This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
 
By Dunnagh (Andreas Micheel)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Contender
#572725
One thing I thing we should discuss is the question about what an affiliation is and what "affiliated" means.

For me it has always been "actively working with" - therefore Neelix, although he never was a Starfleet Officer, is very accurately FED - because he´s not only actively working with the crew of Voyager but also very loyal.

And then there are cards that actively break this rule:
Major Rakal - although this is a very early card which probably would get an infiltration icon today instead of ROM affiliation.

Captain Picard - one of the worst cards in the history of STCCG (in my eyes). Picard NEVER worked with the Ferengi - he was mindcontrolled to live through some hallucination. He really wasnt able to make decisions on his own. So even IF he deserved a FER card, he really should have a CUNNING of 1 - at most and probably no Leadership.

As I´ve seen that there are suggestions to make a CAR Picard, just because he was held prisoner, what exactly do WE all as the Continuing Committee mean when we put an affiliation icon on a card?

a) actively working for / being loyal to / actively promoting the affiliations interest
b) being connected in a most basic way, even when the interests dont match
User avatar
 
By SudenKapala (Suden Käpälä)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#572735
I feel an Affiliation is, rather broadly, "working towards the same goals"; and having grounds, credibility, and reasons for (or being leveraged into) being able to attempt that affiliation's missions.

(So, strictly choosing from OP text, I would opt slightly easier for b) than for a); however, if the 'misalignment of interests' were interpreted as 'should not be allowed to attempt an affiliation's missions', it's a) all the way!)

Major Rakal worked with / for the [1E-Rom] dissidents. Reluctantly, she played her part. Ploy worked. Works for me. (It's not Deanna's fault that regular VS. dissident personnel of [1E-Rom] and [Car] should actually each have their own missions and goals... but that's another story, and let's just not go there... :lol: )

The [1E-Fer] (and the [Bor] , for that matter!) could potentially use Picard to further their aims -- and, arguably, they did do some damage that way. (Even [1E-Fer] JL was under their actual influence, and did Bok's bidding, if only for a moment.) So, I've been okay with those. :thumbsup: (The Leadership of [1E-Fer] Pic is indeed a bit harder to justify, but I'll let that slide.)

Seen in that same light, Madred was trying to get Picard to divulge information; thus, "potentially", Picard could've worked "for" them.

But... didn't. At all.

There! Are! Four! Lights! [Pun]

Madred didn't get anything out of Picard. So, to me, it feels a no-go. :thumbsdown:

I understand the desire (and ONLY that desire!) to make a Picard that fits in a [Car] Coming Of Age deck (which series I love!) but this is overly stretching it.

Same as [1E-Rom] Kirk, or Prisoner Archer. From a card player's POV, I really like that those exists. But I can't recall any justification for them actually "working for the betterment of" those affiliations in any way. (Kirk does everything AGAINST [1E-Rom] ! :x )

Well... Archer's lore states he's put to good use as a labourer... but nope. A perfect lore (and Archer's comes a long way) might do the trick for a character to be able to attempt other affiliations' missions. (Kira's storyline and resulting lore is the perfect example for 3 affiliations!) But Archer, in this case, has no business attempting [Kli] missions, unaided / unaccompanied by [Kli] officials. He should be [NA] at best (because at that time, he couldn't attempt [SF] missions).

So. Don't make a [Car] Picard, please. (Use, say, Galen? Nope, that Picard is already used in the [NA] CoA starter. Well... pick -- or make -- another [NA] one!

A [NA] JL with title & lore along the lines of, "Prisoner Picard: Captured during a special, off-the-books operation to investigate false information, JLP was coerced to divulge information on the institutions that had alledgedly abandoned him" might be believable.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#572738
Sometimes you need some star power for non- [Fed] for gameplay reasons.
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#572745
Remember that we are playing a game and that this game is not a perfect representation/simulation of the Star Trek Universe.

That being said, affiliations are there to balance the game. Unfortunately, D built it as a "3 teams" version and since then have stapled others on as we go along. This is maybe not the basis of a good design.
Now we need to think about putting star power and faces in every affiliation to balance things out and make them more palpable for players (old and new).

So from a game design mechanics/function, affiliations is an artificially constructed boundary for the game to make the game "hard" and enjoyable to play and build decks in. It's there to make decks feel, behave and play differently.

That they also do double duty as a story vehicle is more or less a plus really. =)
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#572749
A [Car] Picard is a terrible idea, but not so much because he would be [Car] . Rather, it's a terrible idea because he lacks pretty much any agency whatsoever, and a personnel should be someone with some kind of agency. That's what that card type represents.

I can buy Prisoner Archer, because that card represents a man serving a lifetime sentence in prison. He's free to move about, live some kind of life, and use most of those skills he has in some capacity within the Rura Penthe community.* And the card represents that.

It's the same as Prisoner Tom Paris.

But Picard was too much of an "object" and a "pawn" in Madred's toolbox to be a personnel. He's even less of a person than [Fer] Picard (which I think is quite a stretch, but not as much obviously).

As far as the subject of affiliation vs. prisoner goes, I think that personnel who are subjugated or under the jurisdictional umbrella/control of a larger affiliation are justified in carrying that affiliation to some extent. Are they a part of that society, even if they didn't choose to be or wouldn't otherwise want to be?

Remans are [1E-Rom] , even if they're slaves that want independence and freedom. Goran'Agar is [Dom] , even though he sought freedom from the Vorta and rebelled from the Founders. Dissidents are [1E-Rom] and [Car] , even though they resist and seek to overthrow their rulers.



* It only just occurs to me how interesting a "Rura Penthe" TV show could be. Like a 24th-century "Oz." Certainly a lot better than Disco.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#572756
SudenKapala wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 7:40 am I feel an Affiliation is, rather broadly, "working towards the same goals"; and having grounds, credibility, and reasons for (or being leveraged into) being able to attempt that affiliation's missions...

I understand the desire (and ONLY that desire!) to make a Picard that fits in a [Car] Coming Of Age deck (which series I love!) but this is overly stretching it.

Same as [1E-Rom] Kirk, or Prisoner Archer. From a card player's POV, I really like that those exists. But I can't recall any justification for them actually "working for the betterment of" those affiliations in any way. (Kirk does everything AGAINST [1E-Rom] ! :x )
QFT
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#572769
In game, an affiliation means the following to me:

  • Does not work automatically with other affiliations
  • Able to attempt affiliation Missions
  • Able to crew affiliation ships
Thematically, it means the following to me:
  • Recognized as a distinct group / nation
  • In universe considered to be one of that group
  • working with that group for common goals

now, not all will fit all of those from both sides, but some clearly do.

Locutus is clearly [Bor], and checks all the boxes, IMO. Nellie is also clearly [Fed], imo.

Does not work automatically with other affiliations is probably the most important gameplay reason for me, and honestly why I wish a lot more of the non-aligned were affiliated with micro-afiliiations, I think.

It's part of the problem with ENT, because a hypothetical Sharan doesn't fit as [FED], but really doesn't fit as [Non], because he wouldn't work with [Vul] (and I really don't want all the [22] Andorians to be [NA] with restriction boxes, for example.


I don't mind Major Rakal being [Rom] because she was working with the Roman dissidents.

I don't mind Spock Son of Sarek being [KLN] because he staffed a Kln ship.

A [Car] Prisoner Picard would work for me, especially if this was one that broke under mind control, because the prisoner Picard would not be working with other affiliations.
 
By Slayer07
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#572841
I mean if we need a Jean-Luc Picard that is [Car] , why not from the episode where he worked with Gul Macet to help apprehend Benjamin Maxwell? Despite following Federation orders he was also essentially assisting the Cardassians despite the implication that Maxwell was right and the Cardassians were arming their people on the DMZ. But he was doing the job (for both sides really) of 'keeping the peace'.
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#572860
Slayer07 wrote: Tue Mar 01, 2022 2:27 pm I mean if we need a Jean-Luc Picard that is [Car] , why not from the episode where he worked with Gul Macet to help apprehend Benjamin Maxwell? Despite following Federation orders he was also essentially assisting the Cardassians despite the implication that Maxwell was right and the Cardassians were arming their people on the DMZ. But he was doing the job (for both sides really) of 'keeping the peace'.
I would have issues with that, because that Picard was clearly still [Fed]. His objectives just worked with Macet. It would be like having a [Fed] Macet.

Now, making dual affiliation of those might be interesting.
 
By Slayer07
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#572999
boromirofborg wrote: Tue Mar 01, 2022 4:07 pm
Slayer07 wrote: Tue Mar 01, 2022 2:27 pm I mean if we need a Jean-Luc Picard that is [Car] , why not from the episode where he worked with Gul Macet to help apprehend Benjamin Maxwell? Despite following Federation orders he was also essentially assisting the Cardassians despite the implication that Maxwell was right and the Cardassians were arming their people on the DMZ. But he was doing the job (for both sides really) of 'keeping the peace'.
I would have issues with that, because that Picard was clearly still [Fed]. His objectives just worked with Macet. It would be like having a [Fed] Macet.

Now, making dual affiliation of those might be interesting.
A dual affiliation Picard from that episode as opposed to single affiliation is essentially the same thing. Likely more useful for the Cardassians since the Federation has plenty of Picard's to choose from, but the option would be there. And it would give them 'star power' sort to speak. So either way mission accomplished.

I will still maintain something like this makes more sense (both are relative terms mind you) than Prisoner Picard.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#573069
boromirofborg wrote: Tue Mar 01, 2022 4:07 pm It would be like having a [Fed] Macet.
Except Macet doesn't have star power, so no-one would care about a [Fed] Macet.

(Insert my usual grumble about "If I wanted to play Picard I'd play Fed - if I'm playing Klingons I want to play with actual Klingons, not Feds playing dressup" here)
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#573222
Again. This is a game based on multiple shows about and focused on the federation.

We have mined most background characters of most small affiliations already. While there are numerous fed character with names that has yet to see the light of day.

To give these affiliations something new or just a little bit of star power then we need to see the bigger picture and remember that this is a game and not the show it takes it’s theme from.
 
By Dunnagh (Andreas Micheel)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Contender
#573255
Smiley wrote: Sun Mar 06, 2022 2:17 pm Again. This is a game based on multiple shows about and focused on the federation.

We have mined most background characters of most small affiliations already. While there are numerous fed character with names that has yet to see the light of day.

To give these affiliations something new or just a little bit of star power then we need to see the bigger picture and remember that this is a game and not the show it takes it’s theme from.
There´s plenty of opportunity to create such characters. Take a CAR Picard that can be seeded (or downloaded with a card), does not add anything to mission attempts but counts as a captive.

Take Ferengi Picard. Should have CUNNING 1 or 0 because he was a mind-controlled goon without own thoughts except the memories of what was - and except for a basic understanding on how the stargazer works (special download Stargazer?) has no real value - except a Federation infiltration icon.

I´m not totally against such characters. What I´m against is creating "what if" personell without adding a [1E-AU] - The Fer Picard shown on the card should have an AU icon - because he never existed in that way depicted. But could have.
User avatar
 
By Hobie (Robert Petersen)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#573394
AllenGould wrote: Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:43 am
boromirofborg wrote: Tue Mar 01, 2022 4:07 pm It would be like having a [Fed] Macet.
Except Macet doesn't have star power, so no-one would care about a [Fed] Macet.

(Insert my usual grumble about "If I wanted to play Picard I'd play Fed - if I'm playing Klingons I want to play with actual Klingons, not Feds playing dressup" here)
Now a dual personnel [Fed] [Car] Picard + Macet could be fun. They were close together a lot in that episode in going after Maxwell.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#573600
[Car] Prisoner Picard feels like a personnel who should be earned from completing Celtis III (Bioweapon Ruse) via a text box. VIP classification, Honor x2, gives 5 or ten extra points when earned, and/or may be tortured, interrogated, brainwashed.
Card Page Glitches

So, it's seeming on some sets that the cards on th[…]

Question for noob

Awesome. Thanks everyone for all the help!

Only works when RS is played after AIV. This is be[…]

Still a few weeks left to get registered for the[…]