If you'd come out and said "the Federation Council is about to make a decision, spend 30pp if you want input on the decision," that would be different. That would actually make a lot of sense. But it was pitched as "you need to spend 30pp just to convince them they need to have a meeting about this." As if, had we chosen not to invest the political will, the Council would just have gone off singing 'herpaderp' to themselves until the Apiata touched off Galaxy War One by attacking the Cardassians over and over until they responded with a major fleet.

This. This. All my this. (In fact, I think I'll steal that mechanic for a quest I'll be starting soon-ish...)

There's been a running theme for awhile that the Federation as a whole should be doing it's own thing, beyond what we're up to. The quest format certainly doesn't encourage that, and it's totally understandable that you'd keep them more hands-off, in terms of player agency. But at the same time, we shouldn't be the only actors on the stage. I'd be perfectly happy having regular postings indicating what other Federation entities are up to. If we're dissatisfied with the progress on those fronts, we might invest extra resources (at the snakepit and via other mechanical investments)... but in general, other governmental organs act on their own accord.

One thing I could do is make regular liaison reports from FDS a thing. There would be a direct focus to what FDS does that will override the event system at times, but to go with that player directed diplomatic pushes would double in price, since your agenda is no longer being pressed against something passive.

I'd have to caution people not to get salty at me if FDS/Council does things for their own reasons that aren't what you think they should/would focus on, because you'd only be seeing their situation as an outsider.

Nah, that's totally reasonable. If you're worried about salt, the best format would be to let us get MWCO-like posts saying 'this is what the diplomats are up to, would you like to give input as to this decision point?' and they basically manage their own house otherwise. If there's any point of particular contention, we can manage it via some combination of single-line-item change or optional investment of resources.

At the same time, if you wanted to make them do things that hinder or inconvenience us, just give us a heads-up in advance, and a way of negating their antics at cost. Perhaps the different factions are implementing various agendas on a semi-regular basis, and some of those agendas are potentially inconvenient... but we can deal with them to avert any trouble that would arise that way.
 
Honestly I've kinda of interpreted the diplo pushes as using some of our political capital/Starfleet to help out the FDS. This might be a retxon to what has been established previously, but it would probably be easier to just imagine it that way than bringing in a whole new FDS mechanic.
 
One thing I could do is make regular liaison reports from FDS a thing. There would be a direct focus to what FDS does that will override the event system at times, but to go with that player directed diplomatic pushes would double in price, since your agenda is no longer being pressed against something passive.

I'd have to caution people not to get salty at me if FDS/Council does things for their own reasons that aren't what you think they should/would focus on, because you'd only be seeing their situation as an outsider.

I would vote to keep things as they are.
 
Some dude said he didn't like the flange at the back of the Excelsior and that it looked like it would snap off-never mind it's not exactly a load-bearing component. So he wrote an omake about how it was structurally flawed to support getting rid of it. I remember it mostly for how tremendously petty it seemed.

I like to imagine that it was petty In universe.

Some group of designers that still hasn't gotten over a debate from 30/40 years ago.

There was probably a response that goes something like:

"OH MY GOD, we still need that for the subspace phase relays to keep the FTL tilling to a reasonable level. And then where are you going to put the tertiary sensor arrays? We also need the extra length clear of the warp power interference to cut down the processing time on rear dorsal and ventral arrays when they triangulate"

"It'll also play merry hell with snap firing of the stern phaser arrays too: the power couplings get snarled without the extra hull to play with. Repairs become impossible outside of extensive yard time and using purpose built black box power sections."

"And, yes, FINE, the lip will snap off if placed on a high gravity surface without the internal grave plating being active. But that has literally never come up again since it happened to one stranded Tellarite cargo ship in the 16th century"

"We've been over this again and again. I'm just tired at this point."
 
Last edited:
the only big thing that never made sense to me is why Starfleet and not the FDS or Council is responsible for beginning/continuing diplomatic pushes. like, what does the FDS do with the extra manpower/resources on years where we dont ask for a push? especially after taking 4 pushes/year for a long time.

Honestly I've kinda of interpreted the diplo pushes as using some of our political capital/Starfleet to help out the FDS. This might be a retxon to what has been established previously, but it would probably be easier to just imagine it that way than bringing in a whole new FDS mechanic.
I kinda figured the FDS's main job was to keep the full members and affiliates from tearing into each other given the rather diverse species and ideals that we've absorbed. hell not 5 years ago we mentioned that the Federation doubled in size w/in a decade of us in charge. I imagine that the Diplo corp is quite busy keeping the peace w/o us demanding that they go court other potential affiliates, with the express intent of increasing their workload. Us telling them to diplomance our favorites is probably as inconvenient as us acting as their taxi service
 
[X][FACTION] Approach the Mercantilists about a diplomatic/financial push to assist the Orions with their political and economic transition.
[X][COUNCIL] Plan Modern Explorers and Syndicate Amendment
 
[X][COUNCIL] Plan Modern Explorers and Syndicate Amendment
[X][FACTION] Approach the Developers about ensuring every homeworld is protected by a Starbase.
 
I kinda figured the FDS's main job was to keep the full members and affiliates from tearing into each other given the rather diverse species and ideals that we've absorbed. hell not 5 years ago we mentioned that the Federation doubled in size w/in a decade of us in charge. I imagine that the Diplo corp is quite busy keeping the peace w/o us demanding that they go court other potential affiliates, with the express intent of increasing their workload. Us telling them to diplomance our favorites is probably as inconvenient as us acting as their taxi service
except they are the ones who carry out the diplo pushes we initiate. 100%. that is there job. so why do we do the initiation and not the council?
 
Honestly I've kinda of interpreted the diplo pushes as using some of our political capital/Starfleet to help out the FDS. This might be a retxon to what has been established previously, but it would probably be easier to just imagine it that way than bringing in a whole new FDS mechanic.

I kinda figured the FDS's main job was to keep the full members and affiliates from tearing into each other given the rather diverse species and ideals that we've absorbed. hell not 5 years ago we mentioned that the Federation doubled in size w/in a decade of us in charge. I imagine that the Diplo corp is quite busy keeping the peace w/o us demanding that they go court other potential affiliates, with the express intent of increasing their workload. Us telling them to diplomance our favorites is probably as inconvenient as us acting as their taxi service

The thing is that foreign policy is one of the key fields of government policy and not really something anybody would "outsource" to another body. There is a reason why in most democracies the foreign minister/secretary is traditionally the second most powerful cabinet member (though nowadays the presidents/prime minister have stolen some of that portfolio) and that reason is because it is so fucking important. By giving away that the Fed Council would have essentially put us over them which doesn't make an sense.

Honestly, I think I'd be satisfied with just having the Council act like a proactive body that is honestly trying to make intelligent foreign policy decisions. Which they've totally done before. But since 2311 or so they've been largely dropping the ball. This has forced us to pressure them into making decisions you would really think they'd already want to make anyway.

We shouldn't have had to pressure them to hold a special session to figure out what to do about the Apiata. The Apiata are a prospective member species with strong and growing ties to the Federation economy, they are potentially a very powerful ally or a major loose cannon in the region. Why did it cost us 30pp to get the Council to discuss the problem seriously?

If you'd come out and said "the Federation Council is about to make a decision, spend 30pp if you want input on the decision," that would be different. That would actually make a lot of sense. But it was pitched as "you need to spend 30pp just to convince them they need to have a meeting about this." As if, had we chosen not to invest the political will, the Council would just have gone off singing 'herpaderp' to themselves until the Apiata touched off Galaxy War One by attacking the Cardassians over and over until they responded with a major fleet.

And if that's true of the Apiata...

We really shouldn't have had to pressure them to hold a special session on how to deal with the Sydraxians. it's been obvious that diplomacy was going badly with them for several years, we'd already established a border zone and they'd raided it repeatedly. There are at least three Council species, two of them core member races, whose holdings are threatened by Sydraxian attacks.

Again, I think it would have made a lot of sense to say "spend 30pp if you want to get a vote on what the Council does in response to this." That much is reasonable- because then you'd be making it clear that we DO have civilian oversight, and that in the natural course of things they'd probably be giving us orders we might or might not like. And that if we want buy-in on the decision-making process, we need to be willing to expend political capital that we could have conserved if we were willing to just nod meekly and say "yessir" to whatever the Council decides.

But the Federation government shouldn't be postponing its decision to even discuss crises on its borders until Commander, Starfleet decides it's worth giving up an extra shipyard to convince the Council to hold a meeting.

I don't often agree with you but this exactly what I am trying to say...
 
Last edited:
If I change anything, to start with it'll most likely be including a bullet point list of FDS priorities, and shifting the generation of diplomacy events away from the sector even tables and onto the FDS - they roll to see how many events requiring your support they will require in a year.

But most likely I'll just see about trying to push some more proactiveness into the Council.
 
I view a lot of these "but that's not how any real government would react" arguments the same way I would an argument that King Arthur could never have put all his knights in a round table, because it would have pissed off his richest landowning supporters and created a rebellion in short order.

No, it's not realistic. Neither is Star Trek. It's a pulp science fiction, slightly utopian fantasy (depending on the episode) that sometimes dabbles in real science (whether physics or sociological) but primarily exists to hold up a mirror to the present and recent past.

You can say "but nobody would ever do that" but so what?
 
I don't view this as even slightly a problem with the quest structure. It's part of the very basics of the setting. Starfleet is that big and important because Starfleet has always been that big and important in the show, no matter how unrealistic it may seem. It's a basic story conceit of Star Trek's, and it forms a large part of the flavor of its world.
 
While the rapid growth of the organization might well explain some of it I honestly have a hard time imaging a government letting things escalate to this degree - especially since many of the functions Starfleet has taken over like for example foreign policy or military, are key features of a sovereign state. Those are not simply given away!
That's the thing, they haven't been given away. Starfleet is part of the government!

The Federation at large does not seem to have the clear division between civilian and military authority that the Western world on Earth circa 2000 takes for granted. I doubt the Vulcans even have a concept of 'military' to begin with as distinct from 'people whose spaceships happen to be armed.' And it's entirely possible that the Andorians and Tellarites' spacegoing armed forces began with their version of NASA and bolted guns on.

Even Earth, which you'd think would draw this division super-tightly... doesn't. Earth's own "armed forces" are dominated by the United Earth Space Probe Agency. Let that name sink in for a while.

Given that kind of a background, there really is no reason to assume that the Federation government would see itself as having 'given up' all these core diplomatic and economic functions to Starfleet. Especially since Starfleet is by definition and intent as much a civilian agency as a military one, hence its ability to maintain industrial complexes, research programs, and so on.

You're making far too many assumptions about how much concern or alarm members of the Federation government have in dealing with a situation they created in the first place. Yes, Starfleet is bigger in that it has more ships and does more research. But no new functions were assumed by Starfleet under Kahurangi. Starfleet Intelligence was always the Federation's primary intelligence arm. Starfleet Medical was always its main health and humanitarian branch. Starfleet Engineering and Shipyard Ops were always a major part of its infrastructure operations. And so on. The growth of Starfleet has been broadly proportionate to the growth of the Federation as a whole; it does not represent "power creep" or Starfleet taking over government functions it didn't formerly have.

Especially not to an organisation you have only limited influence over and which is already starting to amass a military/security monopoly. Even in the EU, where there is a concentrated effort to create a "common" foreign policy, the various states have made sure to secure they have the last say in the matter (and in fact the High Ambassador is a mostly failed idea) and the idea of a an EU army is still an idea despite several decades of trying to get it...
Yeah, which would be extremely applicable if we were talking about the Federation circa 2210 (when it was about as old as the earliest parts of the EU project are today).


But it's not 2210 in our game, it's 2310. The Federation has existed for a long time and the four original member species have become very comfortable working together and operating within shared bureaucratic, diplomatic, economic, and military structures.

You're projecting your own cultural concerns and the political reality of your own times onto an organization whose culture is different and in most cases literally alien, and into a time three centuries in the future.

Hell their mistrust of each other should make this whole thing even more impossible since it should make them even more cautious to give power away and downright paranoid when it comes to powerbuilding in Starfleet... A modern democratic nation simply can't afford to give away its control of military, security and foreign policy to such a a large degree - nor can it survive it.
The actual experience of the Federation with Starfleet suggests otherwise, since Starfleet has not attempted any coups so far as we know. The closest the Federation ever came to such a crisis was the conspiracy to restart war with the Klingons after Khitomer- and that was a criminal conspiracy by Starfleet officers that would have worked regardless of how much of the rest of the government Starfleet controlled. Furthermore, the conspiracy was detected and routed out BY Starfleet, further supporting the notion that the organization is free of corruption as a whole, and does a good job of self-policing.

Honestly I've kinda of interpreted the diplo pushes as using some of our political capital/Starfleet to help out the FDS. This might be a retxon to what has been established previously, but it would probably be easier to just imagine it that way than bringing in a whole new FDS mechanic.
I agree.

Again, I'll be satisfied if we just see some evidence of the Council and the FDS actually trying to accomplish anything. Regardless of whether it's productive or counterproductive, regardless of whether we do or don't get to vote on input, regardless of anything else.

A stupid FDS, or a Council that does inadvisable things, doesn't imperil my suspension of disbelief. At least not so long as it's within reason (e.g. I didn't complain when the diplomats and the Council recognized the new government of Bajor, and I didn't complain MUCH that they agreed to stop diplomacy with Cardassian affiliates).

But an inert Council that has to be actively pressured by Starfleet to make basic foreign policy decisions at all, when those issues are a matter of common knowledge and have been building up in an overt, undeniable manner for years... that isn't something I can believe in.

I would vote to keep things as they are.
Me, I'll be happy if we just get a change in the precise wording of a few snakepit options from:

"30pp : Get the Council to actually have a meeting on Urgent Crisis of the Year"

to read:

"30pp : Secure influence with key players regarding the Council's upcoming meeting on Urgent Crisis of the Year."

It's not that I want us to have more control, more options, or more votes than we have. I'm happy on those fronts. No mechanical thing really needs changing. I just want to feel like the Federation government isn't composed entirely of mindless bureaucratic lemmings who will 'stay the course' until the ship runs into the ground unless we go out of our way to make them change direction.
 
[X][COUNCIL] Modern Explorers and Syndicate Amendment
[X][FACTION] Approach the Developers about ensuring every homeworld is protected by a Starbase.

We shouldn't have had to pressure them to hold a special session to figure out what to do about the Apiata. The Apiata are a prospective member species with strong and growing ties to the Federation economy, they are potentially a very powerful ally or a major loose cannon in the region. Why did it cost us 30pp to get the Council to discuss the problem seriously?

More likely, it's spending political will to make sure feathers are unruffled and a decision is arrived at now, rather than after endless rounds of posturing and inflamed speeches.

They may be sociologically hyper-advanced, but they are politicians still.
 
I view a lot of these "but that's not how any real government would react" arguments the same way I would an argument that King Arthur could never have put all his knights in a round table, because it would have pissed off his richest landowning supporters and created a rebellion in short order.

No, it's not realistic. Neither is Star Trek. It's a pulp science fiction, slightly utopian fantasy (depending on the episode) that sometimes dabbles in real science (whether physics or sociological) but primarily exists to hold up a mirror to the present and recent past.

You can say "but nobody would ever do that" but so what?

And yet every halfway talented author who writes about King Arthur tries to come up with a suitable explanation for that because it does in fact matter if a story is believable or not.

Plus the question if Starfleet is under the control of the Fed Council or not seems quite important to me. Either we follow the ideals we have breached for the last ~1000k pages or we are really little more than an imperialistic military state that keeps the trappings of a democracy as the Cardassians and Romulans say we are... Plus there is the problem of internal coherence since while several events/statements/scenes strongly suggest that we are in fact under a politically active Fed Council this is however not shown in the gameplay itself.
 
[X][COUNCIL] Modern Explorers and Syndicate Amendment
[X][FACTION] Approach the Developers about ensuring every homeworld is protected by a Starbase.



More likely, it's spending political will to make sure feathers are unruffled and a decision is arrived at now, rather than after endless rounds of posturing and inflamed speeches.

They may be sociologically hyper-advanced, but they are politicians still.

Also, the current political state would seem to cause frequent deadlocks. The President's party no longer has a plurality, and anything that is needed requires the support of at least two, maybe three factions. Add in the factor of many councillors only recently joining and it's not surprising that the Council have been hesitant to make dramatic decisions. I agree some more assertiveness would be good, but there are legitimate reasons for the Council to be slow to respond.
 
That's the thing, they haven't been given away. Starfleet is part of the government!

The Federation at large does not seem to have the clear division between civilian and military authority that the Western world on Earth circa 2000 takes for granted. I doubt the Vulcans even have a concept of 'military' to begin with as distinct from 'people whose spaceships happen to be armed.' And it's entirely possible that the Andorians and Tellarites' spacegoing armed forces began with their version of NASA and bolted guns on.

Even Earth, which you'd think would draw this division super-tightly... doesn't. Earth's own "armed forces" are dominated by the United Earth Space Probe Agency. Let that name sink in for a while.

Given that kind of a background, there really is no reason to assume that the Federation government would see itself as having 'given up' all these core diplomatic and economic functions to Starfleet. Especially since Starfleet is by definition and intent as much a civilian agency as a military one, hence its ability to maintain industrial complexes, research programs, and so on.

You're making far too many assumptions about how much concern or alarm members of the Federation government have in dealing with a situation they created in the first place. Yes, Starfleet is bigger in that it has more ships and does more research. But no new functions were assumed by Starfleet under Kahurangi. Starfleet Intelligence was always the Federation's primary intelligence arm. Starfleet Medical was always its main health and humanitarian branch. Starfleet Engineering and Shipyard Ops were always a major part of its infrastructure operations. And so on. The growth of Starfleet has been broadly proportionate to the growth of the Federation as a whole; it does not represent "power creep" or Starfleet taking over government functions it didn't formerly have.

It doesn't matter if Starfleet is viewed as a military or as a civilian agency - what matters is that nobody would give or concentrate that much power in a semi-independent organization (especially not one led by a single person). It goes against the whole basic concept of a democracy (and hell even autocratic members would have difficulty giving that much power away) and last I seen the Federation I supposed to be one of those and operate according to those principles. If Starfleet = Government than we should play as the president not as the admiral...
 
It doesn't matter if Starfleet is viewed as a military or as a civilian agency - what matters is that nobody would give or concentrate that much power in a semi-independent organization (especially not one led by a single person). It goes against the whole basic concept of a democracy (and hell even autocratic members would have difficulty giving that much power away) and last I seen the Federation I supposed to be one of those and operate according to those principles. If Starfleet = Government than we should play as the president not as the admiral...

You need to calm down and remind yourself it's a game based on a fictional setting where Starfleet are the protagonists. Starfleet does answer to a civilian government, but they have broader powers than a solely military organization does and that's just how it is.
 
except they are the ones who carry out the diplo pushes we initiate. 100%. that is there job. so why do we do the initiation and not the council?
See, the thing is, when we spend political will, that's not us doing something. That's us convincing the Council to do something.

We gain political will when we do stuff that makes the Council think we're awesome and want to listen to us.

We lose political will when we do stuff that makes us look dumb in front of the Council.

When we spend 10 or 20 political will on a diplomatic push? Yeah, that's because (Vice) Admiral Sousa got together with two or three Councillors and went "uh yeah, you know, it might be a really good idea if we got the FDS to speed up on that extradition treaty with the Amarki" or "you know, Starfleet is seriously concerned that if we don't get a research treaty lined up with the Gaeni, the Romulans will, and who knows what the Romulans will pay them to create" or "we should probably resolve that trade dispute with the Apiata before it makes them change their minds about joining the Federation."

The Council is still in charge. Political will is not a measure of the things we have the power to initiate. It's the measure of what we have the power to convince the Council to do, that they would not otherwise do. Without our efforts, they wouldn't build new starbases or shipyards, at least not often.

And without our efforts, they probably wouldn't be trying to recruit half the known quadrant to join the Federation. But now they are, because we convinced them to.

This does not represent a deficiency in the FDS decision-making process; it represents a deliberate policy that the Council has pursued in large part at the behest of Admiral Kahurangi and ten years' worth of Expansionist leadership in the Council.

The thing is that foreign policy is one of the key fields of government policy and not really something anybody would "outsource" to another body. There is a reason why in most democracies the foreign minister/secretary is traditionally the second most powerful cabinet member (though nowadays the presidents/prime minister have stolen some of that portfolio) and that reason is because it is so fucking important. By giving away that the Fed Council would have essentially put us over them which doesn't make an sense.
Thing is, the Council doesn't give it away. The problem isn't that they've given away diplomatic power to us. The Commander of Starfleet doesn't actually make any consequential diplomatic decisions other than "this is where the Explorer Corps is going this year." We may persuade others to make such decisions, but we don't make them ourselves.

The issue is simply that they have, historically, not exercised this power very hard without Starfleet advice (which makes sense given that we're one of the main tools they use in their diplomacy)... And that this has trended towards a point where they seem almost unwilling to make decisions at all without active persuasion from Starfleet.

As Oneiros notes, all that is called for here is an active Council, or at least a reactive one that responds meaningfully to threats without having to be pushed to do so. If we have to spend political capital to get input on their decision-making process, great! But we shouldn't have to spend political capital just to get them to have a decision-making process.

I don't often agree with you but this exactly what I am trying to say...
Thank you.

I view a lot of these "but that's not how any real government would react" arguments the same way I would an argument that King Arthur could never have put all his knights in a round table, because it would have pissed off his richest landowning supporters and created a rebellion in short order.

No, it's not realistic. Neither is Star Trek. It's a pulp science fiction, slightly utopian fantasy (depending on the episode) that sometimes dabbles in real science (whether physics or sociological) but primarily exists to hold up a mirror to the present and recent past.

You can say "but nobody would ever do that" but so what?
I'm with you, I agree, I just want a little more purely flavorwise sense that the rest of the Federation government actually exists and is capable of responding intelligently to a changing situation.

That is literally all.
_________________________

EDIT:

I do see the logic behind the "well, the Council has gotten a lot larger and is currently very divided, which may explain why they're hesitant to act decisively." Multiple people have pointed this out, and I don't think they're at all wrong to mention it.

At the same time, if it goes on long enough, I'm going to start sympathizing with Admiral Layton. Because Council inaction in the face of ongoing slow-burning crises is a great way for the Federation to wind up in a disaster.
 
Last edited:
So I'm pretty sure I know what's winning the pp expenditure plan, but I have no idea about the faction approach. Can anyone do a tally?
Vote Tally : Sci-Fi - To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest) | Page 1240 | Sufficient Velocity
##### NetTally 1.7.4

[X] Secure the diplomatic front
No. of Votes: 1

[X] Request Start of Heavy Explorer project, receiving one-off boost of Research Points and go-ahead for some projects, 34pp
No. of Votes: 1


——————————————————————————————————————————————
Task: COUNCIL

[X][COUNCIL] Plan Modern Explorers and Syndicate Amendment
-[X] Request Start of Heavy Explorer project, receiving one-off boost of Research Points and go-ahead for some projects, 34pp
-[X] Request Refit Program for Excelsior class [+1 C, S, L, P for 50br, 30sr, 1 Year (4 turns)], 6 turns, 18pp (NB: new unit cost for Excelsior will be 230/160)
-[X] Amend the Anti-Syndicate Legislation, 30pp (Present options for changing your anti-Syndicate legislation - you have 5 Influence available)
No. of Votes: 37

[X][COUNCIL] Constellations and Investment
No. of Votes: 1


——————————————————————————————————————————————
Task: FACTION

[X][FACTION] Approach the Mercantilists about a diplomatic/financial push to assist the Orions with their political and economic transition.
No. of Votes: 20

[X][FACTION] Approach the Developers about options for relieving the current logistic issues, perhaps arranging for Starfleet auxiliary commands to use idle member world berths.
No. of Votes: 5

[X][FACTION] Approach the Pacifists about a focused diplomatic initiative with the intent of mediating the Ked Paddah/Licori war to prevent needless loss of life.
No. of Votes: 5

[X][FACTION] Approach the Developers about ensuring every homeworld is protected by a Starbase.
No. of Votes: 3

[X][FACTION] Approach the Pacifists about options regarding the conflict between the Licori, Ked Paddah, and the Mentats.
No. of Votes: 3

[X][FACTION] Approach the Developers
No. of Votes: 2

[X][FACTION] Approach the Developers and Hawks about ensuring that each homeworld is protected by a Starbase: This year, Starfleet is given resources to build a Starbase at Indoria (27pp). Next year, Starfleet is given resources to build a Starbase at Betazed (27pp).
No. of Votes: 1

[X][FACTION] Approach the Pacifists about the Diplomatic Service getting their shit together.
No. of Votes: 1

Total No. of Voters: 47
 
Back
Top