattaca, where ambition is hampered by statistical non-compliance.  Yeah, sure, we may be assured that Starfleet is able to pick out the most promising people, looking even beyond simple test scores, but are they really that good at examining a person's nature and potential?  You have people like B'Elanna Torres, who was supposedly an outstanding candidate, but just couldn't stand the way Starfleet operated.  And where did she end up?

So, yeah, there's a huge expanse of space and human nature to investigate, where those twin ideals of Hope and Exploration still hold sway, but where Utopianism simply didn't satisfy the spirit.

!i!

TGA & Ian just to add another dimension to both your comments, how does religion/spirituality fit into the scheme of things. Surely there was a strong whiff of militancy to Picard's atheism and the cultural norms (most times the spiritual aspects) of the diverse range of aliens conflicted with Federation dogma. The question I'm asking is : Can God exist in a Utopia?

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RI am going to watch DS9, but how extreme did the acts of the Maquis get ?

Flattening a planet extreme? Or at least attempted. I seem to recall a Voyager episode where the crew had to deal with the fallout from that. A Cardassian matter/anti-matter interstellar version of a cruise missle, capable of putting a moon-sized hole in a planet, had been sent on an attack run by Torres but ended up getting wormed into the D quadrant and targeted a similar, but obviously not intended, planet.

Quote from: David RThe question I'm asking is : Can God exist in a Utopia?

If He has a scientific basis, yes.

I kid a bit, if only because that's how religious matters were often treated in TNG.  Unless, of course, it was the religious beliefs of an emerging alien culture -- there was an awful lot of cultural relativism and noble savagery going on in that show.  Anyway, I'm not sure there is an essential need for spirituality if all temporal needs are provided for.  After all, doesn't the exploration of the supernatural stem from the desire to account for the inexplicable and the absent from our physical environment?

!i!

Quote from: The Good AssyrianMy only critique of his thesis is the fact that given the TNG assumption that literally anything (with the apparent exception of Latinum) can be created through replicators, and with it the death of scarcity, I am not sure that any current understanding of economics would apply.

That, in fact, destroys the thesis completely. There are several more holes in it, but this is the one that kills it.

Liberal economic thought is predicated on scarcity. How, for the crudest example, can you make a profit selling dildoes when everybody can get the fanciest dildo they like from a replicator? Abundance on this scale means that society will look nothing at all like ours. One could in fact criticise Trek for not going far enough; for being unimaginative.

Quote from: Koltar...This was one of the reasins I started to like the DS9 show better than the rest . Midway through the series the charsacters had to start dealing with the choices they had made earlier, it was the show of touugh choices and consequences.

Very natural for a series that stuck to one spot. The other ST ships followed, although it could come back to them on a larger scale, were largely freed of build-up from their decisions because they were always on the move. Dump and run.

The same is going to hold true for games (and not just ST based ones). If you want this accumulation of conciquences for past decisions then one good way to do that is make it "stationary" instead of "Star Treking, Star Treking across the universe, always going forward because [you] cannot find reverse".

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaIf He has a scientific basis, yes.

That outlook was best demonstrated by ST V:The Final Frontier.

Quote from: droogAbundance on this scale means that society will look nothing at all like ours. One could in fact criticise Trek for not going far enough; for being unimaginative.

Interesting. What would a functional Marxist Trek society look like?

Personally I always thought the dominance of Federation "influence" was based on superior technological know how rather than any philosophical/ideological appeal.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RInteresting. What would a functional Marxist Trek society look like?

Short answer: I can't tell you, because it hasn't happened yet.

Long answer: There's no such thing as a Marxist society. 'Marxism' is not an ideology or a socioeconomic structure, it's a method of enquiry building on certain assumptions about economics. Marx's work was to analyse capitalist society, not to dream utopias.

But I'll stop jacking your thread.

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaAh, but couple with this the oft-stated assertion that Starfleet accepts only "the best of the best".  There are still lots of people out there with the need to do something, but just don't make the cut of the 98th percentile.  What do they do with their lives?  It reminds me a bit of the movie Gattaca, where ambition is hampered by statistical non-compliance...So, yeah, there's a huge expanse of space and human nature to investigate, where those twin ideals of Hope and Exploration still hold sway, but where Utopianism simply didn't satisfy the spirit.

An outstanding point, Ian.  One consideration (one which is given short shrift in most incarnations of Trek) is the presence of large numbers of enlisted Starfleet personnel.  We only see a handful of them on screen, and only DS9's Chief O'Brien gets billing as a main character.  There are presumably hundreds of NCOs and enlisted grade members of the fleet for each officer.  We know that the standards for entering Starfleet Academy are hellishly rigorous (fuck even Picard failed the first try at entry, and wunderkind Wesley Crusher failed twice), but maybe the standards for just enlisting in Starfleet are significantly easier.  Perhaps a lot of those not content with their lot simply enlist in the fleet for a while and either settle down once their wanderlust has been satisfied, or having caught a whiff of the excitement either continue their career in the ranks or settle on a frontier colony or sign up on a transport.

Which brings up another point.  The article that estar linked to brought up an interesting question.  Do citizens of the Federation have access to privately owned warp-capable spacecraft?  We know that in the TOS era it was somewhat common, with Cyrano Jones and Harry Mudd each owning their own small spacecraft.  As for the TNG era, it is less clear.  On one hand, the death of material scarcity with the use of replicators means that small craft used for small-scale trading in high value commodities would not be necessary nor economically feasible.  On the other hand, the presumed ease of manufacture of such craft, and the presence of numerous small warp-capable craft like runabouts, would argue that they were common.  Perhaps we should split the difference and assume that such craft are available for ownership by private citizens, but are mostly the realm of extremely dedicated amateur enthusiasts, like travel nuts, archaeologists, naturalists, etc.

Finally, another clue to where these disaffected Federation citizens go is the presence of a large number of unauthorized colonies that Starfleet apparently has to deal with.  I am not an avid watched of TNG, but I think I can recall several episodes in which Federation "squatters" were a central element of the plot, usually dealing with the need of the Enterprise to evacuate them due to danger either natural or political.  The Maquis movement is just an extension of this.  Perhaps there is a larger trend of people choosing to leave the Federation, a small trickle to be sure, but still an embarrassment to such an enlightened civilization.


TGA