test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
The Republic, The Empire, and other. Why do you like the side you do?
rosetyler51
Member Posts: 1,631 Arc User
There is kind of a civil war in this part of the forums between Romulan players about which side is right. This thread is not about that. It is about why do you think your side is right.
If you have looked at most of my post here you know where I stand. Republican willing to show a little favor toward Imperial officers. Not everyone that worked for the Romulan Star Empire was a Tal'Shiar dog.
Why do like the Republic over the other two? I did not look at or read a lot of Trek. Most of the info I have is Path of 2409 and the game. Before Hakeev and Sela I could kind of see myself joining the Empire. Starfleet and the KDF trying to stop them from using borg tech with Taskforce Omega handing out borg parts left and right came off as the biggest piece of two faced TRIBBLE ever.
Back somewhat on topic. Why do I like the Republic? They are good guys. This is the part where people would say "Just play Fed". Starfleet is not good. They try to be but with Section 31, Insane Admirals, the Taskforce Omega deal, and I'm sure I can think of more things.
Now here is the Republic. They are a group of people not fighting for ideals, "honor", greed, or power. They are fighting to not die. They are fighting to save a dying people. Their goal is not to bring back the good old days. They seek to become something better then own messy history and I can kind of understand that.
So why do you like the Republic, Romulan Star Empire, or Tal'Shiar?
If you have looked at most of my post here you know where I stand. Republican willing to show a little favor toward Imperial officers. Not everyone that worked for the Romulan Star Empire was a Tal'Shiar dog.
Why do like the Republic over the other two? I did not look at or read a lot of Trek. Most of the info I have is Path of 2409 and the game. Before Hakeev and Sela I could kind of see myself joining the Empire. Starfleet and the KDF trying to stop them from using borg tech with Taskforce Omega handing out borg parts left and right came off as the biggest piece of two faced TRIBBLE ever.
Back somewhat on topic. Why do I like the Republic? They are good guys. This is the part where people would say "Just play Fed". Starfleet is not good. They try to be but with Section 31, Insane Admirals, the Taskforce Omega deal, and I'm sure I can think of more things.
Now here is the Republic. They are a group of people not fighting for ideals, "honor", greed, or power. They are fighting to not die. They are fighting to save a dying people. Their goal is not to bring back the good old days. They seek to become something better then own messy history and I can kind of understand that.
So why do you like the Republic, Romulan Star Empire, or Tal'Shiar?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
i like the republic necause of their're goals, and the fact that romulan ships are beautiful and HUGE! i love huge ships!
i like kdf because.... i dunno, orions??? nah, the only thing i truly like about the kdf is the honorguard outfit
What I think causes the break we see on these forums is, none of them were recurring characters. The fact that the Romulans have been viewed as they have is in part due to having no Worf-type character among them, because let's be honest: if we were to judge the TNG Klingons by the likes of the House of Duras, Gowron, and such, we wouldn't have a very flattering picture of them. Worf served an important purpose as a balance to that, while the Romulans...didn't have a recurring character like that to help establish a more three-dimensional portrayal. The TOS commanders get brought up in these arguments a lot in particular, and then there's characters like this guy, even in TNG. But they were never recurring characters, much less main characters like Worf was for the Klingons!
Now, I do believe that more stereotypical and villainous Romulans do have a place, I just don't think that this is the only acceptable option for them. I like the Republic's portrayal most when it is a bit of a mix of the good-guy role and sneakier elements.
And it does have more 'typical' Romulan elements. Even the ever-maligned Tovan Khev has voiced lines for if you choose to execute Hassan the Undying on the spot in the storyline, and not the opposite, if I remember right. And they haven't been all fun and games at all times either, considering they prevent Shon from blowing up the Jouret gateway, try to claim the Jenolan sphere, and plant listening devices at the conference there.
Even moreso, the Republic's military likely overwhelmingly consists of Imperial Star Navy defectors and the ships and technology they take with them, with even Admiral Kererek and Commander Jarok among them. And Obisek, the leader of the Reman Resistance that joined up with the Republic, is on record as having and planning to use thalaron weaponry.
To say nothing of what may have once been on all those Falchion Dreadnoughts the Republic throws around, and what may be again if they get backed into a corner with no escape in sight again. Fortunately, thus far the intervention of the Federation and Klingon Empire has prevented the need for resorting to such extremism again.
If that changes...well.
It would not be the first time a Republic became an Empire, and you know what they say about those backed into corners.
It seems that a lot of people have decided that because they are the underdogs, and D'tan is fairly congenial, they are meant to be portrayed as perfect angels.
And that seems to color how people perceive them. Anytime they're not perfect angels, people freak out. Look at how some people reacted to D'Tan standing up for himself at a political summit.
To me, they are Romulan pride mixed with a small drop of Spock's relative sanity. They're more dangerous than the Empire ever was. They can be relatively good guys WITHOUT being Feds, and can be relatively bad WITHOUT being 2-dimensional villains. The shades of gray are what draw me in, whereas the Federation only has cartoon villains like Section31, and the Empire is basically the House of Mogh and billions of dishonorable jerks.
The ancestors of the Romulans and Remans left Vulcan in order to preserve their freedom of choice, rather than be forced to submit to the false orthodoxy of the distortion of Cthia which the Vulcan establishment was pushing on everyone. But even if the new orthodoxy had been authentic Cthia, some of them would still have left, because Cthia is idealistic to the point of naivete. The Republic offers the possibility of restoring that love of freedom to the Romulan and Reman people. That is a noble virtue, and one I support completely.
Thus, I side with the Republic and love of freedom.
I should keep a running tab of posts that prove I'm right.
Of course, people do the same thing with the Federation, and if I did a count of "everything is the Federation's fault because they're not perfect!" then I'd break the forums.
There's a lot of talk about how Romulans were pretty two dimensional in the later shows, but I never really found that. I always found them to range a wide spectrum of morality, rarely being shown as either completely good or completely evil. The TNG Romulans, perhaps more than any other culture in Star Trek, was morally grey - and that helped to make their stories so compelling.
The reason I prefer this portrayal to the Republic (or STO's Tal Shiar, for that matter) is because I find it invites far more interesting stories and characters. I don't really have anything against the Republic itself, but more with how it's portrayed - it tends to be depicted as absolutely justified in its actions, while the Tal Shiar is always horrible and evil. The Republic feels more like Star Wars than it does Star Trek.
It's not that the Republic is bad, or wrong, it's just doesn't have the depth or the conflicted character to it that I would prefer.
Just a matter of taste, I guess.
Of course we could dream of the type of Republic/ Empire/ TS we want to have, but I am afraid we will not find it in any case in the official background. For myself I prefer to see the Republic much more grey, too - fueling the conflict between the maior powers, rebuilding influence etc.
Honestly I don't quite see where the Space Hippies epithet comes from really. Okay so the scientists on New Romulus are a little enthusiastic with their nature projects. Isn't getting really into their work something that good scientists do? Just means that's what those NPCs are, not what the whole structure is.
As for the 'Romulans much be sneaky manipulative backstabbers," says who? Because Sela and Tomalak and Donatra were that way? That just means its a system that promotes that, doesn't mean that's what the species is. It'd be like looking at Washington DC and deciding that just means all humans are monomaniacal narcissistic suckups, rather than that's just the kind of person that flourishes under that system. I look at my NPCs, the earnest Tovan Khev, the boisterous bruiser Hiven, the uptight Satra, and figure Romulans can have just as many personality types as any other species.
So yeah, the Republic gives me the most opportunities and the least amount of Fascist Space Elves. Works for me.
Whew! Now that that's out of the way, I'll proceed.
I chose a KDF alignment for my first Rom. The other one is Fed. If I ever get around to using it again. Starfleet in STO is different from what I expected them to be. This is not a criticism, it is an opinion. I like using my Fed toons but somehow they just don't seem quite Star Trek enough most of the time. Whenever I play Starfleet in STO, everything feels off key just enough to jangle the experience a bit. Not enough seeking out or boldly going, I suppose. Comes from being a Trekkie first and then an STO player. Again, this is not a criticism but an opinion.
Why KDF? Because I have a lot more fun in STO with my Klink toons. Seriously, I never feel like I am going against the grain of what we've come to expect from the Empire. And the Roms as portrayed in STO seem to fit into this a lot better than they do the Starfleet side.
This character is why I don't play my Romulan any more. Tovan Khev is NOT my BFF! Get him off my bridge!
Except for DOFF missions where you lie to your allies, thalaron weapons, executing prisoners, trying to claim both Dyson Spheres, and that one mission where you fight another Republic captain.
. . . except for that very same mission set, where it points out that much of the Tal Shiar are just brainwashed rubes being manipulated by people like Hakeev.
The thing is, all of the TNG episodes where the Romulans have any depth whatsoever are informing how the Republic is portrayed, while all the rest of them (where they're just aliens of the week who are mean and evil and bad because they're mean and evil and bad) are informing what's left of the Empire.
Personally, I think that as a good decision. It lets you have an understandable point of view to work from without getting rid of every shade of gray, while also shedding a lot of the baggage that caused even Patrick Stewart to write a long letter about how lame Romulans are.
Honestly, I agree they need to play it up more, but some people just don't bother paying attention.
I love my Romulan Toons! I have both a KDF Aligned and a Fed Aligned Romulan, and I play both of them and enjoy both of them equally!
I would like nothing more, than too have just a "Romulan" toon, with no need for alignments, with a full range of ships, BoFF's, DoFF's and equipment.
Until (or if) that happens, both of my toons are first and foremost Romulan and they both support the Republic as the best hope for the long term survival our PEOPLE (which now includes our Reman brothers and sisters, and, yes, even certain Vulcan's as well)
I'll paraphrase from a movie here and simply say ... "Can't we all just get along?"
First, my fleet is Federation, so many things are easier to get.
Second, i always liked the idea of Vulcans and Romulans become closer to each other.
But if there where the option to stay independent i would have chosen it.
I never liked how the Federation has developed since TNG, so a alternative "good guys" faction would have been nice IMO.
(i just can't get along with Klingon "honor" concept, sorry)
Even better: Instead of let us choose between KDF and Fed, they should have let us choose between Romulan Republic and Romulan Empire.
As for me, I'm all for the Empire as far as Star Trek as a whole is concerned: I've loved the Romulans as they appear in TNG and "The Defector" & "Unification" are my primal episodes references (that and a bit of information taken from the lovely "Ways of D'Era").
The idea of an Alien Roman Empire in space, with all its contradictions between old Imperial Laws and a tecnology so high that could solve social and political problems, with the bonus of a spice of dictatorship paranoia all taken from how the States viewed the KGB, result for me in simply the best fantastic race ever conceived.
My approach to STO derives completely with the desire to have a chance to play from the Romulan point of view, in a way more comprehensive that other games have done since (notably, Armada I and Starfleet Command III).
Unfortunately for me, for STO, this means to accept at least the basics of what I think is the "Undead Rebirth" of the franchise I love, that has hit hard expecially on the Romulans: for me, even Nemesis it's really bad and I prefer to consider the end of the Dominion War the real timepoint for beginning of portray in my mind on how the Empire could possibly evolve.
But passing the first, demoralizing moment on having all the Romulans around you talking with grieve about their lost planet (and so interiorizing the idea that I won't be able to see and live on Romulus, despite all the temporal chances viewed during the series that could restore it in no time...), I found myself at overjoying all the little and precious moments, events, even just sentences that, during my play, bring me totally near to the game I wished to play... my first D'Deridex on all, of course.
So my real answer to the question is: the Republic.
It's still a strange concept for me, but I found that Cryptic had done quite a good job building this alternative to the horrific direction the franchise had taken in the movies, considering the premises that, I want to be clear another time, I absolutely don't like: the Empire Remnants viewed in this game its nothing compared to the old and canonic one. I personally found unconceivable that the Tal Shiar could become an army replacing the Star Navy and that will proceed on vexing his own kin in the manner we have all seen.
That said, what I crave now is of course to have this Romulans take the step further and become the Third (and perfectly equal to the other two) Power of the Alpha & Beta Quadrant as it was before. And for what I've seen with the Iconian Gateway, it's quite possible that this is going to happen...
I will love to have some new missions aimed to reclaim the old colonies and starbases, so to begin again to talk about Neutral Zones...
great post.
Moreover, let's be entirely clear just what Reunification would be. It's not "Romulans must give up all they are and become passionless pacifists" at all. Not at all. In order for Reunification to work, the first thing that must be done is restore Surak's teaching of Kol-Ut-Shan (Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations) to its rightful place in the system he created, among the Vulcans, so that the Romulan passion and willingness to fight when necessary are recognized as part of that Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations, and accepted as part of the same. There will never be Reunification if that does not happen.
In short, it is the Vulcans who must give, and not the Romulans. No other path to Reunification will ever work, apart from Romulans becoming Vulcans, and that's hardly the ideal which Spock taught, nor would it be an actualization of the ideal. It would be Romulans becoming other than Romulans. That's not Reunification.
I'm sick of hearing this "D'Tan wants us all to be Vulcans" TRIBBLE. It's not true. Reunification means that THE VULCANS have to stop being so arrogant and intolerant. What do Romulans have to do? Be ourselves.
And I must say, did you met another D'Tan than I (and others)? Wasn't he making the re-unification thing strong at Khitomer? Even BEFORE the Republic was really created (in sole-career-terms)? So I would say he make this thing very strong (although You are right - he did not say in detail what HE mean with re-unification - and that may be or may be not something other than the Vulcans)
Second I think what many people worry is the question why the Romulans - heirs of an Empire - should ever see the Vulcans as equal partners. Vulcan was never more than a planet, and I guess many people see them as not creating the Federation, but being absorbed and superior to the humans. What could they learn from them? From a Romulan point of view - nothing. And why re-unification with them while the children of the raptor still wasting their blood in needles wars against each other?
Third the exodus from Vulcan was the defining moment of the Romulans (and Remans). It defined what they are and what they ever want to be. Different from Vulcan under Surak. And it is hard to believe that the Vulcans will ever give up what THEY defined as core of their soul.
The Syrranite Reform on Vulcan is still ongoing. Until it began, the orthodoxy established by the Vulcan establishment was a distortion of Surak's teachings. Some of that distortion continues to linger. Vulcans live an average of 200 years, after all, so such a reform movement wouldn't be complete as quickly as it would be with shorter-lived races like Humans. That the Syrranite Reform has not yet been completed is obvious from the attitudes and speech of arrogant racists like T'Nae. It is my hope that, when complete, the Syrranite Reform will have re-enshrined Surak's teaching of Kol-Ut-Shan.
However, I am not a Reunificationist (and I will remain a Romulan apart if need be). I simply dislike seeing the movement misrepresented by such a ludicrous caricature.
There's hope there though as well. The part where T'nae apologizes might be my favorite line in the game, both for the depth it adds to the particular character and how it shows the precedent of what others are learning to see the Republic as. Wonderful little vignette.
Forgiveness is all fine and well, but I don't think everyone's ready for that. And not everyone's ready to merge back into one culture just yet I think. Romulans and Vulcans are rather drastically different culturally at this point.
Several of your views are erroneous.
1. The Ancestors of the Romulans -- Not a single group, but at least 3 distinct groups left Vulcan over Cthia, whether it were the authentic teachings of Surak or the distorted version pushed by the Vulcan establishment. To assert that Surak lost his life "at the hands of what would become the Romulans" is thus nonsense. Even if one or more persons in one of those groups were responsible (an assertion still very much in doubt), to paint all of the individuals, much less all of the groups, as being responsible, is so wrong as to be outrageous.
2. Even during Surak's lifetime, his teachings were (a) misunderstood by some through innocent misapprehension, (b) twisted by others for their own nefarious ends, and (c) cherry-picked by others whose motivations were a blend of good and bad. Had Kol-Ut-Shan been properly advocated in those days before The Sundering, there would have been no need for The Sundering. Logic dictates this -- both Vulcan "Logic" and real-world academic Logic. That this is so should be obvious. A doctrine which celebrates "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations" would not have allowed, much less advocated, the efforts at forced conversion to Cthia (or what went by the name) which ultimately drove ALL of the different groups who left in The Sundering to leave. If those who acted in Surak's name had acted in accord with his teachings, they would not only have refrained from this effort to force everyone on the planet to conform to their "interpretation" of Cthia, they would have welcomed the dissent.
3. D'Tan was elected as leader of the Republic before the attack on Virinat, by those very military personnel who became disgusted with the Tal'Shiar, its overweening authority, and its abuse of that authority.
4. Reunification does not necessitate uniformity. While some Romulans definitely would want to conform to Cthia, not all would, and attempting to paint the movement as one which would require all concerned to merge into one culture is either a gross misunderstanding of the movement or a transparent effort at fear tactics so prevalent in propaganda.
It wasn't a stray assassins bullet we are talking about. Surak was killed by radiation poisoning from an atomic bomb attack. It's no small secret that the events that split the Vulcans into Romulans and Vulcans was a very, very bloody affair.
We are talking about a timeframe when Surak was still around. He was the head of the movement and controlled his followers and as such would have a great deal of sway over policy. There's no mention of 'forced conversion' in any of the movies or series as far as I know, so I'm going to have to assume that that's either some revisionist secondary material or unsupported wishful thinking because it directly contradicts the shows.
We know from the shows that Surak his disciples to preach his philosophy-and that many of these followers were murdered by those who opposed him. We also know that there was a series of brutal wars going on during this timeframe. It's quite evident by the goings-on during this time that there were many who opposed Surak's teachings, and that such opposition was expressed chiefly through violence. This was all established in TOS The Vulcans eventually fought back and drove them from the planet.
At any rate, all this stuff about Vulcans needing to get closer to Surak's teachings as a prerequisite to reunification with the Romulans is silly, because they were closer culturally to the Romulans before the reformation. Heck they even had Romulans controlling the government for a while.
So D'tan was 'elected' by military commanders? That doesn't sound much different than how officials were appointed under the old Star Empire.
Reunification heavily implies some exchange of cultural values, and there would justifiably be some concern as to which side (Romulans or Vulcans) the cultural diffusion would be coming from chiefly. We have a pretty good idea of what a Romulan-run Vulcan society would look like from ENT with the militaristic, unpleasant Vulcans, and the Romulan reunificationists from TNG were marked by their rather 'federation-like' ideals and studies of Vulcan texts. I think it's safe to say that most of various reunification movements over the years were attempts to either make Romulan more Vulcan, or Vulcans more Romulan, and D'Tan's vision is rather evident both from his past and expressed views. I can imagine him being rather unpopular figurehead for a lot of people.
So I'm not really sure why that gets fixated on so much. Yes, D'Tan is a Reunificationist. I do not, however, see him trying to shove this ideology down anyone's throats, because there are unquestionably bigger priorities at the moment. He seems more concerned with establishing the Republic as a major power, considering he wanted to claim the Jenolan Dyson Sphere despite the Undine threat and the desires of the Federation and the Klingon Empire.
Considering his willingness to contradict the Federation, which contains the Vulcans, I feel his Reunification views are not his current priority. Diplomatic tensions with them aren't exactly good for Reunification. His current views seem focused on establishing the Republic as the Star Empire's replacement as a major power, and the Romulan power. Even if he was focusing on Reunification, which he is not, we're not talking about an idea that came from the mind of someone like Admiral T'nae or something. We're talking about an idea that came from Spock, whose cowboy diplomat and, yes, emotional tendencies are well known.
(Hell, if you take expanded universe canon into account, which this game does selectively, it might be noted that he seemed to take some interest in that long before TNG, considering it establishes Saavik and Valeris, who Spock mentors, as half-Romulan, I believe? Not sure on the second but the former even had it in the script for Wrath of Khan. So it is entirely possible Spock's interest in the Romulans is far older than it might initially appear. Random tidbit that's not really relevant to this discussion, but I thought it was worth sharing.)
D'tan does mention that Reunification is one of his goals, just not his immediate one. He wants the Republic to be in a better bargaining position when that day comes is essentially what his position is. He's defiantly a bit more scheming and manipulative (relatively) in more recent appearances, which gives me some more respect for him. IMO it's a matter of the writers constantly rewriting him. They can't seem to settle on what they want him to be. when New Romulus hit, he definitely seemed like more of a reunificationist than now and more of a generic 'nice guy'. Although if this is due to inconsistent writing, changing political views, or just being politically saavy enough to not wave that reunification flag quite so eagerly anymore is something that I think we'll have to see a few more episodes of him to determine. he certainly gives the appearance of being a nontraditional Romulan and a reunificationist though, so I can imagine a lot of Romulans not being too keen on his leadership of the Republic.
I personally suspect that D'Tan's endgame is a independent Romulan/Vulcan/Reman state, hence his hesitation on going through with reunification immediately-since that would be a something of a political nightmare to pull off in the Republic's current situation with all the fighting and hardship all around.
I do like D'Tan's more recent portrayals, myself, so there is something we can agree on there. I don't know if a lot of Romulans are going to focus so much on his Reunification views so much as the part where the Republic isn't in utter chaos as the Empire's remnants are, though, which is where the disagreement seems to come in.
Stability and not living in an utter hellhole is likely the biggest focus most have post-Hobus, IMO. Nobody wants to deal with the civil wars in the Empire and conditions like those of the refugees on Hfihar. Most people will consider their lives more important than ideology. I think we'd see more interest in that after everything stabilized, which it hasn't quite yet, considering everything that's still trying to kill everyone.
Right now the priority is survival, and the Republic seems to offer that better than a government that has been repeatedly decapitated and fractured into civil war, starting even before Hobus and continuing past it.
The Empire has been in a death spiral for three decades, starting with the decapitation of the government in 2379 by Shinzon's rebellion, followed by civil war, Hobus, more civil war, and evidently, even more civil war after Hakeev's death and Sela's disappearance. Granted a good chunk of that is game stuff anyway and partly our fault with that last part, but the point remains. Even if we focus solely on official canon Shinzon's coup and Hobus remain, and I think at least some of the civil war was based on other works as well, though that's not official.
This has been going on for decades. Generally, when something isn't working and has not been working for thirty years, one decides to stop doing it. Though as I said earlier in the thread, I also think the Republic could very easily slip into more Star Empire-like tendencies if backed into a corner again, considering some of the people in it and its possession of thalaron weapons.
I think that would make for a fairly interesting storyline, myself, whatever its ultimate result.