I need a little help for a campaign. The setting is 200 years after the Nemesis. What I need is ideas for the politics. Maybe even new bad guys too :eek:
Printable View
I need a little help for a campaign. The setting is 200 years after the Nemesis. What I need is ideas for the politics. Maybe even new bad guys too :eek:
What about a start of time war ? The basic theories of time travel are well understood . A minor power is trying to build a Time ship(s) . The PC follow trail of clues to ship yard .
As the Federation utilizes their own transwarp network to establish outposts across the galaxy, the Founders of the Dominion sequester themselves away from exopolitics, leaving the Vorta and Jem'Hadar to jointly rule the Dominion. The different strains of Borg and the Federation negotiate over who gets what in the Delta and Beta quadrants, deciding the fates of thousands of civilisations in what many regard a callous and cowardly solution to the 'Borg problem.' Civil war rages in the last enclaves of Romulan traditionalist culture, as they try to slow the exodus of their populace into the Federation and the reunified Vulcan and Romulan culture, while traditionalist Vulcans decry the corruption of their values brought by the emotion-ridden Romulan expats. The Bajorans continue their quiet and unstated policy of making sure the Cardassians get the short end of the stick at every opportunity, angering many of their fellow Federation Council members. The Tholians request Federation help rooting out the renegade Romulans and Bajoran imperialists hiding in their annexes.
This would be a good opportunity to introduce other Dominion and Federation-level civilisations across the galaxy, like an AI civilisation or an empire of the neural parasite thingies.
I'd resist having recurring 'evil guys' in the same way that most shows do. Find ideas for cultures which are difficult to deal with, and who may tweak our assumptions or prejudices (is becoming Borg really worse than death? What if people decide to join the Collective willingly?).
I expect that in the 26th century, the Federation is able to reach the whole galaxy (either by transwarp, or ships reaching warp 9.999999, or anything else), so races from any quadrant are now available, plus a lot of new ones. It might not be delusional to guess that most of the powers from the Alpha and Beta Quadrant have now been absorbed into the Federation - maybe as protectorates or alliances - and that the Federation, by becoming bigger, has strayed a bit from the Federation we know.
After that, the question is, which tone do you want for your campaign ? Do you want one centered on internal politics ? Exploration ? War (be it covert operations in a cold war or big battles ?
As we can shape pretty much the future we want for the Federation, it could help to know what you sort of setting you want in order to lead the future in that direction.
I'd lean toward the what the rest of the posters are saying: A bigger FED, with the Klingons as full fledged members, A Romulan Republic sliding into the Klingon's former role as an ally ( a shakey, potentially unstable one though).
As for the Cardassians.....well, perhaps they are a more neutral power now, having been almost wiped out as a result of your power grab tends to make a gov't reassess their values.
Bajor would be an independent ally: they have become very prosperous now that Wormhole traffic is going well. (or, if you do have Transwarp available to SF/FED vessels, they might be in dire straights, as their major trade partners pass them by...)
Depending on how much exploring you want to do, I wouldn't go as far as having the entire galaxy as FED/FED ally territory.
And I totally agree with TK about not having "Bad Guys" per say: I've wondered on this board quite a few time on how the FED would react to a group that was pretty much like them, but didn't share similar beliefs (like no Prime Directive), or suddenly had to face some intrernal issue, like a predjudice (AI, Borged or Gene-enhanced people, or maybe newer members aren't treated as nicely as those from the 'core worlds'!)
I guess it depends on what cylce you want to set it in. Bottom line it appears the Federation goes through cycles of all out war and peace.
I do think it entirely possible the Klingons would have been almost completely absorbed into the Federation, as with the Bajorans (once the Dominion war issues were settled) The Cardassians have either re-founded their empire OR been subsumed by the Federation. Likewise the Ferengi.
The Romulans, hmm that's a tricky one. I tend to see them under the premise that 1) they are singularly driven in their aim to be the premier species and 2) they have no reason to fear or go to war with the Federation. I can't see them joining up, so yes I kind of see them in the position the Klingons were in: fiercely independent, but at the same time, they have lost their urge to counter the Federation, and works with it.
While definitely there will be heavy interpersonal stories among the expanded Federation and it's member worlds and chafing with known quantities (such as the Founders and perhaps a reborn Borg) but really the problem and challenge with this era will be designing a new threat, and not have it be a cheap imitation of the threats we've seen before.
Yeah internal politics could we ll be the new threat to the Federation, but the downside of that is the heavy and wordy aspect it'll bring to the game, and the setting, and suck some of the fun out of it for those who want to 'shoot the bad guy' hehe.
Following the events of Nemesis, I see the interim Romulan government grovelling to keep the Federation from declaring all out war. With the Senate and Emperor wiped out all at once it created a lot of instability, likely a civil war, but those that gain power will surely want to keep the Federation off their backs while they gain total control within their borders. So flag the Romulans as reticent members of the Federation after 200 years. I can definitely see them as the TNG Klingons (Grand Alliance version) where they grudgingly become members but maintaining their own fleet and handling their internal affairs out of the light where the Federation can't see they are still doing their own thing. The Klingons are fully integrated into the Federation. Bajor has made just about everyone's least wanted list (as in they cause too many problems and can't let their grudge go, so drive away all their potential friends and allies).
The Federation, Dominion, and Borg have each expanded at prodigious rates, with the three encompassing almost the entire galaxy. The Borg have been held at bay by both other superpowers, but not having any need for subtleties such as diplomacy they shut their borders and stop communicating. Who knows what they are attempting inside. Anything approaching Borg space is assimilated, so there is no information at all coming out, like a communications black hole. The Dominion is satisfied with holding their 20% of the galaxy.
During exploration the Federation meets a few new organizations. One a Federation that gives out tech to any friendly who does what they want, artificially advancing primitive worlds to the tech of the 24th century or later! Many Federation worlds are in negotiation with them and there have been rumblings from some of the members of leaving the UFP to join this new Federation where they don't have all the restrictions. This presents a mystery (what is the new Fed's secret motive?) and a collection of diplomatic problems for the players. Another world that is met is an entirely AI society. Not androids, but conciousness in the Net without any physical form. This is so alien to the players that it could present lots of fun. The machines of this world can be reassigned to any AI at any time, so when something happens with a machine the players can't easily figure out who wanted it to happen. The final major power to be met is also like the Federation, except that everyone in the systems that are members are genetically engineered to perfection. They surpass the players in every aspect, but they are benign and benevolent. This presents problems because it is flat out forbidden and considered vile to tamper with genetics in the UFP. No reason they can't be friends, but good roleplaying should present a lot of difficult hurdles to friendship.
And if you want conflict, the Kelvin invasion fleet has finally arrived from the Andromeda galaxy (a TOS reference), hundreds of years ahead of schedule.
Only 2 problems with that Alex. I don't think either the Federation nor the Dominion could actually maintain a 20% hold on the WHOLE galaxy. the actual space the Federation encompases might be physically large, but it's not homogenous, held space. Likewise if the Borg held more than a few percent of the actual galaxy, mostly everyone would be doomed :D
I wonder about the future of the Dominion: the Founders received almost slavish devotion and worship from their Vorta and Jem'Hadar. Then, they all got sick, and then beaten, by lowly solids! And a disgraced Founder (Odo), who had betrayed his own people many times before, was the one who saved them. Most of the Founders were on their planet, healing and recovering from the loss.
So, what of their holdings. I wonder if there might have been a collapse of the Dominion, especially as it seems both of their main servent races were becoming very independent (Vorta that put themselves ahead of the Domion, and Jem'Hadar that didn't want to be slaves anymore), and you have to assume that Odo's actions might have changed the Founder's perceptions about solid life a little. So maybe the Domion isn't so 'evil' anymore. Not as 'shiny happy' as the FED, but maybe closer to it.
Or, maybe it's worse: a Balkanized Gamma Quadrant, with sectors controlled by Founders, Free Jem'Hadar, Vorta Cabals, and little republics/federations formed by races that threw off the chains of changeling oppression!
Imagine a campaign trying to fix all that! (ok, that would by like Iraq:The Next Generation, but it could be cool. maybe)
You might also try something totally different. Some kind of regression, technologically, etc. Maybe after the Dominion War the major powers have begun to wall themselves in which resulted in slow down of exploration and the development of new technology. Maybe some technology was even lost, production facilities, etc.
The character might be the first ship to began exploration again. Reconing the situation of Cardassia, Romulus, Quo'nos etc. might reveal some interesting changes in their culture. Maybe one of them has extinguished large portions of their empire during a civil war?
I hate to say it, but being a little darker, all major powers whether empires or republics, or what have you . . . wax and wane overtime . . . the go through periods of great strength and obsurity . . . here on earth the cycles, the time between peaks of the major power at the time (not necessarily the same power), appear to be decreasing slowly. However, how does one work this on a galactic scale.
I mean the romans no longer control the majority of the med and western europe; the mongals don't control the vast stretches of asia; the british down control 1/4 of the landmass of the world; etc. etc.
So what of the federation and other major powers . . . when do they reach their peak . . . what causes their downfall . . . when does the balance between the ideals of the "paradise" fail to cull the implosion pressures of internal + external forces. What of the aftermath? What of other major powers that experiance the same type of events . . . how do they impact each other.
What of new technologies, making it easier to travel and the galaxy appear to be smaller. The increase speed of technology and culture spread, and the negatives that that bring with it (where as in the past a deadly virus may take decades to move across a sector, it could now move across a quadrant in a matter of days before it becomes active). And what about those quirky accidents that no one expected that mess up the political works of a region for decades if not hundreds of years to come. Just because communication is instantanious doesn't mean that what was ment to be said will be understood that way.
What of the meglomaniacs with that much technology at their disposal.
What of physical galactic forces that tend to mess up a large neighberhood (like black holes, supernovas, and all those other unknown things)?
What of exogalactic beings and travel? How does that effect the milky way galaxy?
So many things . . . but depends on your take of the future . . . I mean the world of the modern US would take someone from the end of the colonial era by suprise.
Wait wait . . . you mean the second largest population center . . . and the fastest growing population centers are built on deserts? what are you nuts?!?
I know this is totally, totally against Rodenberry's vision of Humanity of the future, but I've always wondered about what the opinion of 'John Q. Public; Federation Citizen, Earth Native' is about the way the FED is heading? (all of this assumes that FED, being a good and fluffy Gov't, tells it's Citizens everything)
I mean, look at recent (NG-Nemisis) FED life.
New Flagship of FED Launched: Humanity judged by near-omnipotent beings, almost denied spaceflight. (later, almost denied existance, but only Picard knows that)
Flagship offends same being, ends up encountering the Borg, who have made several incurrsions into FED territory to assimilate Earth, causing massive casulities.
Alien parasites almost take over FED, defeated by ENT.
After repeated visits to the Gamma Quadrant, Dominion declares war on Fed. Earth attacked, almost taken over dy failed Coup, and Klingons become enemies again for a time.
I know that that is not a complete list, but i think it would be enough to foster an isolationist movement on Earth.
Or that they have a media industry that isn't a bunch of sycophantic, pandering pussies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricky
These kind of movements are probably fairly common, and likely have been since the Federation was formed. The obvious downsides to such a policy–like, what happens when the Borg come knocking and we don't have Starfleet–seem to be convincing the majority of the population that it's not a wise course of action.Quote:
I know that that is not a complete list, but i think it would be enough to foster an isolationist movement on Earth.
Besides, if there wasn't a Starfleet, some drunk nutter would just build a warp ship by themselves and get humanity into all sorts of trouble.
We know that anti-technologists exist in the UFP. Picard's family, for instance, and even on Earth they're allowed to operate with what appeared to be little more than we have right now. But instituting a definitively isolationist policy, or widespread technological restrictions would likely be seen as infringing on people's right to explore and expand their knowledge of the wider world, a pursuit which appears to be one of the biggest drives of Human society in the 23rd and 24th century. Scientists are the rock stars of Star Trek. Starfleet is where the Erik the Reds and the Zheng Hes and the Yeagers and the Gagarins go; it's a society driven by the best and the brightest forging ahead to new horizons, and sees itself as being that. Suddenly deciding to be an ostrich is totally out of character.
And what of all those who are not the best and brightest? Where do they fit in the world. Sure, they have all this technology to provide for their basic needs (and I wonder how, they don't have a large obesity population) . . . but what of them? Who strives to be a postal carrier, when you have Exobots to do it, and instant messaging via their form of the internet? Who strives to be a humanoid waste technician and deal with 24th century plumbing? Who strives to be a used terrestrial transport salesperson? Who strives to do all those menial jobs which could surely be automated?
Imagine, with the access to technology, what those unfulfilled masses would do. How do you give them a driving sense of accomplishment or fullfillment?
Do they persue other goals such as family, entertainment, or other smaller, less galactic forming goals?
Not everyone can be king of the hill . . .
Sorry off topic . . . But boomhauer in the 24th century . . . how would that be like . . . or worse Gribble!
Because they don't have cars? Because they're not sitting on their asses all day in some lame-ass corporate busywork job and going home to TV dinners and doughnuts?Quote:
Originally Posted by JALU3
Nobody? Who needs mailmen?Quote:
. . . but what of them? Who strives to be a postal carrier, when you have Exobots to do it, and instant messaging via their form of the internet?
Rom?Quote:
Who strives to be a humanoid waste technician and deal with 24th century plumbing?
Tellarites? Would you buy a used subway, anyway?Quote:
Who strives to be a used terrestrial transport salesperson?
Who strives to empower the menial worker? Who tries to preserve the class hierarchy which divides those who make decisions and those who enact them–the division between interior designer and janitor?Quote:
Who strives to do all those menial jobs which could surely be automated?
Boomhauer never seemed particularly... unfulfilled.Quote:
Imagine, with the access to technology, what those unfulfilled masses would do. How do you give them a driving sense of accomplishment or fullfillment? Do they persue other goals such as family, entertainment, or other smaller, less galactic forming goals?
Gribble serves in animal control–if he doesn't like it, I'm sure he could talk to someone from the Bureau of Vocations about what he wants to do. Probably go to Rigel VII and learn telepathy from the evil centipedes or whatever.
Trek presents a world in which, essentially, social structures have gotten the hell out of the way of preserving social institutions for stability's sake, or abandoned quick fixes and blame, and have instead focused on actively helping the basic quality of life. It assumes that human beings, freed from fights against oppression and suffering, are capable of finding fulfilment themselves, naturally, and that a healthy society is made of mutual interactions of the free. Take Crusher–when he finally says "Starfleet isn't fulfilling to me, I want something else," everyone supported him. Likewise with Jake.
So everyone is empowered to strive to fullfill their own ambitions? Whether that ambition is to hunt, and skin one of every non-sentient creature on the planet, or be to pass on the knowledge of how VHS system works and how to repair it, and all those other quirky little things that one could strive to do.
So what if your ambition and what makes you feel fulfilled is against the grain? Say your a a Terraist or Earth Firsty? What then?
And/or . . . What of the Amish . . . say they survive WWIII . . . are they allowed to live in their form of 15th century "utopia" with their self-inforced limitation?
What of other groups . . . are they allowed to venture out into the stars and create their own ideal "utopian" societies?
Those within those socieities, are they allowed to freely leave them? Those who wish to join these inclosed socieities, are they allowed to freely join them, without that societies consent?
Erm well, no and yes. Breaking the law is breaking the law. If you break the law then yes you have a problem, but that's no different to any society! No one's claiming that even in a utopian society there aren't malcontent's and psychotics (though mental health medicine will be a whole lot better, there is still the problem of I WANT to be psychotic!) but a greater understanding of psychology and brain chemistry is going to help a lot. Boredom is probably the biggest problem: I can see ever more lunatic extreme sports growing hehe (See the woman who wants to circumnavigate the Federation in a warp powered canoe!).
The root cause of a lot of the problems in society will have solutions, without need and want it moves the goalposts somewhat!
Erm with regards to cultures separating themselves from the Federation, because they want to pursue an alternate ideology - I suggest you watch STARTREK, for LOTS of examples :P Colonisation is a definite push of humanity, and so it's probably entirely normal for social groups to leave and do their own things. If they chose to abide by the spirit of the law of the Federation, then the Federation will protect them, but if they want to leave the Federation, no one is going to force them to stay.
Part of the vision of Trek is that Humanity is no longer full of small minded morons, psychotic sociopaths and that the exposure to galactic culture through the founding of the Federation promotes open-mindedness, and exposure to many different points of view. First contact of any species, to another species is always going to be an awe inspiring moment (unless they are singularly unready for it in a medieval religious mindset way) which will make the differences between yourself and your neighbour seem small and insignificant, compared to the differences between you and an alien!
In a post script sense we might look at that society and see it as 'unrealistic' from our point of view (because faster than light travel, aliens and broken physics are of course all 'realistic' :P) but it's a caveat of the show, and the POINT of the show, that humans need to challenge their own preconceptions and flaws as much as they need the challenge of creating new technology. If humanity travels down the dark path of distopianism, then we're not likely to make it to the 24th century without blowing ourselves up, absolute power of technology, without a humanist vector will result in absolute annihilation! Change HAS to happen. If you don't 'get' that you're not getting the show!
I guess that is why some people disliked DS9, and the ideas that are wrapped around my chosen quote in my signature.
Before DS9, it was commonly accepted that the Federation was a utopia, that it was the spring which the good within the galaxy comes from or at least it best symbolised a utopian and peaceful future for humanity and those who chose to associate themselves with us as a unified society. DS9 changed that equation, starting with the Marqui and the view of the Federation from those who weren't within the happy core bubble, as it were. It showed a possibility of a future utopia which looks pretty, peaceful, and flawless from far away . . . but having some of the same problems but in a different setting that we experience today. A much grimmer future that some didn't think meshed with the idea of what the Federation, and as an out growth, Starfleet, was made out to be in the previous incarnations of the Universe/genra.
However, given the reality shown in DS9, it is shown that not everything is perfect within the Federation. There are groups which desent from the majority. Most are "mostly harmless", some go so far as being seperatist, and others are down right violent and hostile.
The end of the Dominion War, and the aftermath of the recent Remen usurping of the Romulan Star Empire provides a very fluid moment in time for the Alpha/Beta quadrant . . . due to the outcomes of these events this region of space could move in several very intersting, and story/plot filled possible timelines. It is definatly a period of major flux.
So it allows the GM to take it where they wish it to go. Depending on the GM, and the PCs a limitless number of possibilities could occur.
-----
As for humanity. Although it has evolved socially, I think it still tugged by forces which could lead to being more brutish, or more centric, or less open, or so open it losses itself. No society truly escapes it, for it needs to be renewed generation after generation . . . for it isn't static, and the society is always evolving and changing. Therefore it is always under a threat of going down the possibility of self destruction or societal implosion or explosion.
The first one probably gets you put in therapy. The second one gets you hanging out in antique shops.Quote:
Originally Posted by JALU3
You write pamphlets and run for office.Quote:
So what if your ambition and what makes you feel fulfilled is against the grain? Say your a a Terraist or Earth Firsty? What then?
As long as they fix social problems like the massive suicide rate among females, what would the problem be? There's probably tons of luddite colonies around.Quote:
And/or . . . What of the Amish . . . say they survive WWIII . . . are they allowed to live in their form of 15th century "utopia" with their self-inforced limitation?
Yes. Of course they are; how many human colonies have we seen that are based on some form of "ideal living"?Quote:
What of other groups . . . are they allowed to venture out into the stars and create their own ideal "utopian" societies?
The Masterpiece Society?Quote:
Those within those socieities, are they allowed to freely leave them?
They'd have to take that up with the society. Presumably, it would be up to the colony's leaders, but I doubt that excluding someone from, say, Beta Amishland V would be infringing upon their rights.Quote:
Those who wish to join these inclosed socieities, are they allowed to freely join them, without that societies consent?
"It's easy to be a saint in Paradise."Quote:
Originally Posted by JALU3
It is, and that's what the core worlds of the Federation are. DS9 didn't say the Federation wasn't Utopia; it pointed out how difficult it can be to keep it Utopia. Unlike the inferred reality of magical cohension in TNG, DS9 displayed a society built upon the individual choices of the people involved. Choices made by people seeking fulfilment, whether it's Sisko's dad or Bashir's parents.
There were always dissenting groups, and I don't think that the previous examples from Trek implied that there weren't.Quote:
However, given the reality shown in DS9, it is shown that not everything is perfect within the Federation. There are groups which desent from the majority. Most are "mostly harmless", some go so far as being seperatist, and others are down right violent and hostile.
"Let me tell you something about Hew-mons, Nog. They're a wonderful, friendly people — as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts ... deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers ... put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time ... and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon. You don't believe me? Look at those faces, look at their eyes..."Quote:
As for humanity. Although it has evolved socially, I think it still tugged by forces which could lead to being more brutish, or more centric, or less open, or so open it losses itself. No society truly escapes it, for it needs to be renewed generation after generation . . . for it isn't static, and the society is always evolving and changing. Therefore it is always under a threat of going down the possibility of self destruction or societal implosion or explosion.
It's not about magically angelic humans, it's about people seeking to improve themselves. Trek has faith that they can improve, and that it's a worthy pursuit.
Moreover, I think that the 'dark ages of the Federation' idea is lame simply because it's a lame rehash of stuff that's been done over and over in SF, from reestablishing an empire in Foundation to 'the dark ages of the Federation with its serial numbers filed off' in Andromeda. I guess you could run it, and it's possible that it could be done well, but I'm not sure it'd be the best way of utilizing the ideas in Trek.
I never said that the Federation, and its Earth and other core-world centric, society was a bad thing. What I am saying is that like a star it is always under pressures to expand outwardly violently, or implode inwardly violently. With every new generation, given their experiences, education, and surrounding environment, the ideals of the society have to be taught to them, be accepted by them, and implemented in the way they see best.
Thus in watershed periods such as where the Trek Universe has left off . . . the possibilities are endless . . . what one group sees as the best way to continue the ideals of the society maybe be wholey opposed by other groups. For every group believes that they are doing the best thing . . . otherwise, they wouldn't be doing it, unless they are only doing the best thing as far as they are concerned and doing give a Flying F about anyone else, then they are just plain evil (in the D&D sence).
To roleplay these situations would be very interesting indeed.
Oh, and that is a great quote from Quark, what episode is that? The one where Nog loses his leg?
Nog definatly developed into a different character due to those experiences.
And why would a hunter be put into therapy . . . because it's not a social norm? What of tolerence of others ideas? Not that society has to accept the others actions, but that they must be tolerent of their beliefs as long as they don't harm others.
If I were to run a 'medieval' federation, I'd definitely want a different system, with maybe a morality system built in to it, to run it in, because without the ethics of Federation norm, Trek technology is nightmarish, and from game perspective it'll be horrible. People trampling over other peoples ideologies, and using high powered energy weapons to back that up! Players suddenly realise they can vaporise people with no consequences! :) It would rapidly devolve into a nightmare... D&D Trek... "Oh look a Dragon." *setting 16 - BLAST* "that was easy, what next?!" :D
Having a post-federation game, while perhaps intriguing, wouldn't be Trek, because it wouldn't be exploring of the strange and the new, it would be a desperate fight for survival.
It is fair to say that the Federation does have teeth, and will show them. They do not live in some sort of dreamy bubble reality. They have ships with WMD, and they fight off aggressors, they just maintain their ethics and standards as best they can. If anything DS9 didn't take away from Trek it was simply a show about 'how the other half lives' it showed the ugly side of technology, without enlightenment, ethics and morality. It would be easy for the Federation to become the Ferengi, the Dominion, the Klingons, the Romulans, but they maintained their values, and suffered heavily for it. The answer is was it worth it, and of course yes it was.
A little meme I picked up from Adama in new BSG is one of the core concepts of the show "it isn't enough that we survive, we have to deserve to survive", and that applies very much to the Federation. The ethics of their existence means that to win at any cost means loosing! That's their viewpoint, and in an ideal world it would be mine too, though I don't live in one, they do :D
I'm not sure about your idea of them banning 'hunters'. Most people in the Federation find killing animals for meat distasteful, just like most people in the western world would balk at going up to a chicken and wringing it's neck for our supper. That has nothing to do with the choice to eat meat and hunt for food. Hunting for sport would probably not be allowed, as that's cruel (like badger baiting and such), and somewhat redundant. I'm sure there are people who get a great thrill at tieing razor blades to chickens and have them fight each other, in the future. They'd be deemed just as sick then as they are now! There's a big difference between hunting animals cleanly, and being unnecessarily cruel, and in that era, the excuse not to cull humanely would be even smaller than it is now: When you have a lazer guided super sniper gun, tied into a tricorder, so you can precisely kill an animal at 4km, instantly, they aren't going to look well on someone who uses horrible traps, which leave animals to slowly die of starvation and blood loss over days, unless it was out of necessity (in the case of those who simply don't have such technology, or who are desperate). The ability to replicate meat, without having to kill animals removes ethical problems somewhat, or simply takes away some of the 'vegetarian dilemma' but we know there are people who like to cook real food even then (such as Sisco's dad) so it's not outlawed then.
We are sooooo off topic! :p
I had a die-hard Trekker tell me that WE, meaning 21st century humans. could never comprehend life in the FED because it is, for the lack of a better world, alien to us. We HAVE to work for money to buy things, we DISTRUST things that are different from us, and we STRUGGLE and fight just to get ahead (or stay in place, for some of us...).
A world where you didn't have to slog through an 8+ hour day just to get the basics of life, where everyone is treated fairly, and where personal rather than material achievement is the end goal is more alien to us that the life of a Klingon or Ferengi.
No, we're not. Trek is not (should not be) content-free entertainment. These issues are things at the heart of what Trek is about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricky
Well, Klingons are more or less feudal. Ferengi are 80s capitalism.Quote:
A world where you didn't have to slog through an 8+ hour day just to get the basics of life, where everyone is treated fairly, and where personal rather than material achievement is the end goal is more alien to us that the life of a Klingon or Ferengi.
I believe the term is "Religious Marxists." It assumes that everyone has a rather pathetic and shallow imagination, unable to see the five feet beyond the hole we've dug for ourselves–or even the reasons the hole exists.Quote:
I had a die-hard Trekker tell me that WE, meaning 21st century humans. could never comprehend life in the FED because it is, for the lack of a better world, alien to us. We HAVE to work for money to buy things, we DISTRUST things that are different from us, and we STRUGGLE and fight just to get ahead (or stay in place, for some of us...).
So, I suppose, for them, it is true. But their lack of faith in human ability is, itself, rather un-Trek-like.
OK, if we're off topic, then the question is why place your campaign 200 years in the future of the post-DW, post Nemesis setting? Or are you talking about 200 years from now . . . one can be to allow drastic social and/or technological changes occur . . . another is to reduce technology due to some tragedy . . . while trying to rediscover what use to be common place and our cutting edge, while doing so in a moral/ethical manor . . . to remove yourself far enough from present cannon to allow an otherwise unlikely campaign setting to form.
200 years is a long time . . . imagine if you were to take someone from say 1799 and place them in 1999 . . . the person would see the familiar warped and altered in ways that would take them a considerable time to comprehend . . . society may have taken an idea and interpretted it in a complete opposite position as was originally intended.
So why 200 years . . . why not 2 years, 20 years, or 2000 years?
Depending on what you fill that time with things can alter drastically, or very little . . .
Say you don't take a dreary point of view, and everything within the Alpha and Beta Quadrant go swimmingly, and there is some super-UFP kind of like NATO in the sence that member states enjoy their own soveriegnty but the unit against common threats . . . say a resurgent Borg or a recon in force by the Kelvin Empire . . .
Or for more peaceful means . . . technology is developed to cross the two great barriers of the galaxy allowing for safe exploration/colonization/expansion into areas thought to be otherwise inaccessable . . . and meeting new and interesting species both sentient and non-sentient within those areas.
So the first question ot the original poster would be why do you want to advance into the future . . . if you answer that, it could allow us to focus our thoughts better.
Just to add an idea, When was that battle supposed to take place that Archer time jumped into (When he was on to the Enterprise-J with Dnaiels) that was shown in Star Trek: Enterprise?
I seem to remember that was in the 26th century
Add:
Yes this was one of the possible futures & it was the 26th Century
The episode is "Azati Prime"
From Startrek.com
As he prepares for the mission, Archer is confronted by the mysterious time-traveling operative known as Daniels. This time, Daniels brings Archer four hundred years into the future to the Enterprise-J. Daniels illuminates the mystery behind the Expanse's sphere-builders. The sphere-builders are trans-dimensional beings — the test subject Enterprise recently encountered belonged to the same species. As Archer suspected, these beings are reshaping the Expanse to make it habitable for their species. It is, Daniels notes, a prelude to an invasion. In the future, the "Federation" Daniels keeps mentioning — which humans are an integral part of — drives these trans-dimensional beings back into their own realm. The beings, who are able to examine alternate timelines, have seen this future and are determined to change the outcome. They are the ones who convinced the Xindi that humanity needed to be destroyed. In fact, Daniels says, humans will one day protect the Xindi from the sphere-builders.
But it was also in a timeline that was supposedly prevented...
My question is . . . what would it take to make technology stagnate compared to its relative rate of advancement . . . and what other factors would it take to rapidly increase the rate of advancement.
What would it take to create havoc to the political/social systems that we observe in late 24th century Star Trek . . . how would that effect certain segments of the known area of space . . . would it be benificial to some, yet utterly harmful to others?
Could the region go through a period such as 1000-1800 Germany, where the region breaks up into several smaller states and fight amoungst themselves . . . or it can be like UK where within itself it is relativly stable, but with many far flung areas of control . . . or It could be like Italy . . . with several major states that unite into one larger state.
The future is what you make of it based on the factors you place on it. Sometimes.
TO make it stagnate you'd simply need to have it stop providing new benefits. For instance, maybe they reach a plateau in thier scienfic knowledge where they no longer are coming up with new advances. New warp drives, weapons, transporters, are no longer better than the old ones in a singifnant way. Or maybe some technology has unforeseen consequences (like when Warp drives were wrecking space) that makes people rethink everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by JALU3
Basically unrest, havok and breakup occurs when a power fails to provide for wants and needs of parts of it's populace, especially the needs. The Federation is a near utopia becuase they have managed to provide for the vast majoity of wants and needs of the vast majority of it's membership. They have virtually eliminated, poverty, hunger, illness, and are doing a pretty decent job on war.Quote:
Originally Posted by JALU3
Bring one of morse of the "four horsemen" into the Trek setting and everything could fall apart. For example, what if it were discovered that replicated foodcan cause some sort of illness/genetic mutation that can't be countered with Federation medicine? That starts to put a strain on food resources.
Do a few things like that, and toss in complication due to culture (for example, what if replicated meats were safe, but replicated vegatable matter isn't, so the UFP concil wants Vulcans to eat meat.) and things could start falling apart.