test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
In search for the soul of the Klingon ships
autumnturning
Member Posts: 743 Arc User
Excessively interesting posting over on r/sto by one of our Cryptic Devs. Thread can be found HERE.
Since I don't have a reddit account, I'm going to address the question asked over here in this forum.
So ...
===
Q: Now, is it safe to say Klingons are "space cavemen" as a starting point?
A: No, it is not.
A more fair reading of Klingons would be to read their society as being fundamentally "expansionist" in that they always need to be looking (and moving) outwards ... lest they turn inwards upon themselves. By having an "Other" to struggle/fight with they can direct their own passions, drives and spirit "against" someone other than themselves. They are less interested in Exploration as some sort of noble pursuit for knowledge and understanding than they are interested in Conquest for the pursuit of bragging rights, trophies and triumphs.
In this respect, the allusion to Viking culture seems most apt, in that they would prefer to go out and kick over someone else than stay at home and kick over each other. The problem is that "staying home" and fighting amongst themselves is pretty much (galactically speaking) a Zero Sum Game ... while going out and "conquering new worlds" for the Greater Glory Of The Empire means an ever increasing pie (to fight over) for everyone to partake from. So I look at the Klingons as always looking "outwards" for new ... opportunities ... to enrich themselves and their society.
In the TOS "The Trouble With Tribbles" episode, Kirk says that in the competition that the Federation is in with the Klingons over Sherman's Planet, the Klingons are "savage and brutal, but most efficient" and that without the grain shipment stored on Deep Space Station K7 the Federation is very likely to "lose" the race to develop Sherman's Planet in the competition set up by the Organian Peace Treaty.
War is just "politics by other means" and even in the TOS era, it was stated with pride (by Kor!) that "war is a game, that Klingons know how to play well."
===
Q: Do you think Klingon ships should be inspired in Klingon weaponry for the invisible hand of Kahless to wield?
A: I wouldn't take things THAT far into the Spiritual Realm ... but there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with using weaponry as a starting point for Klingon ship designs.
Depending on the way that you look at a D7, if you squint you might see a relationship between THIS in the top view(s) ...
... and THIS ...
... which would then help explain part of the reason why people look at a D7 and just instinctively see "a weapon" redesigned at a ship. Obviously, there's a lot of Matt Jeffries incredible genius involved in completing the D7 look to be the iconic shape we all know (and still!) love today, including the underslung warp nacelles in their rectangular BOXES rather than being in cylindrical tubes (like you see on the Constitution cruisers), and so on ... but the basic planform is broadly representative of a double bladed axe when viewed from above.
Look at the Bortasqu' War Cruiser. THIS ...
... is evocative of THIS shape ...
... with a goodly bit of modification and artistic license. This is why when we look at Klingon ships, we don't see "creatures" (or birds) or something resembling a "living" thing. Instead, we see a WEAPON that contains a crew.
Speaking just for myself, I'd absolutely love it if the inspiration for the next iteration of (exclusively KDF) Klingon Raiders was evocative of THIS shape ...
... in which the (single, central) impulse engine trail formed the grip/tang of the shape, with everything forward of the hilt being the structure of the ship itself. Make it a flat, knife-like shape that looks like it's meant to "stab you" with forward swept "wings" attached to the aft of the ship and a central "blood groove" that goes all the way through, yielding a port/starboard hull arrangement between the wedge shaped triangular "saucer" up front and the blocky "engine compartment" at the rear.
Starting from inanimate objects, such as weapons like axes, hammers and knives ... but not swords(!) ... would aid with the intuitive understanding that these ships are not "living" ships or even meant to be evocative of a sense of "life" like you'd get from Romulan aesthetics and design (let alone Starfleet, with their "big head" saucer sections).
Only other pointer I'd give you on the aesthetics of Klingon ship design is if you can make the ships look like they are somehow CARVED as you move on down the timeline, you'll be doing yourself a tremendous favor. Things that look they have been forged, carved, knapped ... anything that looks like it has be purposefully SHAPED into an extremely FUNCTIONAL form, such as a Weapon, ought to be the way to go. So forged metals, hammered metals, carved wood and bone, knapped stones ... all of these things are extremely utilitarian. Their form is entirely subordinated to their function. They have a PURPOSE, and that purpose is immediately apparent even with the most cursory visual inspection. I'm thinking you'll have a hard time going wrong if you stick to "solid" looking shapes and forms evocative of different types of hand weapons, ranging from the primitive to the medieval.
===
Q: Are Klingon bridges nothing more than caves?
A: I always looked at Klingon bridge design, as seen in the TNG episode "A Matter Of Honor", as being an antithetical departure from the Galaxy Bridge. The Galaxy bridge was all light and sweeping/swooping curves and carpet and leather seats(!) ... and it just felt like a hotel (in space!). The Klingon bridge design was brutally utilitarian, with bare metal, gratings everywhere, and obvious structural reinforcements evocative of armor protection. It was still a "circular" bridge design with the captain on the central "throne" and harkening back to the TOS Constitution bridge (with the Science station behind the captain to the right, no less!), but it was meant to feel confined and claustrophobic and lacking in any sort of "privacy" at any of the stations. It was a set designed to say with every frame of film "Don't Get Comfortable" ... which was such a stark contrast with the Galaxy bridge.
The dark, indirect lighting on the bridge helped evoke not only the sense that the ship was Cloaked (and thus, "at home" in the darkness of space) but also the sense of being in an armored "tin can" of a submarine/destroyer, thereby lending the space a distinctly militaristic feel.
I would say they that Klingon bridges are not "caves" as you've postulated, but more sort of "darkened rooms filled with computer lights" that are very localized. Think of a Command & Control room on an aircraft carrier. It's "deep" in the ship, with no windows, and the room is kept dim to better see the "glow" of the lights on computer screens by their operators with less glare. The darkness of the room brings out a sense of shared purpose among the crew who are there to WORK instead of there to socialize.
So, no ... not a CAVE. Klingon bridges are very utilitarian spaces, but they are not "caves" per se. Above all, they are not "happy" places, like Starfleet bridges are made out to be, just in terms of aesthetics when looking at the room while it's empty. Klingon bridges are places where BUSINESS gets DONE ... and that "business" needs to include combat, at ANY moment ... so they should present both Readiness and Purpose.
===
Q: It has been pointed out the possibility of Napoleon complex. Do you think there's some of that too?
A: No.
Think of it this way.
Vulcan revere logic because they have to. Without logic ... what is a Vulcan? Short answer, an incredibly dangerous individual whose actions cannot be predicted and with passions they may not be able to control.
Do "modern" (i.e. post-TOS) Klingons revere honor the way they do because they have to in order to preserve their society? Was Klingon society dealt such a savage blow between TOS and TNG that in order to "guard" against what almost led them to destroy themselves, they settled on using Honor to reign in and control the worst aspects of their civilization ... much like how the Vulcans turned to Logic to save themselves from their worst impulses? Is that why "dishonorable" acts are so frowned upon in Klingon culture?
To bring this back to "Klingons are Space Vikings" ... consider that Klingons have the equivalent to Valhalla. To get to Sto'Vo'Kor you need to not only die with Honor, but also die a Warrior. Those who die in dishonor and disgrace are instead consigned to the Barge Of The Dead which ferries the "damned" to the Gates of Gre'thor, never to return. Considering what B'Elanna Torres encountered on her way to Gre'thor, it's not hard to imagine that all "right thinking Klingons" would value their honor so highly as to become one of the prime drivers of their entire culture. If all it takes is a few near death experiences to figure out what dishonor MEANS, then it's no wonder the entire Klingon race became obsessed with Honor.
The thing is, what are the "shortcuts" to achieving Honor, and thus a place in Sto'Vo'Kor?
Well ... fame certainly helps ... and how do you get to be famous, and have your name (and your deeds) remembered "forever" ...? Simple, do it the way the Vikings did it ... with songs and sagas.
Ever heard of Beowulf?
So no, I don't view the Klingons, as a culture or as a species, as having a Napoleon complex. What I do see them doing however is having an eternal/perpetual "competition" for Fame and Glory, so as to worthy of entry into Sto'Vo'Kor, which doesn't accept wimps, losers or cheaters (see: Valhalla). Tack on the requirement/pre-requisite of being a Warrior in order to accomplish that and you get a Warrior Culture that is always looking around for the next Victory against SOMEBODY and you've got an entire society primed to "test their mettle" at almost every opportunity that presents itself.
Think of it this way. Starfleet says they want to Explore simply for the purpose of Discovery. Klingons would also want to Explore, but they would be after the opportunities for Conquest. In that respect, the Klingons would share a lot in common with the Terran Empire of the Mirror Universe (although the parallel isn't perfect, of course) ... just as I would expect the Klingons of the Mirror Universe to be the Explorers who make Discoveries for the Klingon Star Forces in the Mirror Universe.
So no, not a Napoleon complex. Instead, they are driven by the imperatives of their culture To Be Great ... lest they be forgotten and their names only whispered in shame and disgrace. That's a hell of a thing to have to live up to. It's not Ancestor Worship, but it's a hell of a Darwinian pressure cooker on their society.
Since I don't have a reddit account, I'm going to address the question asked over here in this forum.
*NOTE: This doesn't mean this is a direction Cryptic will necessarily take regarding Klingon ships. This is just personal curiosity.
So this is a situation I'm confronted when designing Klingon ships. Let's see if we can figure this one out by starting with something we know well, Romulans. Romulans are pretty much "space Romans" (at the end of their empire). They always try to look bigger than what they really are, rule by intimidation and their weapons are mainly hidden. Like Romans, they use birds as emblems. Like raptors they fly around out of sight, they watch you, attack you and then disappear leaving only bones behind. Romulans as a concept are really well defined.
Now, what can we say about Klingons (and this is where you guys come in)? Their emblem is something that resembles a weapon. They have strong family ties and are clan based. To me Klingons represent the lust for life in us humans. Strength, passion, pain, loyalty, love and hate. They prefer their food raw. They enjoy hunting. They drink a lot. They favor bladed weapons. They sing epic tales around bonfires (narrated history). Now, is it safe to say Klingons are "space cavemen" as a starting point?
Klingons revere their weapons. Their religions and cultures idolizes them. Do you think Klingon ships should be inspired in Klingon weaponry for the invisible hand of Kahless to wield? Are Klingon bridges nothing more than caves?
I'll stop here for a bit. Let's see what you guys think.
Real world comparisons are good. It allow us to grab related elements. For example a viking comparison allow us to grab visual reference from their ships.
It has been pointed out the possibility of Napoleon complex. Do you think there's some of that too?
So ...
===
Q: Now, is it safe to say Klingons are "space cavemen" as a starting point?
A: No, it is not.
A more fair reading of Klingons would be to read their society as being fundamentally "expansionist" in that they always need to be looking (and moving) outwards ... lest they turn inwards upon themselves. By having an "Other" to struggle/fight with they can direct their own passions, drives and spirit "against" someone other than themselves. They are less interested in Exploration as some sort of noble pursuit for knowledge and understanding than they are interested in Conquest for the pursuit of bragging rights, trophies and triumphs.
In this respect, the allusion to Viking culture seems most apt, in that they would prefer to go out and kick over someone else than stay at home and kick over each other. The problem is that "staying home" and fighting amongst themselves is pretty much (galactically speaking) a Zero Sum Game ... while going out and "conquering new worlds" for the Greater Glory Of The Empire means an ever increasing pie (to fight over) for everyone to partake from. So I look at the Klingons as always looking "outwards" for new ... opportunities ... to enrich themselves and their society.
In the TOS "The Trouble With Tribbles" episode, Kirk says that in the competition that the Federation is in with the Klingons over Sherman's Planet, the Klingons are "savage and brutal, but most efficient" and that without the grain shipment stored on Deep Space Station K7 the Federation is very likely to "lose" the race to develop Sherman's Planet in the competition set up by the Organian Peace Treaty.
War is just "politics by other means" and even in the TOS era, it was stated with pride (by Kor!) that "war is a game, that Klingons know how to play well."
===
Q: Do you think Klingon ships should be inspired in Klingon weaponry for the invisible hand of Kahless to wield?
A: I wouldn't take things THAT far into the Spiritual Realm ... but there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with using weaponry as a starting point for Klingon ship designs.
Depending on the way that you look at a D7, if you squint you might see a relationship between THIS in the top view(s) ...
... and THIS ...
... which would then help explain part of the reason why people look at a D7 and just instinctively see "a weapon" redesigned at a ship. Obviously, there's a lot of Matt Jeffries incredible genius involved in completing the D7 look to be the iconic shape we all know (and still!) love today, including the underslung warp nacelles in their rectangular BOXES rather than being in cylindrical tubes (like you see on the Constitution cruisers), and so on ... but the basic planform is broadly representative of a double bladed axe when viewed from above.
Look at the Bortasqu' War Cruiser. THIS ...
... is evocative of THIS shape ...
... with a goodly bit of modification and artistic license. This is why when we look at Klingon ships, we don't see "creatures" (or birds) or something resembling a "living" thing. Instead, we see a WEAPON that contains a crew.
Speaking just for myself, I'd absolutely love it if the inspiration for the next iteration of (exclusively KDF) Klingon Raiders was evocative of THIS shape ...
... in which the (single, central) impulse engine trail formed the grip/tang of the shape, with everything forward of the hilt being the structure of the ship itself. Make it a flat, knife-like shape that looks like it's meant to "stab you" with forward swept "wings" attached to the aft of the ship and a central "blood groove" that goes all the way through, yielding a port/starboard hull arrangement between the wedge shaped triangular "saucer" up front and the blocky "engine compartment" at the rear.
Starting from inanimate objects, such as weapons like axes, hammers and knives ... but not swords(!) ... would aid with the intuitive understanding that these ships are not "living" ships or even meant to be evocative of a sense of "life" like you'd get from Romulan aesthetics and design (let alone Starfleet, with their "big head" saucer sections).
Only other pointer I'd give you on the aesthetics of Klingon ship design is if you can make the ships look like they are somehow CARVED as you move on down the timeline, you'll be doing yourself a tremendous favor. Things that look they have been forged, carved, knapped ... anything that looks like it has be purposefully SHAPED into an extremely FUNCTIONAL form, such as a Weapon, ought to be the way to go. So forged metals, hammered metals, carved wood and bone, knapped stones ... all of these things are extremely utilitarian. Their form is entirely subordinated to their function. They have a PURPOSE, and that purpose is immediately apparent even with the most cursory visual inspection. I'm thinking you'll have a hard time going wrong if you stick to "solid" looking shapes and forms evocative of different types of hand weapons, ranging from the primitive to the medieval.
===
Q: Are Klingon bridges nothing more than caves?
A: I always looked at Klingon bridge design, as seen in the TNG episode "A Matter Of Honor", as being an antithetical departure from the Galaxy Bridge. The Galaxy bridge was all light and sweeping/swooping curves and carpet and leather seats(!) ... and it just felt like a hotel (in space!). The Klingon bridge design was brutally utilitarian, with bare metal, gratings everywhere, and obvious structural reinforcements evocative of armor protection. It was still a "circular" bridge design with the captain on the central "throne" and harkening back to the TOS Constitution bridge (with the Science station behind the captain to the right, no less!), but it was meant to feel confined and claustrophobic and lacking in any sort of "privacy" at any of the stations. It was a set designed to say with every frame of film "Don't Get Comfortable" ... which was such a stark contrast with the Galaxy bridge.
The dark, indirect lighting on the bridge helped evoke not only the sense that the ship was Cloaked (and thus, "at home" in the darkness of space) but also the sense of being in an armored "tin can" of a submarine/destroyer, thereby lending the space a distinctly militaristic feel.
I would say they that Klingon bridges are not "caves" as you've postulated, but more sort of "darkened rooms filled with computer lights" that are very localized. Think of a Command & Control room on an aircraft carrier. It's "deep" in the ship, with no windows, and the room is kept dim to better see the "glow" of the lights on computer screens by their operators with less glare. The darkness of the room brings out a sense of shared purpose among the crew who are there to WORK instead of there to socialize.
So, no ... not a CAVE. Klingon bridges are very utilitarian spaces, but they are not "caves" per se. Above all, they are not "happy" places, like Starfleet bridges are made out to be, just in terms of aesthetics when looking at the room while it's empty. Klingon bridges are places where BUSINESS gets DONE ... and that "business" needs to include combat, at ANY moment ... so they should present both Readiness and Purpose.
===
Q: It has been pointed out the possibility of Napoleon complex. Do you think there's some of that too?
A: No.
Think of it this way.
Vulcan revere logic because they have to. Without logic ... what is a Vulcan? Short answer, an incredibly dangerous individual whose actions cannot be predicted and with passions they may not be able to control.
Do "modern" (i.e. post-TOS) Klingons revere honor the way they do because they have to in order to preserve their society? Was Klingon society dealt such a savage blow between TOS and TNG that in order to "guard" against what almost led them to destroy themselves, they settled on using Honor to reign in and control the worst aspects of their civilization ... much like how the Vulcans turned to Logic to save themselves from their worst impulses? Is that why "dishonorable" acts are so frowned upon in Klingon culture?
To bring this back to "Klingons are Space Vikings" ... consider that Klingons have the equivalent to Valhalla. To get to Sto'Vo'Kor you need to not only die with Honor, but also die a Warrior. Those who die in dishonor and disgrace are instead consigned to the Barge Of The Dead which ferries the "damned" to the Gates of Gre'thor, never to return. Considering what B'Elanna Torres encountered on her way to Gre'thor, it's not hard to imagine that all "right thinking Klingons" would value their honor so highly as to become one of the prime drivers of their entire culture. If all it takes is a few near death experiences to figure out what dishonor MEANS, then it's no wonder the entire Klingon race became obsessed with Honor.
The thing is, what are the "shortcuts" to achieving Honor, and thus a place in Sto'Vo'Kor?
Well ... fame certainly helps ... and how do you get to be famous, and have your name (and your deeds) remembered "forever" ...? Simple, do it the way the Vikings did it ... with songs and sagas.
Ever heard of Beowulf?
So no, I don't view the Klingons, as a culture or as a species, as having a Napoleon complex. What I do see them doing however is having an eternal/perpetual "competition" for Fame and Glory, so as to worthy of entry into Sto'Vo'Kor, which doesn't accept wimps, losers or cheaters (see: Valhalla). Tack on the requirement/pre-requisite of being a Warrior in order to accomplish that and you get a Warrior Culture that is always looking around for the next Victory against SOMEBODY and you've got an entire society primed to "test their mettle" at almost every opportunity that presents itself.
Think of it this way. Starfleet says they want to Explore simply for the purpose of Discovery. Klingons would also want to Explore, but they would be after the opportunities for Conquest. In that respect, the Klingons would share a lot in common with the Terran Empire of the Mirror Universe (although the parallel isn't perfect, of course) ... just as I would expect the Klingons of the Mirror Universe to be the Explorers who make Discoveries for the Klingon Star Forces in the Mirror Universe.
So no, not a Napoleon complex. Instead, they are driven by the imperatives of their culture To Be Great ... lest they be forgotten and their names only whispered in shame and disgrace. That's a hell of a thing to have to live up to. It's not Ancestor Worship, but it's a hell of a Darwinian pressure cooker on their society.
THE Balanced Budget Build
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
0
Comments
I see Klingons like that. They do what they do (following a code of honor, relentless conquering, extreme celebration) because any other way is just distasteful and wrong.
"Space Cavemen" seems like it is missing the point entirely. Vikings does seem more apt, as they also were known to conquer and have extreme celebrations.
I see minimalist crew quarters and bridges as them seeing no use for comfort when they're "working." They're pretty serious about it when they're doing their thing.
And Napoleon Complex? Um....no. I've never seen that.
Heh.
"Is the Klingons-as-monsterplay truer?"
"No ... noooo. Quicker. Easier. More seductive. If once you start down the Monster Side path, forever will it control your creativity. Consume you it will! As it did the Cryptic Developer Apprentice(s) ..."
The TOS series set up the Klingons as an Opposition Culture, who did not "share" the same Values as Starfleet. They were the/an OTHER ... in the sense that they were Foreign ... and were a rival power to the Federation. That doesn't make them "monsters" (per se), but it does make them DIFFERENT from the culture we were exposed to aboard NCC-1701. And as soon as you start angling towards an US vs THEM dichotomy, you swing the doors wide open to making "THEM" decidedly inhuman and thus ... monsters.
But Klingons are NOT monsters ... nor should they be viewed through the lens of Klingons-as-monsterplay like you assert. I agree, that doing so is a First Order Fallacy. You can take the view that Klingons are "savages" if you want, but if you do that, you're going to have to also accept that they ought to be NOBLE Savages, and not just "evil" savages, if you want to present them correctly.
To be fair, pretty much ANY post on these or any other forums is going to be an "incomplete analysis" of Klingon culture, society and aesthetics. Why? Because even an entire BOOK (or series of them) isn't going to completely encapsulate everything there is to know about them. There's always going to be additional elements that you can throw into the stew pot for "seasoning" of the understanding of the species and the society.
Note that what I wrote doesn't EXCLUDE anything related to Mok'bara, or the spiritual side of that art of movements. Instead, I was merely addressing the demonstrated underlying influences (as I see them) that inspired the Klingon Ship Designs that we know and have (complete with pictures!). Those were the questions that were asked, and so those were the answers that I focused on.
Besides ... how are you going to express Mok'bara, a ground-based set of movements for a humanoid figure and frame operating in a gravity well, in the shaping and design of a starship's hull, which isn't intended to be flexible and change shapes? I'd argue that the closest you could get to expressing the one in the other would be in how the ship "flies" through space, and turns and moves and maneuvers ... not in terms of what the ship itself "looks like" when sitting in a dry dock. Thus, you can make the ship "dance" when it is flown, perhaps, but that's something that is expressed in MOVEMENT, rather than in stillness.
And Michael Dorn wasn't "wrong" about wanting to introduce that element into the understanding of the culture and mentality of the Klingons. It gave the society a structure and a set of motivations that could then be worked with more reasonably/responsibly, rather than just making it up on the fly for the sake of the Script Of The Week. It gave the presentation of the Klingons what they needed most at that point ... CONTINUITY.
If that's true, then that's because doing so is "Quicker. Easier. More seductive." than actually doing your homework and reaching for a deeper understanding of where THEY (the Klingons) come from and the motivations behind what they do. That sort of thing is just corner cutting, plain and simple, until there are no corners left to cut (and all you've got left is a rounded spheroid).
In other words ... LAZY DESIGN and LAZY STORYTELLING.
However ... that's *NOT* what we've got here, in this instance. Instead, we've got a Developer who asked for input to aid understanding of the aesthetics that go into Klingon Starship Design. To me, that says that we've got a Developer who DOESN'T want to go the "Quicker. Easier. More seductive." route, and who instead wants to really get their hands and head around what makes the culture's and the society's design imperatives get expressed in the way that they are and have been portrayed.
I would hope that everyone here in these forums would not only appreciate that but also approve of the effort required to do that ... and want to participate in the discussion of the specific issue(s) in constructive ways. Why? Because we could get a better game out of the results of our collective and collaborative efforts.
We can quibble all we want to over whether the original posting on r/sto should have been done over here in this forum all we want ... but that's just a "turf battle" over which forum is a better place for constructive criticism. I'd rather sidestep the point entirely and just simply "participate" in the discussion in a constructive fashion. Since I couldn't do that over on r/sto ... I brought the discussion here, to continue and expand upon it.
Here's hoping that @pwlaughingtrendy will notice and pass a note to our ship design developer, letting them know to come over here (too!) and have a look at what we've got to say.
Even better yet, let's "say useful things" while we're at it, such that coming here will be worth the developer's time (which is a precious, finite resource)!
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
More like "more conversation" happening at a higher standard of discourse with a better signal-to-noise ratio happening over there than over here. As of this posting, over here we're struggling to get out of single digits on responses. Meanwhile, over on r/sto, the original thread is up to 104 responses.
If you were doing a survey, where would you go?
That said, I did see that our interested Developer posted again ...
/em looks around expectantly ...
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
I am sure they have it translated and explained somewhere on the internet.
I been reading this Klingon forum over here, a bit, though it is not as active, any more...
NOW, those guys get a lot more in depth about things. If you want "in depth".
http://www.klingon.org/smboard/index.php?topic=197.0
I wish I had more time to read....been busy, lately.
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
The expansionist habits and values of the Empire are the expansionist habits and values of the Federation, seen the way non-Federation worlds likely view the Federation. Every episode of TOS and TNG began with the Enterprise transporting colonists, bringing supplies to colonists, or checking up with colonists who the Federation had lost contact with. Humanity wants new frontiers to tame, and Starfleet exists to put down threats to this endless expansionism with military force. That's it. For all the ink that's been spilled over the utopianism of Star Trek over the decades, it's not about a united galaxy; it's about one nation looking for room to grow its colonies and finding out that there are other nations who insist on their privilege to do the same. It becomes harder to see the other faction as monstrous when one stops looking at one's favorite faction through rose-tinted goggles.
Klingons are, or should be, based on the Mongols under Jhenghiz or Kublai. Vikings are too overused. Samurai even moreso. There aspects of Klingon culture we've seen in the series and films which fit perfectly with Mongol social mores and customs from the time of the Khan of Khans. These same aspects have to be 'explained' if we tack them onto either Viking or Samurai culture.
The Mongol military under Jhenghiz excelled in rapid movement and tactics which maximised speed, shock effect, and heavy firepower. They were adroit at mobility combat and fearless in the attack. They were also tough when defending and had a talent for mounting a flexible defense which minimized losses and damage. On the rare occasions they encountered enemies who were able to defeat them, the Mongols quickly adapted and emerged victorious.
So if I was asked what should be the soul of Klingon ships, I would reply, "Mongol".
The Mongols were (and still are, mainly) a nomadic people. They didn't build cities, they just made camp. They were horse nomads, meaning their people were "born to the saddle" so it's only to be expected that they'd be awesome archers from horseback. A lot of stuff flows from there, militarily speaking.
Klingons don't strike me as being horse nomads wandering the steppes of Qo'nos until ... well ... I'm not saying it was Aliens, but they were ALIENS!
Now, in terms of military tactics, strategy and doctrine, there is something to draw on in terms of how *successful* the Mongol "hordes" were when they went out campaigning. But as for the organizational a cultural roots/foundations of the Mongolian people as a Way Of Life ... not so much. The Klingons aren't exactly a nomadic people.
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
If you want to really oversimplify things, their culture and politics is a sort of "king of the hill" kind of deal with different "clans" (Houses) battling for supremacy. Call it conflict or call it competition, but there is a sort of constant "churn" going on in Klingon society. I'd argue that this means that one of the guiding principles of being a Klingon is "nothing succeeds like success!" which is essentially a way of simply needing to "win" and keep on winning, with the leaders being the ones who win and keep winning.
Like I said, somewhat Darwinian.
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
BTW, this is a Dev who is asking about designing Klingon ships. Which means there may be some more Klingon ships in the pipeline. I think he needs to hear as many viewpoints as possible. I realize Geko hates us. He and the beancounting suits at PWI would like nothing better than the 16% to go away forever. But as long as we are given an adult way to interact with the Devs, I feel compelled to try.
Forward firing weapons, and scary. They want you to be petrified and watch you blow up when they unload on you.
DHC/DBB/Torps. More forward weapons than aft. Kurak/T6 Mogh is pretty close, as far as weapons arrangement. So is the Matha. Closer if one of the aft weapons (on the Kurak) was switched to fore (which presents balance issues, admittedly).
Broadsiding isn't a Klingon-esque thing to do.
What is a Klingon?
A klingon is a warrior in all things and seeks to do the honorable thing at all times. This is not that hard to explain. There are many ways on can do battle, hand-to-hand, ship-to-ship, and at the negotiation tables(refer to Kang here). Every encounter from a simple hello to blasting away at each other in space, is a form of combat.
A klingon is probably the most honest among all the races, as they seek honor in all things. They hate liars and betrayers. There is no forgiveness here, and death is the only punishment. These are the two fastest ways to lose honor.
A klingon is passionate about their beliefs. Other races say that a klingon's honor is easy to offend. This is because they are passionate about their honor. The fastest way to anger a klingon is to insult them, their crew, their ship, their house, or The Empire. Their passion runs deep for all of those.
A klingon is respectful. If you do not respect your equipment, your ship, your crew, and your enemy. Then you are going to be the first one to die in battle. The thing here is, to a klingon, everyone is a potential enemy.
A klingons honor runs just as deep as their passion. But for this, think of honor as reputation. Kahless had enough honor that his story has survived for more than a thousand years. This is a point of pride for a klingon, as it is what tells your enemy who you are. Think of this from a storytellers point of view, "Oh the stories that they will tell, and the songs that they will sing, for what you have done here."
Also when looking at how a klingon honor is a part of their society. Remember there are unspoken rules that goes with this.
1) Face your enemy, evenly and squarely.
2) Do not cover your face, so that your enemy may know who to curse in the afterlife.
3) Never attack from behind.
4) Respect and honor your enemy, because there can only be 1 victor.
Many will argue that it is not honorable for a klingon to use a cloaking device. To this always remember, "A lion does not openly dance the waltz, when it is stalking its prey."
There is a lesson here about honor from Gowron as well. That is the use of the black market, well to a klingon it is not really the black market. It's more of an information and business network. As there is very little that can't be bought and sold openly in Imperial Space. This is a point in the hunters direction. Because as a hunter you either sit and wait for your prey, or you seek it out where it lives.
Another point about honor here is the slave trade. Yes, klingons do partake of this trade. Though it is mainly the Orions that handle this. But there is honor in owning slaves, not the opposite as would say. Because for a klingon to own a slave means they are taking responsibility for that person's life. The slave of a klingon can cause their klingon master to lose honor. This is because the klingon is responsible not only for that slaves life, but their actions as well. This puts a slave in a member of the house category. Also note, the slave of a klingon can earn their freedom by gaining honor for that klingon and their house, or by honorable combat. If a slave kills a bekk in honorable combat. The slave is not to be be punished, as the Empire just lost a weak warrior and gained a stronger one. If slave kills someone in a manner that isn't honorable, then the slave is killed as well. This also shows the great length a klingon will go to, to honor their allies. The klingons do no seek to change the way of life of their allies. The Orions and their slave markets are a testament to this. As the klingons have done nothing to change their culture, but openly accepts it is as a part of their way of life.
Now, the one thing most people will go on and on about here is the cast separation. Warrior and Worker. Though the warrior cast does look down upon the working cast. They do not dishonor them, nor disrespect them. Because in their hearts they know, the workers are the reason they are able to be a Warrior. If they did not tend the fields, build the houses, and assemble and repair the ships, then a warrior would have to do it. Then there would be no more warriors. Not everyone is strong enough to be a warrior. This is what a klingon looks down upon. But they also know there is just as much honor in being a farmer, as there is in being a warrior. If Warriors are the Body of the Empire, then the workers are the heart that keeps that body alive.
Now, contrary to popular belief, a klingon will not prey upon any one they know to be weaker than them. They might rough them up some. But kill them, no, there is no honor in killing those weaker than you. Yes, I know, with that statement, I just not only destroyed what the Federation wants people to think of a klingon. It also explains why the Federation still exists. A klingon will not prey upon those weaker than them.
As to their excessive drinking. Well the life of a warior is generally not a very long life. So drinking and enjoying life, while you're still alive, is very important to them. And an old warrior is to be respected. They got to be old for a reason. They survived all their battles.
So when looking at a klingon and what it meas to be one. You have to jump around earth and take bits and pieces from the warrior casts that exist. The samurai, spartans, romans, the celts, vikings, and the native americans.
Now with this in mind, turn your attention to their ships. They are each designed to be predatory in nature. Even the four I designed last year in my Syndicate Science Support Vessel post, keeps to this tradition. A ship is like a sword, or armor, symbolic of the warrior that wields or wears it. That is why I designed those four ships, and any other ship I might design for the Empire as a more forward facing predator. As it was stated, broad sides are not facing your enemy. This is also why all the ships I design for the Empire can use cannons. You have to face your enemy in order to use them. So if you break down.
Cannons, staple of the Empire because you have to face your enemy. - Klingon
Dual Beams, same as cannons, but with more leeway for the gorilla type of tactic, hit and run. - Romulan
Beams, the very epitome of run and gun. - Federation
This is why klingons have more respect for the Romulans than they do the Federation. While the Romualns do use a more unhanded approach to combat, just their setup in general keeps them facing the enemy. Something that a klingon respects.
One can also apply a U.S. Army acronym to the klingons. L.D.R.S.H.I.P. aka Leadership.
Loyalty
Duty
Respect
Self-less Service(all things in service to your house and/or the Empire)
Honor
Integrity
Personal Courage.
The qapla' salute came about because klingons do not have a word for goodbye, so it was used as a conversation ending with others. But for a klingon, the conversation is over when one of the participants leaves. There is no goodbye, see you late, etc. The qapla' was just as way for a klingon to show respect to others when ending a conversation. On my klingon character I don't even use it. I might say, "Well, time to go do _____." and then walk away. But in general, I just use the latter part of that and walk away or go quite. The closest thing a klingon has to good bye is "maj ram" which translates to "good night."
P'taq, or the correct spelling of it petaQ, translates as epithet. While it is a curse word in klingonii, it allows it to be used in a variety of manners. It is one of the few words in the language that can be malleable. But also note, that "Pahtak", "Pathak", "p'tahk", "p'takh", "patahk", "pahtk", or "p'tak" are also ways to spell it. But petaQ is the only one with an actual translation.
For instance when Worf called a Dopterian a p'tak after he discovered the alien had broken into his quarters and had stolen several items belonging to him. I'm pretty sure he didn't mean "fool" here.
ep·i·thet
noun
an adjective or descriptive phrase expressing a quality characteristic of the person or thing mentioned.
"old men are often unfairly awarded the epithet “dirty.”"
synonyms: sobriquet, nickname, byname, title, name, label, tag
an epithet as a term of abuse.
"the woman begins to hurl racial epithets at them"
One driving factor for Klingon ship design is clearly the desire for efficient armor layouts. An optimized ratio between protected volume and surface area. Older Klingon designs have usally speric or semi spheric front ends, to optimize armor thickness for a given internal volume.
And that's where Cryptic designs so far fail.
Lets compare the Vor'cha and Crytics own design, the Tor'kaht:
The Vor'cha is sleek, large flat surfaces, sturdy, well armored bridge and mission module.
The Tor'kaht is a fat turkey with an inefficient armor layout. At least 2 times the surface area of an Vor'cha-> thinner armor protecting the internal systems. Shot traps all over the place.
It's as if one compares a simple AK-47 with iron sight to a pimped AR 15 with several optics, laser pointer, bipod and what have you.
Forward firepower and strong impulse engines are ususally a hallmark in Klingon design. Not so much in STO. Most battlercruisers come with beam spam optimized 4/4 layouts instead of the 5/3 they should have to at least somewhat resemble the sips we saw in the shows.
With the advent of the Omni-direcitional beam, one can have a cannon majority setup.
Tal'Shiar/Reman Resistance/Romulan Nemesis uniform, pls.
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7403/13262502435_5604548f2c_o.png
People who work using their own creativity sometimes get stalled. There are lots of reasons for this. Not going to take the time to list them all. Asking others for opinions is one way to get moving again.
With the "Give battlecloaking Raiders to everyone!", "You get a 1/200 chance for a KDF ship," "No, KDF, you can't play the expansion," and the "Admiralty gave everyone too much dilithium, nerf Contraband!" stuff going on, I'm not convinced they're ever going to touch KDF again, period. Wouldn't be surprised to log on and see it completely removed, at this point. /shrug
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
and for the idea that the quality and quantity of the responses on other forums is the reason why they should. what about the part where these are supposed to the official sto forums?
Good observation! Reminds me of an ominous bird with it's talons poised to grab something beneath it. The Vor'cha is a nice ship, but it loses that aspect because the warp nacelles are pitched out rather than in like the D7/K'tinga.
Again, the responses generated over at r/sto exceeded 100 in a day or two. We're struggling to generate more than 30 over here after 2 weeks has elapsed. Go figure.
Matt Jeffries both was (and still is!) a genius designer. 'nuff said.
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
Other than pointing out to other users who happen to bother reading this and venting a little there is no real reason to post anything here at all as they ignore the forums and the Klingon threads especially.
All that aside, historically Klingon ship design has stemmed from a general commonality that includes: main hull with mission pod on top, elongated neck with forward command center, warp nacelles jutting off to the sides and often downward...sometimes underslung. If you look at the Raptor, D7/K'tinga and Vor'cha class ships, they all seem to have these factors in some way shape or form. The exception to that rule of course is the Bird of Prey which is a ship class unto itself, a fast attack raider class starship. I think Cryptic, for most of the Klingon ships they've designed outside of canon, have tried to keep those standard elements in their designs. Even the strange looking Qib Intel Battle Cruiser has these elements although the neck is shortened quite a bit. The Mogh and the Kurak also have the standard Klingon design elements. The Tor'khat was a design anomaly. But...whether Klingon design is based on a battle axe, is debatable although you could argue that, because of their warrior roots, it may be plausible that their ships resemble such hand-held weaponry.
They really had a hit on their hands with the Kamarag, but they lost too much of the main hull which ended up appearing stick-like in comparison to the K'tinga and the Vor'cha's hull. The thicker neck and forward command center were an obvious evolution to the K'tinga's, especially the split K'mag version, which was fantastic.