trekcc.org

Without a vote, Consume Me!'s type was decided as a planet dilemma, I've been told for story reasons. It has been argued that Armus did not really interact with people in space. In fact, however, Armus was the cause for Troi's shuttle to crash when and where it did in the first place... essentially he was able to pull the shuttle down from nearby space almost as he had dragged Riker across tht ground and into him. This is evidenced by several lines of dialogue from the script:

1) Shuttle pilot:
"Sir, I have an onboard systems failure. You'll have to tell me where I am."
"Can't confirm. My instruments are haywire."
"... losing more power! My flight control computer's fried."

2) Tasha Yar:
"Ben must have had no control left, otherwise he would have picked a better spot."

3) Jean-Luc Picard
"And Number One, I don't believe the location shuttle crash and the proximity of this creature is necessarily a coincidence."

4)Armus:
"Why do you intrude into my space?"

From this dialogue it seems armus was able to "reach"into space to sense the shuttle's presence, disrupt/destry its instrumentation, drain its power, and pull the shuttle to its immediate vicinity. Therefore I believe there is storyline justification for Armus interacting with people/ships in space and thus for a dual dilemma.

Also, I believe it will be best if Consume Me! were a dual dilemma for gameplay reasons. As the introduction of a new type of dilemma, it will best serve the playability of the dilemma if it were dual. Planet and space dilemma slots continue to be fairly limited and I'm uncertain that Consume Me! will be able to, as frequently as is hoped, "make the cut" and displace some of the more valuable planet dilemmas. If the dilemmas is to serve as a "carrot" for Consume dilemmas, it will best be able to perform this function as a dual dilemma. Finally, if one were to remove the story entirely (which, incidently, I believe does indicate a dual dilemmas) and just consider Consume Me!'s gametext, there is nothing that indicates that it would/should be a specific dilemmas type.

I think we should put it up to a vote. What do you think?

CFHollister wrote:I think we should put it up to a vote. What do you think?

I completely agree. Let the Collective decide.

(Though I don't think it matters for the actual gameplay of the card, right?)

In fact, I think it does matter gameplay wise, at least for the "set-up" part of the dilemma. I imagine if you played this dilemma at a space mission, it would automatically be overcome as opposed to put on the top of your dilemma pile.

I can see why it was decided to be a planet dilemma story wise, because after all, it is a puddle of mud on a planet. Yet, I think CFHollister gives good examples for why it could be duel and in turn would probably see more use.

Edit to note: I'd be interested in seeing the potential cost of a duel dilemma vs. a planet dilemma. Assuming a duel dilemma is far more expensive, it may be smarter in the end to leave it as a planet.

I think that the dilemma type should be voted on. One questions that I have is would that increase the cost of playing the card (and if so would that make it less used/useful)?

Uh... who is to say the designers don't duplicate this card as a space dilemma? We have numerous examples of game text that is duplicated on space and planet dilemmas.

To play devil's advocate, I second what Mogh said and I further suggest that it makes sense as planet for another storytelling and gameplay reason. It can still work at a space mission. It just can't set itself up. And doesn't that make sense? Armus had to wait to be lucky enough to have a ship crash in. Yet, when the crew beamed down, he could play games with them and coerce them.

I can see why it's a planet dilemma. It will also keep the cost down if it cannot be played at both. And this also opens up a new card in the future for playtesting/creating a space version of this card.

charlie wrote:I can see why it's a planet dilemma. It will also keep the cost down if it cannot be played at both. And this also opens up a new card in the future for playtesting/creating a space version of this card.

I smell "The Void" or "The Doomsday Machine".......

Hoss-Drone wrote:

charlie wrote:I can see why it's a planet dilemma. It will also keep the cost down if it cannot be played at both. And this also opens up a new card in the future for playtesting/creating a space version of this card.

I smell "The Void" or "The Doomsday Machine".......

What was the Voyager episode with the crazy guy who kept flying into an anomoly he thought was trying to eat him?

The Guardian wrote:What was the Voyager episode with the crazy guy who kept flying into an anomoly he thought was trying to eat him?

Bliss

Given that it can be a "Free" kill I like this idea a lot that it comes as both planet and space (2 cards). We've got a lot of "repeat" dilemmas that are very appropriate.

Who do we lobby for this???


Jared

charlie wrote:I can see why it's a planet dilemma. It will also keep the cost down if it cannot be played at both. And this also opens up a new card in the future for playtesting/creating a space version of this card.

But with only 45 cards in a V-set, do we want to use 2 cards to do the same thing when we could do it with just one?

Maelwys wrote:

The Guardian wrote:What was the Voyager episode with the crazy guy who kept flying into an anomoly he thought was trying to eat him?

Bliss

That's the one! I'd suggest that for the space version. It has the same other-worldly aspect as Armus, the eating motif, and seemed to pick its victims too. It could be called All-Consuming Bliss (assuming the voting on this one goes as it is).

For the sake of keeping the cost down, I would be satisfied if we had reasonable assurance that there would be a space equivilant; I even quite like the Bliss idea that's forming up. If not, I still think there are adequate story grounds for a dual dilemma (though The Guardian makes a good argument as well).

Lysander wrote:

charlie wrote:I can see why it's a planet dilemma. It will also keep the cost down if it cannot be played at both. And this also opens up a new card in the future for playtesting/creating a space version of this card.

But with only 45 cards in a V-set, do we want to use 2 cards to do the same thing when we could do it with just one?

Very true. I miss the 120 card sets. I liked those over the 180 even.

Jared