I use psychohistorians in the same way people make references to dead parrots or babel fish. It's known to an inclusive group, but it has a meaning. Besides, I've seen psychohistorians used both in other works of fiction and in an article once before.
As for Section 31 operatives, I would seriously doubt if the majority of the operatives even knew their leader. They might only know their direct superior who would act more like the Smoking Man, showing up only occasionally, often to fix something. There may not even be a leader. Just a group that is held to their purpose through the knife-edge of their peers.
At any rate, they have been rumored throughout the Federation like Area 51 is to the US. Sloan took chances he shouldn't have, trusted an initiate that should never have been approached, and solidified Section 31 in the minds of a few officers, one of which is "dead" and another on Earth. To say they've blown their cover wouldn't be quite accurate.
They started out in the shadows and have remained in the shadows. So if they are to be involved in the Trials, it should be designed so that they remain enigmatic in the end to retain their mystique. The characters learn only enough to introduce them to what Section 31 is and to thwart it.
Actually, the idea of an operative based on the Smoking Man is intriguing. Noone smokes though. He'd need some sort of trademark. Nothing big, just something to make the player go "Hey, wasn't he in a Starfleet uniform last time I saw him?"
And remember the man who hid a cyanide capsule in his tooth? There should probably be one Dominion criminal who has a similar cop-out.
While I think Sloan is way up there in the command rank in section 31, I seriously doubt he's the top fellow.
Oh and Cmdr Sloan just showed up in my last game on the experimental 'Defiant Pathfinder' with a full salvo from all 6 of its forward mounted torpedo launchers. Lets just say the Warbirds backed off real quick.
I use psychohistorians in the same way people make references to dead parrots or babel fish. It's known to an inclusive group, but it has a meaning. Besides, I've seen psychohistorians used both in other works of fiction and in an article once before.
Reply With Quote
