How about a rival for the Federation ( Not an Enemy)

bwleon7 · September 2016

I posted this on priorityonepodcast.com but I wanted to see what you all think.

I would love to have another group that acts as a rival of the Federation. This group of worlds would be organized in a way very similar to the Federation but disagrees with the Federation over The Prime Directive. This other organization is not against the Federation and generally gets along well with the Federation and likes most of what it does, but they think that it is the duty of more powerful worlds to help less advanced ones. Maybe they have a good reason for it. Perhaps they started saving worlds from the Borg and found that it was something that they wanted to expand on.

Star Trek likes to pull from current events. Issues over whether superpowers should interfere with developing nations is something that is debated very often.

Note that conflict between this group and the Federation would be very rare but could happen from time to time. If the right ( or wrong) two captains from each side meet we could see some fighting. This new group would not be added as a way to see big space fights but instead would involved lots of dialogue heavy encounters. I would love to watch someone like Picard debate someone from this other group over a cup of Earl Grey.

EDIT: I should have mentioned this but this is for Star Trek as a whole (TV, Books etc). Not so much for STO.

ryan218 · September 2016

It certainly sounds like an interesting premise.

wombat140 · September 2016

Dialogue is good (if it's good dialogue), but if there's nothing but talking, it gets dull; you come away feeling that nothing's actually happened as a result of all this talking, which it hasn't. You don't have to have fights, but you do have to have action of some sort, as well as the dialogue. What might there be for plots in this?

I always liked that one mission among the "random exploration missions", before they were removed, where you broke into a secret Klingon base on an uncontacted planet, and found out that the Klingons had been secretly trying to manipulate their society, by propaganda disguised as coming from among themselves, so that when the Klingons contacted them and invited them to join the Empire they'd be all for it and think the Klingons were just the kind of leaders "they" had been clamouring for for years! And you went through the base's logs and saw how that worked out. In the original mission, the Klingons had already abandoned the base (except for several groups inexplicably left behind to give you something to fight

) and all there was to do was read their logs, but if you found out about it while the spies were still at it, I can see that having quite a lot of potential for shenanigans. Especially since (if you weren't going to solve the problem by somehow explaining the truth to the locals, which is the other possibility) you'd have to stop their efforts without the locals ever finding out that you were there, either!

You could have a very puzzling situation where the "rivals" had been successful in changing a society's behaviour, without their realising it, and the "new" culture had been going on for some years. Which culture is the one you're supposed to be defending? Do you try and restore the "original" traditions, or do you say, well, now they've got that tradition we shouldn't interfere again?

Reminds me of a project that Starbase UGC (the website for Foundry authors) had once, but I've forgotten the name; they might have been called the Uplift Alliance, something like that? They went around locating civilisations that were nearly ready for warp flight and then "training them up" in what the Alliance believes are "enlightened" views and then giving them warp technology once the Alliance thinks they're ready to meet the gang. Methods varied from straightforward education to plans that most people would consider to be well into mad scientist territory. I don't know whether this project ever resulted in any finished missions.

eriksmith80 · September 2016

Seems like the central conflict would be something akin to the Star Trek TOS episode "A Private Little War", inspired by USA's involvement with Vietnam, or TNG's "Too Short a Season", inspired by Iran-Contra. Wouldn't necessarily need to be dealing in arms again, could be something that tips the balance of an economy. Maybe the non-Federation group is favoring a group that they deem worthy and ready to advance to the stars at the cost of letting another culture on the same world / in the same system languish. There are a lot of things going on now that could be a backdrop for this scenario.

alexmakepeace · September 2016

I like the idea, but I think they need more differences from the Federation than just the Prime Directive. That's an important difference, perhaps the most important one, but it can't be the only difference.

wombat140 · September 2016

Why particularly?

alexmakepeace · September 2016

For the same reason you don't want an enemy faction in a video game to be just a pallete-swap. They need their own presence and character--"The Federation with one twist" is kind of a boring idea, and given how central the Prime Directive is to the Federation's culture, it's unlikely that you can actually become the same as the Federation without it.

eriksmith80 · September 2016

I think, when actively writing it out instead of musing it, this hypothetical faction would start to take on its own characteristics and more differences would emerge; no prime directive would just be the jumping-off point. What would they be like? Perhaps a sort of benevolent Borg? Not literally of course, but prizing assimilation into their culture, rather than allowing them to keep their own culture. Perhaps they are an Empire, like in Star Wars, minus an evil wizard at the top. Valuing order over chaos, one strong voice. If that's too extreme, you could at least begin to see a conflict with the Vulcan IDIC principle, and go from there.

antonine3258 · September 2016

Not quite related (I think this would be an interesting contrast to bring up as a separate group), but a 'Federation without the Prime Directive' group - have you read the Culture novels, @bwleon7 ? They're a good example of one of this type, written by Iain Banks.

bwleon7 · September 2016

eriksmith80 wrote: »

I think, when actively writing it out instead of musing it, this hypothetical faction would start to take on its own characteristics and more differences would emerge; no prime directive would just be the jumping-off point. What would they be like? Perhaps a sort of benevolent Borg? Not literally of course, but prizing assimilation into their culture, rather than allowing them to keep their own culture. Perhaps they are an Empire, like in Star Wars, minus an evil wizard at the top. Valuing order over chaos, one strong voice. If that's too extreme, you could at least begin to see a conflict with the Vulcan IDIC principle, and go from there.

Yes this is very much in line with what I could see happening.

My thinking is that a ship from one world is attacking the Borg and they do some damage. However the Borg adapt and that ship is no longer doing damage. A ship from another world helps them and together they figure out that the Borg have to come into direct contact with a culture's technology before they know how to defend against it. With this information they decide that the more cultures they have the more varied the types of technology they will have access to. So they figure if they assimilate lots of different cultures into their own "collective" then they will have more ways to fight the Borg.

One of the biggest differences between them and the Federation would be the reasons why they decided to partner up. The Federation was created under a calmer climate and had the benefit of time to hash out differences before allowing new members.
The " United Collective of Planets" had to join together in order to survive. They wont be as well structured as the Federation and I would like it if their ships were not as uniform as the Federation. Their ships could be mishmash of technology from the different member worlds and put together in random configurations. No two ships would have the same setup. The thinking being that the way the Borg defeat one ship wont work on the next.

Basically it's a group of cultures that are using the tactics of the Borg for themselves, assimilation and adaptation. But trying to do so while remaining individuals.

lordrezeon · September 2016

Well the fundamental problem with creating a rival for the Federation is that by its original intended design the Federation is supposed to be a Hollywood "paradise". This initial conceit results in any rival group being presented as inherently inferior to the Federation.

In TOS the various factions were just random enemies of the week that popped in at random, it was only through trial and error that the Klingons and Romulans emerged as the ones with staying power. TNG tried to introduce many new enemies but fell into the trap of making them all inept so that the Federation could look better in comparison. The Ferengi were the first big attempt, but fell flat on their first appearance with viewers almost universally rejecting them as rival material. The Cardassians were presented as a military rival but were immediately emasculated when a single Nebula class was able to curb stomp an entire squadron of Cardassian warships. About the closest they have ever come to a proper anti-Federation was the Dominion, but many writers seem to divorce DS9 from the rest of Trek.

A proper true rival to the Federation needs to be presented as having competent leadership, vast resources, a military of equal standing to Starfleet, and a set of guiding principles that stand in contrast to the Federation. For the first set of things to happen the writers need to avoid the conceit of having the heroes always win, it is the only way to build them up as a credible rival.

As for the contrasting principles you must first break down what the core elements of the Federations identity are. Sadly this is where a lot of the problems will inevitably come in, as what the Federation says and what it does don't sync up. For example they claim not to be a military power but Starfleet Captains from their heavily armed starships have broad sweeping authority over the civilian populace. There is also the claim that the Federation treats all its member worlds as equals, while at the same time all governmental and military institutions are based on Earth with humans as the predominant members of those organizations. We also see the rights of colonies being subordinate to those of the core worlds. About the only core principles that they adhere to consistently are the Prime Directive which boils down to "don't get involved in other people's problems" and a long standing policy of expansionism.

marcusdkane · September 2016

lordrezeon wrote: »

Well the fundamental problem with creating a rival for the Federation is that by its original intended design the Federation is supposed to be a Hollywood "paradise". This initial conceit results in any rival group being presented as inherently inferior to the Federation.

In TOS the various factions were just random enemies of the week that popped in at random, it was only through trial and error that the Klingons and Romulans emerged as the ones with staying power. TNG tried to introduce many new enemies but fell into the trap of making them all inept so that the Federation could look better in comparison. The Ferengi were the first big attempt, but fell flat on their first appearance with viewers almost universally rejecting them as rival material. The Cardassians were presented as a military rival but were immediately emasculated when a single Nebula class was able to curb stomp an entire squadron of Cardassian warships. About the closest they have ever come to a proper anti-Federation was the Dominion, but many writers seem to divorce DS9 from the rest of Trek.

A proper true rival to the Federation needs to be presented as having competent leadership, vast resources, a military of equal standing to Starfleet, and a set of guiding principles that stand in contrast to the Federation. For the first set of things to happen the writers need to avoid the conceit of having the heroes always win, it is the only way to build them up as a credible rival.

As for the contrasting principles you must first break down what the core elements of the Federations identity are. Sadly this is where a lot of the problems will inevitably come in, as what the Federation says and what it does don't sync up. For example they claim not to be a military power but Starfleet Captains from their heavily armed starships have broad sweeping authority over the civilian populace. There is also the claim that the Federation treats all its member worlds as equals, while at the same time all governmental and military institutions are based on Earth with humans as the predominant members of those organizations. We also see the rights of colonies being subordinate to those of the core worlds. About the only core principles that they adhere to consistently are the Prime Directive which boils down to "don't get involved in other people's problems" and a long standing policy of expansionism.

And the Prime Directive isn't even a Federation law, it's only a Starfleet regulation... Federation citizens are quite free to break the Prime Directive

wombat140 · September 2016

alexmakepeace wrote: »

For the same reason you don't want an enemy faction in a video game to be just a pallete-swap. They need their own presence and character--"The Federation with one twist" is kind of a boring idea, and given how central the Prime Directive is to the Federation's culture, it's unlikely that you can actually become the same as the Federation without it.

Well, if that's all, a lot of the Federation's "character", the interesting features of it, are the various species that are in it, the presence of the Vulcans, humans, the Betazoids and so on, rather than anything about the few basic philosophical/political things that the whole Federation has in common. At least, it is to me. This group might be based on all but one of the same shared principles as the Federation, but it wouldn't be composed of the same people. Being an alliance of different worlds like the Federation, it'd include lots of different and interesting species within it and I think they'd be enough to make it stand out, without having their shared philosophy be that different. The ones that Starbase UGC came up with were very intriguing, as far as they went.
In fact, I think it would be fun to have them have a few (not all, but a symbolic few) of the arbitrary features the same as the Federation's, too, for instance having white ships. (That would suit their character, too, since like the Federation they're self-appointed "white knights".) It'd be a persistent reminder of the annoyingness that they were like another Federation, a rival Federation, only they were constantly on the opposite side from us!

The fact that the Federation contradicts itself a bit over what its principles are needn't be a problem; just have the rivals have some of the same contradictions! Thus showing up the Federation. For instance, we could see them talking about being pacifists, but having a heck of a lot of heavily-armed starships and deciding remarkably quickly that in this situation they have "no choice but to use them". Meanwhile the Federation is doing much the same thing. Alternatively (maybe both on different occasions), they could put the Federation to shame by actually persisting to find a peaceful solution when the Federation, fellow self-proclaimed masters of diplomacy, weren't going to or couldn't think how. (The Federation don't always seem that GOOD at diplomacy. They repeatedly say they are, but in practice the only ideas they (i.e. the episode writer) often seem to have for dealing with opposition is "we've asked them nicely to give in and they haven't, so we'll just have to shoot them all".)

I'd forgotten that the Prime Directive only referred to Starfleet, not to civilians. So the opposite policy would presumably be a policy of their "Starfleet", rather than the whole "nation".

lordrezeon · September 2016

marcusdkane wrote: »

lordrezeon wrote: »

Well the fundamental problem with creating a rival for the Federation is that by its original intended design the Federation is supposed to be a Hollywood "paradise". This initial conceit results in any rival group being presented as inherently inferior to the Federation.

In TOS the various factions were just random enemies of the week that popped in at random, it was only through trial and error that the Klingons and Romulans emerged as the ones with staying power. TNG tried to introduce many new enemies but fell into the trap of making them all inept so that the Federation could look better in comparison. The Ferengi were the first big attempt, but fell flat on their first appearance with viewers almost universally rejecting them as rival material. The Cardassians were presented as a military rival but were immediately emasculated when a single Nebula class was able to curb stomp an entire squadron of Cardassian warships. About the closest they have ever come to a proper anti-Federation was the Dominion, but many writers seem to divorce DS9 from the rest of Trek.

A proper true rival to the Federation needs to be presented as having competent leadership, vast resources, a military of equal standing to Starfleet, and a set of guiding principles that stand in contrast to the Federation. For the first set of things to happen the writers need to avoid the conceit of having the heroes always win, it is the only way to build them up as a credible rival.

As for the contrasting principles you must first break down what the core elements of the Federations identity are. Sadly this is where a lot of the problems will inevitably come in, as what the Federation says and what it does don't sync up. For example they claim not to be a military power but Starfleet Captains from their heavily armed starships have broad sweeping authority over the civilian populace. There is also the claim that the Federation treats all its member worlds as equals, while at the same time all governmental and military institutions are based on Earth with humans as the predominant members of those organizations. We also see the rights of colonies being subordinate to those of the core worlds. About the only core principles that they adhere to consistently are the Prime Directive which boils down to "don't get involved in other people's problems" and a long standing policy of expansionism.

And the Prime Directive isn't even a Federation law, it's only a Starfleet regulation... Federation citizens are quite free to break the Prime Directive

Hm... I seem to recall a TNG episode where Worf's human adopted brother did that and got into huge trouble for it, its been a long time since I saw the episode though so I might be forgetting important context or details from the episode.

rattler2 · September 2016

Sounds a little like SFC2's Interstellar Concordium. They had a similar structure to the Federation, but had more of a "Might makes Right" mentality in some ways. In SFC2 the Organians actually brought in the ISC to put an end to the Galactic War, but if I remember correctly the local powers were already trying to end it on their own at the start of the campaign, and the arrival of the ISC just made it flare up again. But if you play the Federation campaign, the second mission (I think) actually has a peaceful option, and the ISC recognizes that the Federation is more "enlightened" then the other powers, like the Klingon Empire, and allows you to finish the escort mission without firing a shot.

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Interstellar_Concordium

memory beta wrote:

The ISC have a complete belief in peace at all costs which they feel that they must sustain even if intervention is required in the most trivial of conflicts. This is signified by their belief that 'a peaceful, harmonious and well-ordered universe is the right of all sentient species. Civilizations collapse when the right is violated, therefore, it must be protected at all costs'.

Despite this near noble aspect of peace, it is peace that is forced on those that encounter the ISC. The Concordium has no respect for individual or cultural rights and have no problem with violating them in order to ensure a peaceful, orderly government.

marcusdkane · September 2016

lordrezeon wrote: »

marcusdkane wrote: »

lordrezeon wrote: »

Well the fundamental problem with creating a rival for the Federation is that by its original intended design the Federation is supposed to be a Hollywood "paradise". This initial conceit results in any rival group being presented as inherently inferior to the Federation.

In TOS the various factions were just random enemies of the week that popped in at random, it was only through trial and error that the Klingons and Romulans emerged as the ones with staying power. TNG tried to introduce many new enemies but fell into the trap of making them all inept so that the Federation could look better in comparison. The Ferengi were the first big attempt, but fell flat on their first appearance with viewers almost universally rejecting them as rival material. The Cardassians were presented as a military rival but were immediately emasculated when a single Nebula class was able to curb stomp an entire squadron of Cardassian warships. About the closest they have ever come to a proper anti-Federation was the Dominion, but many writers seem to divorce DS9 from the rest of Trek.

A proper true rival to the Federation needs to be presented as having competent leadership, vast resources, a military of equal standing to Starfleet, and a set of guiding principles that stand in contrast to the Federation. For the first set of things to happen the writers need to avoid the conceit of having the heroes always win, it is the only way to build them up as a credible rival.

As for the contrasting principles you must first break down what the core elements of the Federations identity are. Sadly this is where a lot of the problems will inevitably come in, as what the Federation says and what it does don't sync up. For example they claim not to be a military power but Starfleet Captains from their heavily armed starships have broad sweeping authority over the civilian populace. There is also the claim that the Federation treats all its member worlds as equals, while at the same time all governmental and military institutions are based on Earth with humans as the predominant members of those organizations. We also see the rights of colonies being subordinate to those of the core worlds. About the only core principles that they adhere to consistently are the Prime Directive which boils down to "don't get involved in other people's problems" and a long standing policy of expansionism.

And the Prime Directive isn't even a Federation law, it's only a Starfleet regulation... Federation citizens are quite free to break the Prime Directive

Hm... I seem to recall a TNG episode where Worf's human adopted brother did that and got into huge trouble for it, its been a long time since I saw the episode though so I might be forgetting important context or details from the episode.

In terms of the episode, yes, he got in trouble because he p*ssed Picard off, by doing something that he could do which Picard's regulations wouldn't allow... As a civilian, that was his prerogative...

wombat140 · September 2016

A propos the idea of the rival group having started as an alliance against the Borg: that could work well as part of the reason why they take the stance they do. From their point of view, an uncontacted civilisation would be in grave danger from the Borg (at least if it had reached the point of having technology worth stealing, or had other interesting assets). So if they encountered one, they needed to introduce themselves immediately and get them organised, kitted out and in good order (according to the alliance's particular idea of good order), before the Borg found them.

lordrezeon · September 2016

The Voyager novels recently introduced a delta quadrant civilization that had some similarities to the Federation, the Confederacy of the First Quadrant or something like that. It was made up of multiple species that survived the Borg.

In terms of tech they outgunned Starfleet ships but were much slower, they also possessed alternative technologies for cloaking and shuttling personnel to locations. Ultimately Janeway concluded that their civilization was incompatible with Federation values because they were capitalists without a social safety net, had a slightly more religious undertone to their values, and their navy was openly admitted to be a military. Overall they were a more realistic take on the original Ferengi concept.

When they were introduced they had quite a bit of potential but quickly became strawmen to remind readers that the Federation is paradise.

theraven2378 · September 2016

The Typhon Pact could be a good faction to rival the Federation

trennan · September 2016

I would say the KDF was a rival to the Federation. But I will not insult the KDF or the Empire with saying something so weak would be the KDF"s rival.

Of course, if you need a faction that is a rival to the Federation. You'd first need to make the Federation worthy of having one, or one based off the Federation. So a peaceable Defara type rival. Completely useless to the galaxy. But there no less. The Federation and this new one could compete as to who was the most useless to the galaxy.

ryan218 · September 2016

trennan wrote: »

I would say the KDF was a rival to the Federation. But I will not insult the KDF or the Empire with saying something so weak would be the KDF"s rival.

Of course, if you need a faction that is a rival to the Federation. You'd first need to make the Federation worthy of having one, or one based off the Federation. So a peaceable Defara type rival. Completely useless to the galaxy. But there no less. The Federation and this new one could compete as to who was the most useless to the galaxy.

Ah yes, the glorious Klingon Empire, who bravely fought off the Borg Invasions-- Oh, wait...

mustrumridcully0 · September 2016

The Culture might be a non-Prime Directive take on the Federation.

But maybe something else - maybe a religious faction that has a complex polytheistic belief system and expects adopting the values of this belief system - but does not allow this adoption to be forced. They might deliberately contact primitive species and show off their advanced technology and explain that this is the gift of the gods - but if the gifts are refused, the species is left alone, not subjugated. Whether the belief is based on some factually existing omnipotent beings, is without any basis in reality, or is a carefully crafted social contact that the founding fathers of the nation believed to ensure a stable and mostly peaceful development of the nation I'll leave up to the writers..

suki36 · September 2016

What about the rival to the Federation is the Federation itself. In Game lore we've just been thru a series of wars, mayhaps a large portion of both Starfleet and the populace disagree with the way things were done, or feel that not enough was done...have an ideological split that can evolve into a Marquis-esque breakaway where instead of single officers, entire ship crews or member world and not just colonies opt to pursue their own agendas.

alexmakepeace · September 2016

suki36 wrote: »

What about the rival to the Federation is the Federation itself. In Game lore we've just been thru a series of wars, mayhaps a large portion of both Starfleet and the populace disagree with the way things were done, or feel that not enough was done...have an ideological split that can evolve into a Marquis-esque breakaway where instead of single officers, entire ship crews or member world and not just colonies opt to pursue their own agendas.

#Fexit

wombat140 · September 2016

I like that idea.

mustrumridcully0 · September 2016

alexmakepeace wrote: »

suki36 wrote: »

What about the rival to the Federation is the Federation itself. In Game lore we've just been thru a series of wars, mayhaps a large portion of both Starfleet and the populace disagree with the way things were done, or feel that not enough was done...have an ideological split that can evolve into a Marquis-esque breakaway where instead of single officers, entire ship crews or member world and not just colonies opt to pursue their own agendas.

#Fexit

Wouldn't it be more something like:

#Bexit
#Vexit
#Aexit
#Trexit
#Texit
#Eaxit
#Baexit
#Boexit

ashrod63 · September 2016

I think it would be interesting if it was a bit more than just the Prime Directive they disagreed on, there has to be something that they get "right" that makes them look better than the Federation. Trying to find that would be the key to getting them to work.

mustrumridcully0 · September 2016

Well, not having the Prime Directive would make them look as if they were actually doing something better than the Federation. Or at least it could be, if they manage to engage new pre-warp cultures and uplift them without causing their societies to break apart.

discojer · September 2016

Star Fleet Battles has the ISC (Inter Stellar Concordium), which is basically like the Federation, but from a a different part of the galaxy. They invade because they want to keep the various empires from fighting

http://www.starfleetgames.com/federation/interstellarconcordium.shtml

ashrod63 · September 2016

mustrumridcully0 wrote: »

Well, not having the Prime Directive would make them look as if they were actually doing something better than the Federation. Or at least it could be, if they manage to engage new pre-warp cultures and uplift them without causing their societies to break apart.

It would, but having a one note society would lead to too many temptations to show off the Federation as "correct" when really you need to show it from both points of view.

Of course you also get into the delicate situation of what happens when somebody wants to join the Rivals, but the Feds are opposed to their fundamental existence. Do they dare turn their beloved Federation into a Donald Trump allegory?

wombat140 · September 2016

It'd be too tempting to always bring it round to "yes, they saved this planet while the Federation was talking about non-interference... BUT there's a catch!", you mean? I suppose it would be, but if the writers DID pull off making it legitimately two-sided, so that their "fault" was also sometimes the thing they were doing "right", that would be the most intriguing way of doing it, in my opinion.

I don't quite follow what you mean with that other scenario, can you explain?

suki36 wrote: »

What about the rival to the Federation is the Federation itself. In Game lore we've just been thru a series of wars, mayhaps a large portion of both Starfleet and the populace disagree with the way things were done, or feel that not enough was done...have an ideological split that can evolve into a Marquis-esque breakaway where instead of single officers, entire ship crews or member world and not just colonies opt to pursue their own agendas.

Not quite the same thing, but have you read the Masterverse stories by some people on these forums? Specifically the ones about the colony Moab IV.

trennan wrote: »

I would say the KDF was a rival to the Federation. But I will not insult the KDF or the Empire with saying something so weak would be the KDF"s rival.

Of course, if you need a faction that is a rival to the Federation. You'd first need to make the Federation worthy of having one, or one based off the Federation. So a peaceable Defara type rival. Completely useless to the galaxy. But there no less. The Federation and this new one could compete as to who was the most useless to the galaxy.

I don't think the OP was talking about just a rival in the sense of a worthy opponent, but a rival in the sense that they're similar - they're both going about trying to be the "white knights" of the galaxy and like to think of themselves as pacifists, not always accurately. As for useless, the Federation has got itself several hundred planets. Useless?

How about a rival for the Federation ( Not an Enemy)

Comments