"So you want to play..." Part III, Tactical and Security
May 2, 2014 2:47:02 GMT
Chris Winters likes this
Post by Geralyn on May 2, 2014 2:47:02 GMT
A Brainstorming Session by Geralyn and Kal
As you might recall, a little while ago HSZMV and I did a bit of brainstorming over how to better involve and engage characters of the science and medical professions. Ayche and I continued the train of thought with a brainstorming session on Engineering and Operations. The responses were particularly and delightfully thoughtful, and certainly helpful. With that in mind, I figured why not expand the thought to the other career tracks in STO? Has there been cases where a GM or player has found it difficult to engage a tactical officer, or security officer? Or, do Gms or players find themselves in a rut as to how to engage such characters?
Again, you'd think there wouldn't be an issue with either of these occupations. Tactical handles ship to ship warfare, weapons and shields, as well as the comm channels. Security are basically MPs, handling law enforcement, ship and facility security, and prisoner escort/transport. What difficulties might a player or GM stumble into?
For this brainstorming, I had a sit-down with Kal, fellow Pathfinder and a longtime veteran of STO and the fleet, for his insight into the roleplaying aspect of his preferred character track. And like last time, I posted the conversation here, so you can follow the train of thought as we threw ideas at the wall to see if anything stuck.
[10:05] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Today's part three of the "So you want to play..." series, covering Tactical and Security professions.
[10:06] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Previous posts covered difficulties engaging the roles in RP, as well as creative ideas on how to do so. And unexpectedly, how one track can overlap or interfere with engaging another...
[10:06] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: ...as in the case of Ops and Science.
[10:06] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: What kind of hurdles can a Tac/Sec character run into, you think?
[10:07] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Other than a sense of bad timing? Never one around when you need one... Mostly I would say 'lack of co-operation', in regards to the Sec aspect.
[10:08] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: I was going to say, I see the bigger hurdles in the way of Security characters.
[10:09] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Pure Tactical characters tend to be much easier to play. There's very little that can actually get in the way of what they're doing, and their roles usually overlap more with +
[10:09] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: other departments, particularly engineering.
[10:09] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: One thing I seem to notice with Security is a lack of acknowledgment for their authority in a given situation. Effectively, they should be treated like MPs would be in a real military scenario.
[10:10] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I completely agree, and I think that's the biggest problem, and what puts so many people off playing characters.
[10:10] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Characters of that nature, rather.
[10:11] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: My dad was US Navy, which is what Roddenberry largely based Starfleet off of, and Captains and other officers visiting a base had to respect their positions.
[10:11] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Absolutely. We've always tried to promote the same ideal here, waaaaaay back before we were the Storytellers, even. Port Authority.
[10:12] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Also seems to be a difficulty balancing story ideas with not making the Security staff look incompetent.
[10:13] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Yeah, I've seen very few stories where security have done anything other than A) Be murderised, B) Be unimaginably inept, or C) Pretty much just dragged someone off to a cell.
[10:14] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: And with the large number of RP ideas that involve someone causing a mess on the base, people playing Security feel there's a lack of any faith at all in their ability.
[10:14] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I can understand why it's hard to work them in, in a satisfactory manner, but I can't help but feel that it's the most overlooked profession.
[10:14] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Absolutely.
[10:15] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Which leads to a vicious cycle of...No respect > Nobody wants to play one > Never one around when needed > No respect > So on.
[10:15] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: I guess my first reaction to that was "what, more overlooked than science?" But I guess it's not as noticeable because Tactical has a better visibility.
[10:16] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Tactical is easily the easiest profession to get into, especially for newer, less experienced roleplayers. The security aspect, not so much. And it's a huge shame, because Sec is such an +
[10:17] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: important part of life in Starfleet, especially on a ship or Starbase.
[10:18] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Always found myself hoping for the episode where a Security extra would subvert the stereotype and brutally beat the villain senseless with his own boot or something...
[10:19] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Huh. That...I kinda like that idea.
[10:19] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Would have been amazing in a TNG episode, wouldn't it have?
[10:20] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: If it had just been that weedy little Ensign everyone thought would die from allergies, rather than a phaser blast.
[10:21] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: So, realizing there's a vicious cycle impairing Security, what can be done to break it? We have a couple of brave players trying to already, but how can it be made easier?
[10:21] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Besides the obvious 'People should give people playing security more respect/actually pay attention to what they're saying'?
[10:22] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Well, that, obviously...
[10:22] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: That's an excellent question, to be honest.
[10:23] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Maybe that's something we should be asking the fleet at large. Plenty of them have tried to play Security in the past, and failed. They must have opinions.
[10:24] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Admittedly there have been past examples where Security was played in a manner that harmed credibility. None of the current Security characters, but it's happened.
[10:24] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I...yes. I can recall a couple of instances.
[10:25] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Speaking of which...where, if at all, should regular military fit into Security? There've been MACOs and Marines used for the purpose. Is there precedent?
[10:26] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: We have...had that debate many, many times. I believe the usual way of dealing with it is to have a MACO/Marine leader, who reports to the head of security, or directly to the XO, since they +
[10:26] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: obviously aren't Starfleet Officers, and therefore have no real place in the ship's hierarchy. I could be mistaken, however.
[10:27] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: That's something I don't think I've heard yet; MACO and Marines aren't Starfleet?
[10:28] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: They're Starfleet. As I understand it though, they're not officers. More like...Enlisted, I suppose.
[10:29] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: A disclosure, I haven't seen past episode 3 of ENT, but I'm given to understand ENT is where MACO makes it's debut?
[10:30] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Again, this is just as I understand it. And yes, I believe it is. I've seen Enterprise, but tend to treat anything from it as...soft canon, so.
[10:30] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: In that series, at least, they were completely separate from the Officers, and seemed to be subordinate to them. Whether that's changed, I have no idea.
[10:31] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: When it comes to ENT, seems to be a lot of people's opinion. The arrogant Vulcan grated on me...
[10:31] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Not to mention the magical appearance of Ferengi and Borg.
[10:31] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: 'They didn't use their name, it doesn't count!'. It doesn't work that way.
[10:31] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: There's been no canon appearance of MACO timelinewise after ENT, so there's very little to draw on.
[10:32] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Yeah. I know some people have played them as dual...uh.
[10:32] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: As both MACOs and Starfleet Officers at the same time. Words. So they'd have the rank of...Major, and the rank of Lieutenant Junior Grade, or something.
[10:33] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: I've seen one or two people 'dual-class' that way, as it were. Is there a real-world precedent for such a split career?
[10:33] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I have actually never looked into it. I absolutely should have.
[10:34] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I'm not sure what it would actually be the equivalent of.
[10:36] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Hm. Something to look into or get feedback on.
[10:36] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Agreed.
[10:37] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Another thing I've seen is a lack of awareness in where the boundaries are for Security's authority.
[10:37] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Hm. Can you give an example, please?
[10:37] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Players with Security characters see someone behaving badly. Where's the line where it goes from annoying to "I should maybe do something"?
[10:38] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: That's a good point, as well, yes. There's the issue of...are they glorified bouncers for the bar, or do they just get involved when people start physically attacking each other?
[10:38] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: And if they should maybe do something, there's a lack of guidelines for WHAT they could do.
[10:38] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Agreed.
[10:39] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I think there needs to be, it's just a question of where the line is drawn. Something else for the 'Crowdsourcing', I think.
[10:40] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: There've already been a few heated discussions, by now. But a serious and mindful discussion to lay out the specifics would be good.
[10:41] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Again, with an eye toward balance; if it gets too detailed, it becomes tedious.
[10:41] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I agree completely. And then it becomes less roleplay, and more ruleplay.
[10:42] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Heh, a topic I had in mind for a future posting, 'how much realism is too much in roleplaying?"
[10:42] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Ah. Now *that* is a popular topic of debate.
[10:43] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: In the case of Security, they should act in a timely and realistic fashion, but perhaps the slack should be in the prosecution afterward?
[10:44] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: That's not a bad idea at all. With any luck, that'll break the previously mentioned vicious cycle.
[10:44] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Someone is drunk and disorderly, maybe punches someone, they get arrested. But instead of six months in the brig, they spend the night in a cell, a day or three tops?
[10:44] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Absolutely.
[10:44] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: We've had a lot of cases of people being left in the brig indefinitely.
[10:45] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: An idea mentioned by Chris, by the way, credit where credit's due. And...yes, a returning player from hiatus asked me a couple days ago if her character was still in jail.
[10:46] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: She'd been away for close to a couple months.
[10:46] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Yeah, it's a big problem we've had. Maybe we should encourage a full-time 'Jailer' character. Someone who runs the brig on the Starbase. Lets them out, deals with them, et cetera.
[10:46] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Would be part of Security, too, yes?
[10:47] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I'd say so, yeah. I mean, we saw that kind of character on TNG and Voyager all the time. I mean, presumably it was a rotation, but I don't see why it couldn't be full-time.
[10:48] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: There's an idea. Now, to avoid leaving Tactical completely out, easy to play or no...what should a Tactical character be doing?
[10:48] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: What would the differences be for such a post on a ship versus a base?
[10:49] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Base-wise, Tactical is often folded in with Strategic Operations, which tends to be...Tactical/Fleet Intelligence.
[10:49] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Ship-wise, it tends to mostly be pointing the guns at stuff and making pretty lights. Besides the obvious maintenance of said weapons, and...commonsense things.
[10:50] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Is there any reason why Tactical took over communications in TNG that you know of? That always confused me.
[10:50] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I assumed it was because Worf kept slapping everyone else who tried to answer the phone.
[10:50] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Voyager, we saw everyone answer it. Tactical, Ops, Engineering, the Captain, the Tree, the Helm.
[10:52] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: In the Eng/Ops piece, Ayche and I talked about how Operations tended to overlap other posts. Would it make more sense to give Ops the comm, since Tactical has lots to do already?
[10:53] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: It would, although I'm not a big fan of the way Ops is often played. It seems to be...a backup for everything else.
[10:54] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Which touches on the thought that duties should be more clearly, if only basically, defined to avoid unnecessary overlap.
[10:55] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: One hundred percent agreed.
[10:56] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Any moments that stand out in your mind where Tac/Sec was played/GMd for in a way that stood out in your mind? In a good way, that is.
[10:57] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: In all honesty, they're often kind of... 'Point those guns and fire at that thing. Kthx. Back to work'.
[10:58] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I don't often see them played as heroes-of-the-day.
[10:59] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: In the weekly tabletop Star Trek RPG I play in, for example, the one Tactical officer saw the spotlight for being particularly clever in a strategic capacity in a running ground fight.
[10:59] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Oh really?
[11:00] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: The GM would tell us what we saw, he'd make deductions as to what the enemy was doing (and be right a LOT) and came up with ways to confound the enemy and outmaneuver them.
[11:02] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Gave a real feeling for how Tactical could mean more in a ground situation.
[11:02] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: That's good. I'd like to see people being offered more opportunities like that, rather than the Captain immediately looking for solutions through engineering and such.
[11:03] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: And Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan showed an example of the value of strategy and tactics in space, in the final space battle. Thinking outside the box, and all.
[11:03] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Tactical, whilst the easiest to play, seems to be...a last resort, I suppose.
[11:03] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Absolutely. And I know a lot of Tac players have fantastic ideas.
[11:04] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: There's a treasure hoard of ideas out there for all the classes, the trick is mining them.
[11:05] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Agreed.
Some much needed insight into the plight of Starbase Security, and some thoughts on both Tactical and Security career tracks. And just like the previous two installments, This is by no means a complete discussion or resolution on the topic, but the start of what we hope is a dialog on the matter, to see what other solutions or ideas people come up with.
So make yourself heard! If you have ideas, or have seen interesting ways to address the engagement of Tactical or Security characters in various RPs, post them in the comments. If you have ideas, questions, suggestions, or stories of personal experience where the GM sought to involve the Tactical or Security classes, and knocked it out of the park, we'd love to hear your thoughts!
As you might recall, a little while ago HSZMV and I did a bit of brainstorming over how to better involve and engage characters of the science and medical professions. Ayche and I continued the train of thought with a brainstorming session on Engineering and Operations. The responses were particularly and delightfully thoughtful, and certainly helpful. With that in mind, I figured why not expand the thought to the other career tracks in STO? Has there been cases where a GM or player has found it difficult to engage a tactical officer, or security officer? Or, do Gms or players find themselves in a rut as to how to engage such characters?
Again, you'd think there wouldn't be an issue with either of these occupations. Tactical handles ship to ship warfare, weapons and shields, as well as the comm channels. Security are basically MPs, handling law enforcement, ship and facility security, and prisoner escort/transport. What difficulties might a player or GM stumble into?
For this brainstorming, I had a sit-down with Kal, fellow Pathfinder and a longtime veteran of STO and the fleet, for his insight into the roleplaying aspect of his preferred character track. And like last time, I posted the conversation here, so you can follow the train of thought as we threw ideas at the wall to see if anything stuck.
[10:05] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Today's part three of the "So you want to play..." series, covering Tactical and Security professions.
[10:06] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Previous posts covered difficulties engaging the roles in RP, as well as creative ideas on how to do so. And unexpectedly, how one track can overlap or interfere with engaging another...
[10:06] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: ...as in the case of Ops and Science.
[10:06] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: What kind of hurdles can a Tac/Sec character run into, you think?
[10:07] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Other than a sense of bad timing? Never one around when you need one... Mostly I would say 'lack of co-operation', in regards to the Sec aspect.
[10:08] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: I was going to say, I see the bigger hurdles in the way of Security characters.
[10:09] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Pure Tactical characters tend to be much easier to play. There's very little that can actually get in the way of what they're doing, and their roles usually overlap more with +
[10:09] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: other departments, particularly engineering.
[10:09] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: One thing I seem to notice with Security is a lack of acknowledgment for their authority in a given situation. Effectively, they should be treated like MPs would be in a real military scenario.
[10:10] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I completely agree, and I think that's the biggest problem, and what puts so many people off playing characters.
[10:10] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Characters of that nature, rather.
[10:11] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: My dad was US Navy, which is what Roddenberry largely based Starfleet off of, and Captains and other officers visiting a base had to respect their positions.
[10:11] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Absolutely. We've always tried to promote the same ideal here, waaaaaay back before we were the Storytellers, even. Port Authority.
[10:12] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Also seems to be a difficulty balancing story ideas with not making the Security staff look incompetent.
[10:13] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Yeah, I've seen very few stories where security have done anything other than A) Be murderised, B) Be unimaginably inept, or C) Pretty much just dragged someone off to a cell.
[10:14] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: And with the large number of RP ideas that involve someone causing a mess on the base, people playing Security feel there's a lack of any faith at all in their ability.
[10:14] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I can understand why it's hard to work them in, in a satisfactory manner, but I can't help but feel that it's the most overlooked profession.
[10:14] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Absolutely.
[10:15] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Which leads to a vicious cycle of...No respect > Nobody wants to play one > Never one around when needed > No respect > So on.
[10:15] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: I guess my first reaction to that was "what, more overlooked than science?" But I guess it's not as noticeable because Tactical has a better visibility.
[10:16] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Tactical is easily the easiest profession to get into, especially for newer, less experienced roleplayers. The security aspect, not so much. And it's a huge shame, because Sec is such an +
[10:17] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: important part of life in Starfleet, especially on a ship or Starbase.
[10:18] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Always found myself hoping for the episode where a Security extra would subvert the stereotype and brutally beat the villain senseless with his own boot or something...
[10:19] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Huh. That...I kinda like that idea.
[10:19] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Would have been amazing in a TNG episode, wouldn't it have?
[10:20] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: If it had just been that weedy little Ensign everyone thought would die from allergies, rather than a phaser blast.
[10:21] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: So, realizing there's a vicious cycle impairing Security, what can be done to break it? We have a couple of brave players trying to already, but how can it be made easier?
[10:21] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Besides the obvious 'People should give people playing security more respect/actually pay attention to what they're saying'?
[10:22] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Well, that, obviously...
[10:22] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: That's an excellent question, to be honest.
[10:23] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Maybe that's something we should be asking the fleet at large. Plenty of them have tried to play Security in the past, and failed. They must have opinions.
[10:24] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Admittedly there have been past examples where Security was played in a manner that harmed credibility. None of the current Security characters, but it's happened.
[10:24] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I...yes. I can recall a couple of instances.
[10:25] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Speaking of which...where, if at all, should regular military fit into Security? There've been MACOs and Marines used for the purpose. Is there precedent?
[10:26] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: We have...had that debate many, many times. I believe the usual way of dealing with it is to have a MACO/Marine leader, who reports to the head of security, or directly to the XO, since they +
[10:26] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: obviously aren't Starfleet Officers, and therefore have no real place in the ship's hierarchy. I could be mistaken, however.
[10:27] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: That's something I don't think I've heard yet; MACO and Marines aren't Starfleet?
[10:28] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: They're Starfleet. As I understand it though, they're not officers. More like...Enlisted, I suppose.
[10:29] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: A disclosure, I haven't seen past episode 3 of ENT, but I'm given to understand ENT is where MACO makes it's debut?
[10:30] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Again, this is just as I understand it. And yes, I believe it is. I've seen Enterprise, but tend to treat anything from it as...soft canon, so.
[10:30] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: In that series, at least, they were completely separate from the Officers, and seemed to be subordinate to them. Whether that's changed, I have no idea.
[10:31] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: When it comes to ENT, seems to be a lot of people's opinion. The arrogant Vulcan grated on me...
[10:31] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Not to mention the magical appearance of Ferengi and Borg.
[10:31] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: 'They didn't use their name, it doesn't count!'. It doesn't work that way.
[10:31] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: There's been no canon appearance of MACO timelinewise after ENT, so there's very little to draw on.
[10:32] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Yeah. I know some people have played them as dual...uh.
[10:32] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: As both MACOs and Starfleet Officers at the same time. Words. So they'd have the rank of...Major, and the rank of Lieutenant Junior Grade, or something.
[10:33] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: I've seen one or two people 'dual-class' that way, as it were. Is there a real-world precedent for such a split career?
[10:33] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I have actually never looked into it. I absolutely should have.
[10:34] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I'm not sure what it would actually be the equivalent of.
[10:36] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Hm. Something to look into or get feedback on.
[10:36] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Agreed.
[10:37] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Another thing I've seen is a lack of awareness in where the boundaries are for Security's authority.
[10:37] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Hm. Can you give an example, please?
[10:37] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Players with Security characters see someone behaving badly. Where's the line where it goes from annoying to "I should maybe do something"?
[10:38] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: That's a good point, as well, yes. There's the issue of...are they glorified bouncers for the bar, or do they just get involved when people start physically attacking each other?
[10:38] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: And if they should maybe do something, there's a lack of guidelines for WHAT they could do.
[10:38] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Agreed.
[10:39] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I think there needs to be, it's just a question of where the line is drawn. Something else for the 'Crowdsourcing', I think.
[10:40] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: There've already been a few heated discussions, by now. But a serious and mindful discussion to lay out the specifics would be good.
[10:41] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Again, with an eye toward balance; if it gets too detailed, it becomes tedious.
[10:41] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I agree completely. And then it becomes less roleplay, and more ruleplay.
[10:42] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Heh, a topic I had in mind for a future posting, 'how much realism is too much in roleplaying?"
[10:42] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Ah. Now *that* is a popular topic of debate.
[10:43] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: In the case of Security, they should act in a timely and realistic fashion, but perhaps the slack should be in the prosecution afterward?
[10:44] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: That's not a bad idea at all. With any luck, that'll break the previously mentioned vicious cycle.
[10:44] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Someone is drunk and disorderly, maybe punches someone, they get arrested. But instead of six months in the brig, they spend the night in a cell, a day or three tops?
[10:44] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Absolutely.
[10:44] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: We've had a lot of cases of people being left in the brig indefinitely.
[10:45] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: An idea mentioned by Chris, by the way, credit where credit's due. And...yes, a returning player from hiatus asked me a couple days ago if her character was still in jail.
[10:46] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: She'd been away for close to a couple months.
[10:46] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Yeah, it's a big problem we've had. Maybe we should encourage a full-time 'Jailer' character. Someone who runs the brig on the Starbase. Lets them out, deals with them, et cetera.
[10:46] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Would be part of Security, too, yes?
[10:47] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I'd say so, yeah. I mean, we saw that kind of character on TNG and Voyager all the time. I mean, presumably it was a rotation, but I don't see why it couldn't be full-time.
[10:48] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: There's an idea. Now, to avoid leaving Tactical completely out, easy to play or no...what should a Tactical character be doing?
[10:48] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: What would the differences be for such a post on a ship versus a base?
[10:49] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Base-wise, Tactical is often folded in with Strategic Operations, which tends to be...Tactical/Fleet Intelligence.
[10:49] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Ship-wise, it tends to mostly be pointing the guns at stuff and making pretty lights. Besides the obvious maintenance of said weapons, and...commonsense things.
[10:50] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Is there any reason why Tactical took over communications in TNG that you know of? That always confused me.
[10:50] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I assumed it was because Worf kept slapping everyone else who tried to answer the phone.
[10:50] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Voyager, we saw everyone answer it. Tactical, Ops, Engineering, the Captain, the Tree, the Helm.
[10:52] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: In the Eng/Ops piece, Ayche and I talked about how Operations tended to overlap other posts. Would it make more sense to give Ops the comm, since Tactical has lots to do already?
[10:53] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: It would, although I'm not a big fan of the way Ops is often played. It seems to be...a backup for everything else.
[10:54] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Which touches on the thought that duties should be more clearly, if only basically, defined to avoid unnecessary overlap.
[10:55] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: One hundred percent agreed.
[10:56] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Any moments that stand out in your mind where Tac/Sec was played/GMd for in a way that stood out in your mind? In a good way, that is.
[10:57] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: In all honesty, they're often kind of... 'Point those guns and fire at that thing. Kthx. Back to work'.
[10:58] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: I don't often see them played as heroes-of-the-day.
[10:59] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: In the weekly tabletop Star Trek RPG I play in, for example, the one Tactical officer saw the spotlight for being particularly clever in a strategic capacity in a running ground fight.
[10:59] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Oh really?
[11:00] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: The GM would tell us what we saw, he'd make deductions as to what the enemy was doing (and be right a LOT) and came up with ways to confound the enemy and outmaneuver them.
[11:02] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: Gave a real feeling for how Tactical could mean more in a ground situation.
[11:02] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: That's good. I'd like to see people being offered more opportunities like that, rather than the Captain immediately looking for solutions through engineering and such.
[11:03] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: And Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan showed an example of the value of strategy and tactics in space, in the final space battle. Thinking outside the box, and all.
[11:03] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Tactical, whilst the easiest to play, seems to be...a last resort, I suppose.
[11:03] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Absolutely. And I know a lot of Tac players have fantastic ideas.
[11:04] [Local] Six of One@geralynrhig: There's a treasure hoard of ideas out there for all the classes, the trick is mining them.
[11:05] [Local] Taev Rehu@Kal_Steel: Agreed.
Some much needed insight into the plight of Starbase Security, and some thoughts on both Tactical and Security career tracks. And just like the previous two installments, This is by no means a complete discussion or resolution on the topic, but the start of what we hope is a dialog on the matter, to see what other solutions or ideas people come up with.
So make yourself heard! If you have ideas, or have seen interesting ways to address the engagement of Tactical or Security characters in various RPs, post them in the comments. If you have ideas, questions, suggestions, or stories of personal experience where the GM sought to involve the Tactical or Security classes, and knocked it out of the park, we'd love to hear your thoughts!