This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.

Should George and Gracie be made romantic partners?

Yes!
13
30%
Sure, if you're reprinting or touching the card otherwise.
10
23%
No, whales don't respect "romance."
8
18%
No.
13
30%
User avatar
Director of First Edition
By MidnightLich (Charlie Plaine)
 - Director of First Edition
 -  
Prophet
#566600
Hello folks,

It's Friday, and it's time for a Friday Question. Today's is a bit weird, as we're going to talk about anthropomorphizing whales. Specifically, George and Gracie. As of right now, they aren't considered to be romantic partners of each other. If you aren't familiar, romantic partner is a game term defined by personnel in their lore:
The Glossary, Romantic Partner wrote:a personnel is the romantic partner of another personnel if the lore (on either card) both names the other and states that they are or were "romantically involved". For example, Pel and Quark are romantic partners of one another, but Pel and Deputy Quark are not. See named in lore.

The following terms (even if preceded by "ex-") are considered equivalent to the phrase "romantically involved": "husband", "wife", "mate", "married", "wedded", "imzadi", "beloved", "bride", "mistress", "widow", "divorced".
Being a romantic partner has a few uses in game, most notably with Holoprogram: Cafe des Artistes. It's also an area where I think there is a lot more cool potential for new cards.

George and Gracie don't mark each other as romantic partners in their lore, even though they could be, mechanically. But that's the issue - do we imbue these whales with human traits by making them "mates"? Or is it better to leave such things to non-whales?

So that's my question for you today: should we make George and Gracie romantic partners? Aside from voting in this poll, feel free to reply and sound off with your thoughts.

Those of you in the US (or elsewhere that might have a holiday this coming week), enjoy! I'm looking forward to eating a lot of turkey and as much cranberry sauce as I think I can get away with.

-crp
User avatar
 
By ShipNerd
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#566601
My concerns would be the balancing as george and gracy are already powerful with their 15 points AND you can seed the time location and download the whales immediately. Personally, I see that Cafe Des Artist for 3 draws is already far too OP, together with other ways to draw so much that the game has only a few turns. :(

however, If that would be properly dealt with (and there are many ways to do so), I wouldn't mind having them as romantic partners. redshirting with whales and the beating heart isn´t the strangest thing the game has to offer 8)
User avatar
 
By geraldkw
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#566642
ShipNerd wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 8:08 am In generell when it comes to romantic partner´s, how about removing: "widow", "divorced" and "Ex-" as actual/current romantic partners ?
I think the idea is that they were romantic partners at some point and we don't have a character version from every point in time, so the game could still be taking place in the timeframe where they were romantically involved(/still alive).
User avatar
 
By ShipNerd
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#566643
geraldkw wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:38 am
ShipNerd wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 8:08 am In generell when it comes to romantic partner´s, how about removing: "widow", "divorced" and "Ex-" as actual/current romantic partners ?
I think the idea is that they were romantic partners at some point and we don't have a character version from every point in time, so the game could still be taking place in the timeframe where they were romantically involved(/still alive).
Ok, I see where you are coming from. there are actually 2 cards being romantic partners due to either of the 3 criteria. Beverly Picard (divorced) to all Jean-Luc Picards (and there were Picard to Beverly kisses). And Bevery Crusher widow to dead Jack Crusher, but if they would see each other due to time anomaly xyz they would still love each other.

I considered being against the 3 criteria, but after listening to you, I choose to have no preference. Thanks for exchanging information and opinion :)
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#566644
1. Former relationships should count because former titles and other characteristics in lore count, it would be confusing to single out romantic partners here.

2. I do not have a strong feeling on George and Gracie in particular, but if we are considering lore errata to match them up, as Ensign Q mentioned there are higher priorities. There are a LOT of early lore references that break modern conventions about who is referring to whom in what capacity. If we're going to clean up lore, let's do so systematically rather than a one-off like G&G. "Systematic" doesn't mean all at once -- which would be a huge project -- but rather coming up with a consistent framework for what to change, and with a sense of priorities and a plan.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#566645
I voted no.

Two reasons:

1.) It's not clear that animals have "romance" the same way humans do (maybe Dolphins?) and I don't like the idea of anthropomorphizing animals to be human when there's no canon reason to do so.

2.) From a gameplay practical perspective, it's already too easy to load up on Love Cafe people, starting with one in play would just make it worse. ESPECIALLY or [Fed] decks. And while technically G&G could work with anyone, the fact that you need Earth and Feds are already good at Love Cafe draws creates the de facto effect of yet again "blue gets the most toys"

So no. On all fronts, no.
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#566647
No for pretty much the reasons others have stated. Non-humanoid, so not really romantic partners in a way that would get a card draw at the holoprogram. (It's not a doubt that they are in love or experience love the say way humans do, but there's enough of a conceptual difference that I'm fine with it not working for the purpose of a holoprogram.)

Balance reasons. (Which could be overcome in a different version)

If we are fixing lore, there's far worse offenders.

(And a general feeling that if we are doing more stuff like this, we should be calling it out on the card in some manner other then just lore.)
User avatar
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#566648
Armus wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 11:30 am I voted no.

Two reasons:

1.) It's not clear that animals have "romance" the same way humans do (maybe Dolphins?) and I don't like the idea of anthropomorphizing animals to be human when there's no canon reason to do so.

2.) From a gameplay practical perspective, it's already too easy to load up on Love Cafe people, starting with one in play would just make it worse. ESPECIALLY or [Fed] decks. And while technically G&G could work with anyone, the fact that you need Earth and Feds are already good at Love Cafe draws creates the de facto effect of yet again "blue gets the most toys"

So no. On all fronts, no.
Yes, what Brian said.

The nature of all Trek shows thus far favors Federation by default (we'll see with regard to Prodigy), but with situations like this, there is no compelling reason story-wise to add yet another advantage to Federation decks.

It's funny, but as the admin of the facebook Dream Card group, I did a fun unofficial challenge for people to come up with romantic partners, with special emphasis on non-Federation couples to help balance out the game. This was before I became a CC volunteer on Creative and Design.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#566650
I voted no, because 1E isn't a dating sim?

(I mean, if you want to take your cards and make them smooch, I ain't judging. I just don't think it should be a game mechanic.)
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#566651
AllenGould wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 12:34 pm I voted no, because 1E isn't a dating sim?

(I mean, if you want to take your cards and make them smooch, I ain't judging. I just don't think it should be a game mechanic.)
The problem with this statement is that it *is* a game mechanic. And a strong one at that.
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

Happy birthday to @Takket ! :D :thumbsup: […]

Opponents turn

Remodulation