[The Guardian]

Every once in a while, we get the 2E conversion of a 1E card. This project converts each 1E card that does not have a 2E version yet. Generally, I take a gameplay standpoint and avoid overpowered mechanics. I work within the mechanics, icons, and keywords we already have. I try to retain the spirit of the card in some fashion, even if I have to change story for gameplay or vice versa. Afterwards, I would love feedback and will even alter the card further and save the collaborated results for comparison if the case arises.

Skip:
None.

Original:
Battle of Narendra III
Narendra III: Battle adversary at Klingon colony world.
Leadership + SECURITY + Honor x2 + ship with WEAPONS>7
[40]
4
32 V
Opponent’s Side: Leadership + SECURITY + Treachery x2 + ship with WEAPONS>7

2E Equivalent:
•Near Narendra III
Aid Enemy in Battle
[35]
Leadership, 2 Officer, Security, and Integrity>34
Region: Narendra System. You may attempt and complete this mission using your personnel using Honor instead of Officer and Strength instead of Integrity. You may attempt and complete this mission using your personnel using Treachery instead of Officer and Cunning instead of Integrity.

3

Notes:
This is a twist on the old modal mission. Each faction attempts the mission for their own reasons and with their own strengths. No room for lore. Of course, by making it a ship battle, that leaves the planet open for its own interpretation.

Bonus:
•Narendra III
Render Judgement
[30]
2 Law, Programming, and Cunning>32
Region: Narendra System. When you complete this mission, you may place an Honor personnel involved in an opponent’s brig to score 5 points.
“This tribunal is convened. Strength to the Empire.”

2

Next: Getting to Know You

[Danny]

I was wondering, could this:

•Near Narendra III
Aid Enemy in Battle
[35]
Leadership, 2 Officer, Security, and Integrity>34
Region: Narendra System. You may attempt and complete this mission using your personnel using Honor instead of Officer and Strength instead of Integrity. You may attempt and complete this mission using your or personnel using Treachery instead of Officer and Cunning instead of Integrity.

3

be phrased like this:

•Near Narendra III
Aid Enemy in Battle
[35]
Leadership, Security, (2 Honor or 2 Treachery), and (Cunning>34 or Strength>34)
Region: Narendra System. You may attempt and complete this mission using your personnel with these requirements: Leadership, 2 Officer, Security, and Integrity>34.

3

It would still give the right splits (although it would allow Romulans to complete with Honor and Strength ), but removes any potential ambiguity and (if my maths is right) leaves room for a line of lore.

[The Guardian]

I was wondering, could this:

•Near Narendra III
Aid Enemy in Battle
[35]
Leadership, 2 Officer, Security, and Integrity>34
Region: Narendra System. You may attempt and complete this mission using your personnel using Honor instead of Officer and Strength instead of Integrity. You may attempt and complete this mission using your or personnel using Treachery instead of Officer and Cunning instead of Integrity.

3

be phrased like this:

•Near Narendra III
Aid Enemy in Battle
[35]
Leadership, Security, (2 Honor or 2 Treachery), and (Cunning>34 or Strength>34)
Region: Narendra System. You may attempt and complete this mission using your personnel with these requirements: Leadership, 2 Officer, Security, and Integrity>34.

3

It would still give the right splits (although it would allow Romulans to complete with Honor and Strength ), but removes any potential ambiguity and (if my maths is right) leaves room for a line of lore.

I certainly did not mean to ignore this post as long as I did. That change sounds good. I had thought about the Romulan angle, but you're right. Simpler is better. Let me find a good quote before I update.

[The Guardian]

I certainly did not mean to ignore this post as long as I did. That change sounds good. I had thought about the Romulan angle, but you're right. Simpler is better. Let me find a good quote before I update.

I'm feeling a little dumb here. I might have added the icon to the Treachery side because I was confusing this with Khitomer. That leads me back to the original, just deleting the Klingon icon in the Treachery possibility. Or, simplify it completely by making it Leadership, Security, (2 Officer and Integrity>34 or 2 Treachery and Cunning>34 or 2 Honor and Strength>34) with all three icons, but the intention was to show the battle through all three perspectives. Thus, the Klingons were not supposed to go Officer and Integrity, which would be reasonably easy for them. I'll take suggestions on this one.

(I wonder where the Klingon bar on the asymmetric opposite side of the 1E version was supposed to represent...)

[MattgomeryScott]

I certainly did not mean to ignore this post as long as I did. That change sounds good. I had thought about the Romulan angle, but you're right. Simpler is better. Let me find a good quote before I update.

I'm feeling a little dumb here. I might have added the icon to the Treachery side because I was confusing this with Khitomer. That leads me back to the original, just deleting the Klingon icon in the Treachery possibility. Or, simplify it completely by making it Leadership, Security, (2 Officer and Integrity>34 or 2 Treachery and Cunning>34 or 2 Honor and Strength>34) with all three icons, but the intention was to show the battle through all three perspectives. Thus, the Klingons were not supposed to go Officer and Integrity, which would be reasonably easy for them. I'll take suggestions on this one.

(I wonder where the Klingon bar on the asymmetric opposite side of the 1E version was supposed to represent...)

I like it the way you have it currently, each showing a different side of the events.

•Near Narendra III
Aid Enemy in Battle
[35]
Leadership, 2 Officer, Security, and Integrity>34
Region: Narendra System. You may attempt and complete this mission using your personnel using Honor instead of Officer and Strength instead of Integrity. You may attempt and complete this mission using your personnel using Treachery instead of Officer and Cunning instead of Integrity.

3

The Klingons fought with Honour. The Federation did the right thing at great cost because they had a great leader. The Romulans planned and executed a treacherously cunning sneak attack.

Having all three affiliations be able to use the same requirements doesn't really fit, even having the and having four ways of doing it (Honour + Strength or Cunning + Treachery or Honour + Cunning or Treachery + Strength) also doesn't seem right to me, as does making it just a standard modal (is that the word?) mission.

I appreciate that simplicity is usually better, but I think in some cases story telling should trump simplicity. This is a key moment that needs to be done well to do justice to it, and with all due respect to Danny I don't think the alternative does. Each affiliation's actions there were for different motives (requirements,) which I think each affiliation having one set of different requirements shows.

As for why the CC put a icon on the side, no idea. I stopped asking why random icons turned up on missions back in the Decipher days.

All the Best,

Mattgomery Scott.

[Danny]

I too confused this with Khitomer. Now that I've Memory-Alpha'd the reference, I'd be inclined to drop the icon (as they're the enemy being aided), have it a mission, but with alternate requirements (including Treachery).

Something like:

•Near Narendra III
Aid Enemy in Battle
[35]
Leadership, 2 Officer, Security, and Integrity>34
Region: Narendra System. You may attempt and complete this mission using your personnel with these requirements: Leadership, Security, 2 Treachery and Cunning>34.

3

Still leaves room for a line of lore.

[MattgomeryScott]

I too confused this with Khitomer. Now that I've Memory-Alpha'd the reference, I'd be inclined to drop the icon (as they're the enemy being aided), have it a mission, but with alternate requirements (including Treachery).

Yes, but the Klingons could have had other Klingons come to their aid. Okay they didn't in the series, but as we make our own stories in STCCG it would seem odd for a player not to be able to come to his or her brethren's aid.

All the Best,

Mattgomery Scott.

[Danny]

Yes, but the Klingons could have had other Klingons come to their aid. Okay they didn't in the series, but as we make our own stories in STCCG it would seem odd for a player not to be able to come to his or her brethren's aid.

I guess, however the line "We make our stories..." could essentially be used to justify putting any icon on any mission (or personnel or ship).

I just went with KillerB's KISS mantra, and the canonical story that was told (story telling trumping complexity, as it were).

[The Guardian]

I'm going to leave it with the simple removal of the Klingon icon for the Treachery requirements. Making it a straight modal mission would feel better if the requirements were much different instead of so similar.

Thanks for the help.

[MattgomeryScott]

I'm going to leave it with the simple removal of the Klingon icon for the Treachery requirements. Making it a straight modal mission would feel better if the requirements were much different instead of so similar.

Thanks for the help.

Happy to help.

All the Best,

Mattgomery Scott.