Need Feedback: Starfleet Ranks

Hi.

I'm designing a DecipherTrek campaign set to begin about mid-season 5 of DS9. Basically, the campaign will encompass the immediate run-up to the Dominion War, through the war itself, and into the aftermath.

I anticipate giving the PCs anywhere from five to fifteen or so "advancements", to start out with. Depending on the character concept and the case individual players make to me, I'd like the PCs to begin play as relatively experienced, anywhere from two to ten years into their Starfleet careers. I'd like to limit them to no more than three levels in the Promotion edge (with a maximum rank of Lieutenant Commander), though, because the kind of stories I want to run necessitate the PCs be (at least initially) subordinate to, rather than peers of, folks like Sisko.

This brings me to my question. I want the campaign to have the feel of the last two seasons of DS9, where the characters are primarily based on a space station, but also form the senior staff of a smallish starship. Would it be reasonable for a character with the rank of Lieutenant Commander to be given command of such a ship -- say, something Saber- or Defiant-class, or perhaps even Steamrunner-class?

Thanks.

Under normal circumstances the answer would be highly unlikely. However, if the PCs are experienced line officers, then with the staggering casualties Starfleet suffers during the war, the need for experienced officers of any rank would be enough to get them assigned to postions they would otherwise have to wait years to earn.

Fair enough, Pericles. Let me propose a followup question, then:

What is the lowest rank at which a line officer would reasonably be given command of a small vessel (again, Saber-, Defiant-, or perhaps Steamrunner-class)?

Steamrunners aren't so small, are they??

"Heavy frigates", according to the DecipherTrek Starfleet Operations Manual -- 18 decks, crew complement of 200. They're evidently a little bigger than Intrepid-class ships like Voyager, but a little smaller than old Constitution-class ships. So in TNG/DS9/VGR terms they seem to be pretty modest in size.

In that case, why not Norway?

Honest answer? Because I think Norway-class ships look goofy. :)

I'd suggest a lieutenant as lowest for a ship command on say a Defiant or Saber.

Lowest Lieutenant Commander for Steamrunner, Norway, or Intrepid.

Commander for the Akira or Nebula (but more likely a captain.)

Captain or admiral for the Sovereign or Galaxy.

Justa suggestion

Actually, I don't think Starfleet would lower their rank requirements to the point of putting a lieutenant in charge of a Saber or Defiant.

At the very minimum, they'd probably take a lieutenant commander and brevet him to the rank of commander until he achieves the permanent promotion.

For a Steamrunner or Norway, a commander can fill the role. Rather than brevet a lieutenant commander to a ship of this size, Starfleet would probably just promote the officer early.

Got something against Vikings?? :)
Seriously, a Norway is basically an upside doem constitution. Did the original Enterprise not look goofy at first?

I agree about LtC being the lowest rank to command a true starship. Runabouts don't count.

Sovereign and Galaxy are unusually large. Steamrunner, Norway, Intrepid, Akira, and Nebula are average. Average size deserves a captain in all but the most unusual circumstances. Unusually large ships get captains with seniority, commodores, or rarely flagships get admirals.

Lieutennant is just barely above Ensign. Might as well give Ensigns their own ships.

I'll join in the chorus and say the minimum rank for command of any ship with a crew 100 or larger would be lieutenant commander. An Akira, Nebula, Galaxy, Sovereign, or larger would have to be a senior commander or better.

This is just a rule of thumb I use.

(Is there any way to set a tab here?)

Ship Type..........Captain..........Department Head

• Flagship..........Fleet Captain..........Lt. Commander
• Explorer..........Captain..........Lt. Commander
• Battleship..........Captain..........Lt. Commander
• Cruiser..........Captain..........Lieutenant
• Frigate..........Commander..........Lieutenant
• Scout..........Commander..........Lieutenant
• Destroyer..........Lt. Commander..........Lieutenant, jg
• Escort..........Lt. Commander..........Lieutenant, jg
• Gunboat..........Lieutenant..........Lieutenant, jg
• Surveyor..........Lieutenant..........Ensign
• Courier..........Lieutenant, jg..........Ensign
• Runabout..........Lieutenant, jg..........Ensign
• Shuttle..........Ensign..........N/A

Notes:
Warrant Officers, Junior Grade may hold Lieutenant rank slots.
Warrant Officers may hold Lt. Commander rank slots.
Master Chief Petty Officers may hold Lt. Commander rank slots.
Senior Chief Petty Officers may hold Lieutenant rank slots.
Chief Petty Officers may hold Lieutenant, jg rank slots.

Now I know I've used ship designs not used by Starfleet, but this list is used by all races in my game.

Well considering command officer I think Trek has been quite unrealistic all the time. In fact it is highly unlikely to have a Captain command a ship with only 40 crewmembers ( Defiant ) or 80 ( Equinox ). At least in "Equinox" we see that the XO is only Full Lieutenant and considering that 80 is roughly company strength it would not be surprising to have a Full Lt. as commanding officer. Then again CO's of ships have special priviliges and duties other officers of more stationary posts have not ( e.g. a Captain, army rank speaking, of a infantry company will highly unlikely make a diplomatic contacts, a CO of a starship probably will ).
So I would say for a Defiant-Class a Full Lt. is in order especially since its an escort vessel that will only rarely operate alone and most certainly not in diplomatic duties.
When considering ranks for officers I simply stick to our real-life military, which is is pretty consistent so far, although of course specialized units may have higher ranks than ordinary ones. I use the following system, depending on crewmembers. CO and XO ranks can be the same ( especially with low ranking officers ), although usually the XO has one rank less than the superior:

crew rank
<10 Ensign
<60 Lieutenant j.g. - Lieutenant
<160 Lieutenant - Lt. Cmdr
<500 Lt. Cmdr - Cmdr
<1000 Cmdr. - Captain
<1500 Captain - Admiral

I usually take the higher rank for mobile fleet ships and the lower rank for stationary fleets. Experimental ships, etc. can have higher ranks as well.
In fact I always wondered why Picard never was promoted to Admiral, considering todays regularies being the CO of the flagship with 1200 people onboard should suffice for a Rear-Admiral ( lower half ) position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Tyger

Actually, I don't think Starfleet would lower their rank requirements to the point of putting a lieutenant in charge of a Saber or Defiant.

At the very minimum, they'd probably take a lieutenant commander and brevet him to the rank of commander until he achieves the permanent promotion.

For a Steamrunner or Norway, a commander can fill the role. Rather than brevet a lieutenant commander to a ship of this size, Starfleet would probably just promote the officer early.

---

Let's not forget that Woof...er, Worf...was nominally in command of Defiant a helluva lot of the time. For a Defiant-class vessel, I'd say a lieutenant commander could reasonably be given command, without the brevet being necessary. I think anything bigger would be at least a commander.

This, of course, from the guy who was putting a lieutenant commander in the captain's chair of a King's Protector-class in his own aborted campaign...your mileage may vary.

So if it weren't for the diplomacy stuff, Voyager shouldn't have had a Captain?

I think Equinox was an extreme situation as far as the writers are concerned because people had been dying.

According to you, Evan, it sounds like the No Bloody A, B, C, or D shouldn't have had a captain. Maybe it was different because there were only a handful of Constitutions and they were top of the line?

I always remember the EntD having about 1000, not 1200. Did the Ent-E have 1200? Maybe they wanted to make him an Admiral but he managed to avoid it? But your comments go against the standard Trek opinion of Admiralty... Maybe in the 23rd century there was only one admiral rank? nah, that wouldn't make much sense I guess.

Techically speaking the commander of any vessel is called the Captain ! :D

I also agree with Sea Tyger's point.. They would Brevet officers they thought were suibtable, because a) they were short on experienced officers b) they were building ships faster than they could crew them c) in times of war it can be a very quick way to rapidly get promoted!

A Brevet command means they can take it frrom you, but hey at least you get it on your service record.

I suspect Captains and Admirals comandeer whatever they feel like taking. Admiral Ross had the USS belerephon, a 'mere' Intrepid (which are really a quite powerrful ship for their size), most likelly because it was among the fastest ships in the fleet, to get round quickly, Ditto the Defiant.. It's easy to say a Captain or an Admiral would have a Sovereign or Galaxy, but there were few of either.. the reason there were a few more galaxy's in the fleet was because Starfleet utrned it's backlog of galaxy spare parts into real ships, to make use of them, but then didn't fill them full of crew.. they were not fully completed ships. They tended to focus on the midsized ships, because they are an order of magnitude less complex to build!

And remember the Sovereign was a more powerful ship, but it is most definatelly SMALLER than a galaxy, it's just longer.. it has WAY less internal volume!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cochrane

So if it weren't for the diplomacy stuff, Voyager shouldn't have had a Captain?

---

I am merely sying that it is unlikely in our military to have 150 people be commanded by a Colonel equivalent. Even regarding it is a specialized unit ( ship, second ship of the line ), a Lt. Colonel/ Commander would have been more realistic. I think the main reason for making Janeway a Captain was to put her in line with the others and prevent anybody from saying that she was only a Cmdr because she is a woman. But remember Chakotay ( and his Starfleet predecessor ) was a Lt. Cmdr, no Cmdr as XO and remember Sisko who was a Cmdr as well for a long time ( until Bajor got a more prominent role in Starfleet strategy ) and he had to administrate 200 starfleet guys and a lot more civilians.

Quote:

---

I think Equinox was an extreme situation as far as the writers are concerned because people had been dying.

---

Equinox had only 73 people in the original and it was never intended to be a long range vessel but to operate within UFP territory. To have a Captain command it is very strange. I mean Worf probably had far more than 70 security officers under his command on Enterprise and he was only a Lt. ( at the beginning only Lt. j.g. )

Quote:

---

According to you, Evan, it sounds like the No Bloody A, B, C, or D shouldn't have had a captain. Maybe it was different because there were only a handful of Constitutions and they were top of the line?

---

Well they were the flagships, intended for long range missions without contact ( at least physically ) with Starfleet. Therefore a Captain is in order, I think.

Quote:

---

I always remember the EntD having about 1000, not 1200. Did the Ent-E have 1200?

---

To be precise it was 1012. However there was room for more, so at least ther e would have been the possiblity that Picard had to command more. And not in every episode it is said how many people are onboard. Therefore is is quite likely that it changed from now and then.

Quote:

---

Maybe they wanted to make him an Admiral but he managed to avoid it?

---

in fact he did. In season 2 I think he was meant to become the CO of Starfleet Academy which would have included a promotion to Admiral. He denied and therefore was not promoted.

As I said I base that assumptions on our today military structures. However those are to some extend also based on payment, i.e. you simply cannot afford to make everybody a General, because the training and salary is expensive. However since Starfleet is not bound to such restrictions it would explain a Captain to command a 70 crew vessel - you simply can afford to "waste" the training, etc. to such a low-priority post. On the other hand there is training time, and regarding Starfleet canon it is highly unlikely to become a Captain before age 30, so you would at least "waste" ten years of service. However it is only an assumption and I know that Trek was never too realistic about ranks.

Quote:

---

I mean Worf probably had far more than 70 security officers under his command on Enterprise and he was only a Lt. ( at the beginning only Lt. j.g. )

---

Worf was a Lt j.g. at the start as he was Tasha Yar's second in command for security, if I remember correctly (which is only a marginal possibility! lol)

I think the Lt. Commander would be the barest minimum rank for command of any vessel in Star Fleet. Obviously, larger ships would have the most experienced commanding officers due to their multi-role usage (Diplomacy, War, Escort, Emergency Aid, First Contact and so on). Smaller ships that tend to be specialised would normally be commanded by those familiar in that field (Medical Frigates would likely have a Doctor or Scientist type in command, I would think). Again, the rules can and will be bent (Kirk getting the enterprise back for example).

Just my random musings on the subject.

Cheers

Tas

Worf was a Lt j.g. at the start as he was Tasha Yar's second in command for security, if I remember correctly (which is only a marginal possibility! lol)

Well, he was a Lt (jg), but he wasn't Tasha's 2iC in Security - he was a red (Command branch) tunic bridge officer who often assisted Tasha, not a gold tunic Security officer. He was as likely - even more likely, in fact - to fill in as relief CONN officer.

Of course the very purpose of starfleet in huge part is much different from military. Wouldn't just about every Starfleet captain have to do diplomacy? And does science make a difference too? Would the writers have been smart enough to make a male captain of Voyager a Commander? I suppose it could well be that the Galaxy class Enterprise crew fluctuated widely enough that it often had 1200 or more. But then, "we never needed a crew before!"

After Tasha died Worf became a yellow-shirt but had not been promoted for at least two episodes, I think. So for some short time he was head of Security as Lt.j.g.
We also have a case of a Lt. Cmdr. commanding a vessel. Dax took over command of the USS Defiant when DS9 was in the hands of the Dominion ans Sisko busy with Fleet work. Admiral Ross then officially made Dax the CO of Defiant.

Concluding: As a rule of thumb I use our current military system as reference for rank requirements. However it is also perfectly in order to have only Cmdr or Captains be COs in Starfleet as it is fully consistent with what we see in the shows.

Worf commanded Defiant as a LCDR.

If, as it sounds, you're running the game with a small starship attached to a station the way Defiant was, then treat the ship as a department of the station. The ship's commander would report to the station CO as a department head, but still be the ship's CO when on patrol or a mission. Historically, and in moder usage, you could even call the "commander" the "officer in charge"... usually used in modern times with a vessel assigned to a shore command when the vessel is not considered and independant command itself. The OIC has the authority of a commander when underway, but is subordinate to the shore facility commader in a way that CO's of independant commands are not. Probably too realistic for startrek.

For a similar ship NOT attached to a station and performing relatively long-endurance missions I'd say you'd need at least a Commander. Defiant-class, attached to a station and performing local patrols and such- LCDR. Nova-class on a 6 month mission to chart a nebula- CDR.

Historically it was very common for LCDRs to have command of minesweepers, corvettes and destroyer escorts during WWII... and during the age of sail a Lieutenant might be given command of a sloop or similar-sized ship. If you were going to use Runabouts, you could give a Lieutenant command of the runabout, as a "sub-department head" under a Flight Operations Officer department head.

In redemption Pt II Data took controll of the Sutherland. I can't remember if he'd been promoted then, and it was a brevet promotion, but I believe he was just a Lt Cmdr... which is just the sort of thing we've been talking about :)

Yes, Data temporarily commanded a ship as a LtC.