So who here thinks that the Klingon's from Disco are h'urQ high-breads from when they ran things on Qo'nos? [...]
Now that you say it... they do look a bit like bread.
DISCO has a lot to explain. TBH I wouldn't be surprised if in the second part of the season they would gradually erase themselves from the timeline, like Annorax did. This spore drive is so extremely OP that there's no way in hell starfleet would abandon the idea. There must be a twist somewhere.
Also T'Kuvma is a punching bag, Kol is a punching bag, Voq we will see but he seems to be a human. Only L'rell is pulling her weight but she's jailed and will go down with DISCO after this Omega 4 relay incident.
It's quite possible that the spore drive was scuttled because of significant, irreconcilable issues. Like...reality-degrading ones
... snip...
Not seeing how the concept of a species of small "brain slug" parasites that control someone else to infiltrate a society is no different from a "Starship troopers" bug-swarm with different incarnations of brutish, flying monsters the protagonists shoot in a never ending onslaught is either wilfully ignorant or extremely hyperbolic.
... snip ...
Except TNG did it on screen 9 years before Starship Troopers.
And the weird movie "The Stuff" well before them both. Bonus on that film... Steve Neill who did Leonard Nimoys ears for Star Trek the motion Picture along with other alien crew on the film did EFX's for that movie.
but on the whole the "Cool/Lame" argument IS germane to the original question, while the "Canon/Non-Canon" argument is a moot sideshow. (because...CBS owns it! CBS says it's the Canon, therefore, it's the Canon, regardless of Cool/Lame factors!)
The hardcore business end answers to the original question were handled on page 1, and the discussion could've died there having been at least moderately well answered.
Yes they own it, it's like if I owned a Monet and painted a Green Alien on it. Sure it's mine, I can do with it as I please. However not everyone will agree it is the right thing to do.
JJ Abrams took the Franchise and at least had the common courtesy to set it in an Alternate Timeline. He still acknowledged the Look and feel of Classic Trek and Updated it too, masterfully I might add.
St:Disco has twisted things in strange ways, and as of yet they haven't said which timeline they are in. (On the Show, producers can say whatever they want, it doesn't make it so until it happens on Screen.)
As to my OP, There is a way to make a Klingon TOS, in the tailor, which I was unaware of. I finally fixed my two underplayed Klingons. However making the Hairless Metal Skinned Klingons of Discovery is still not possible, you can sort of get close, but the nose, and odd shaped head are not possible at this time with a Klingon.
And yes I do want to make one. Because I do like Discovery, which is why I'm 'head canon'ing it to an Alternate Timeline where Fek'Ihri were united with the Klingons, not driven off. Which if you pay attention to the Dialog in 'the Vulcan hello' fits what T'Kuvma was saying:
"But there is no honor without unity. There is no home for any of us, unless it is shared by all."
"(in Klingonese) They are coming. Atom by atom, they will coil around us and take all that we are. There is one way to confront this threat. By reuniting the twenty-four warring houses of our own empire. We have forgotten the Unforgettable, the last to unify our tribes: Kahless. Together, under one creed, remain Klingon! That is why we light our beacon this day. To assemble our people. To lock arms against those whose fatal greeting is... (in English) we come in peace."
1. The uniform thing was explained away in one of the Discovery novels...
Rules of Star Trek canon: TV (TNG=DS9=Voyager>TOS>Enterprise) > Movies > TAS > extra material (Books, comics, and video games)
If you bring books into a TV discussion then can just use the lore in STO, since it is equally worthless. It also means that Doctor Who is a part of Star trek Canon, you know that is a big can of worms right there. So if the explination is a book, I'm sure we can bring out all kinds of lore from Memory Beta that makes Discovery look really bad lorewise. Only I wont as I actually like the show even though it flies in the face of established canon, to sell more online subscriptions.
My head is largely hairless. Does that mean I deny the tales of, say, Samson in the Old Testament...
really strange argument, It is highly illogical. What does you having male pattern hair loss have to do with it? Even in classic Trek there were a few Klingons with male pattern baldness, like you they have facial hair and a bit behind the head.
I'm sure there are even a few rebellious Klingons who shave their hair altogether. However what we have in Discovery is different, these Klingons are Hairless. And it's not a random few, they showed Leaders of the great houses on Hologram, all hairless even the women. The production designed these Klingons intentionally and even have an in depth reasoning for the design. Which is all good, only it ignores Previous Canon.
p.s. I deny the tales of any Book without physical evidence, so Samson is right out.
So exactly like how Klingon weaponry has always been? The Bat'leth has always been one of the most stupid and impractical weapon designs in Trek ever since we first saw on. Not to mention most other Klingon blades are wildly impractical edge lord material as well.
I'd take an Origanal Bat'leth over a Katana for self defence any day of the week. It's easy to use, great for blocking, allows for amazing leverage, using a classic Bat'leth is like a Sword, Shield, and Heavy Ax all in one. The Disco Bat'leth...
a bit scary to use, as it has blade pointing at the user.
Goth, the Klinks we've seen in TRIBBLE appear to be hairless. This can well indicate a cultural tendency toward shaving, and be of no more biological import than the fact that most female humans in North America sport hairless lower limbs. You're making assumptions based on the idea that an entire interstellar empire has but one monolithic culture, and that this culture never changes across the centuries, so much so that even outliers like T'Kuvma's group share exactly the same values in all things. To analogize, this would be akin to noting that the Amish wear older styles of clothing and the males are bearded, and complaining that the rest of human society is non-canon because so many of us are clean-shaven and wear a variety of colors and styles of clothes - and that this also invalidates, say, pre-Revolution France with its wigs and high-heeled shoes on upper-class men.
> gothicshark wrote: » > > I'd take an Origanal Bat'leth over a Katana for self defence any day of the week. > > > > Well good. Katanas are actually pretty terrible weapons, that even samurai only really used as last resort weapon if they lost their bow, or whatever weapon they were using, because of how bad they were. Most weapons, even poorly designed fictional ones, are better then kanatas.
In defense of Katanas, the design is actually fairly good. In the future, with advanced materials (hell, even today), the katana is a solid design for a sword
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Goth, the Klinks we've seen in TRIBBLE appear to be hairless. This can well indicate a cultural tendency toward shaving, and be of no more biological import than the fact that most female humans in North America sport hairless lower limbs. You're making assumptions based on the idea that an entire interstellar empire has but one monolithic culture, and that this culture never changes across the centuries, so much so that even outliers like T'Kuvma's group share exactly the same values in all things. To analogize, this would be akin to noting that the Amish wear older styles of clothing and the males are bearded, and complaining that the rest of human society is non-canon because so many of us are clean-shaven and wear a variety of colors and styles of clothes - and that this also invalidates, say, pre-Revolution France with its wigs and high-heeled shoes on upper-class men.
The level of difference, and with the known Cannon Prior to Disco, something doesn't add up, unless we place Disco in a new Timeline similar yet different than TOS.
In defense of Katanas, the design is actually fairly good. In the future, with advanced materials (hell, even today), the katana is a solid design for a sword
Not really, it's designed for one kind of cut, it's not capable of blocking or parrying with out significant damage to the blade, unless you and your opponent are trained in the same exact fighting style. Katanas are by far the most graceful two handed short swords, and they have a lot of mythology making them look cooler than they really are.
If you want a great short sword style that is functional go to the Middle east around 1400. Although these swords are Calvary One handed designs, they can withstand side impacts, blocking, parrying, and imprecise Slashing, the thinness and the curve provide reinforcement for things which would destroy a Katana.
Which is understandable since Katanas as we know them are not the swords Samurai went to war with, Most Classic Family blades were Nodachi cut down to meet an Imperial edict to shorten all sword blades. Nodachi are a two handed Mounted Sword designed to charge and slice through a battle field. They were not meant to be dueling swords. But when Japan was unified and Samurai became an obsolete weapon of war, dueling was all they were allowed to do. Katanas are not a weapon of war, they are a weapon of honor battle.
meanwhile in the world which was always at war the Scimitar style swords became the go to sword of war.
It's like post WW2 military weapons. While the US was refining a precise ranged weapon. The world went with the AK family of rifles because they were durable cheap and easy to use.
In defense of Katanas, the design is actually fairly good. In the future, with advanced materials (hell, even today), the katana is a solid design for a sword
Not really, it's designed for one kind of cut, it's not capable of blocking or parrying with out significant damage to the blade, unless you and your opponent are trained in the same exact fighting style. Katanas are by far the most graceful two handed short swords, and they have a lot of mythology making them look cooler than they really are.
If you want a great short sword style that is functional go to the Middle east around 1400. Although these swords are Calvary One handed designs, they can withstand side impacts, blocking, parrying, and imprecise Slashing, the thinness and the curve provide reinforcement for things which would destroy a Katana.
Which is understandable since Katanas as we know them are not the swords Samurai went to war with, Most Classic Family blades were Nodachi cut down to meet an Imperial edict to shorten all sword blades. Nodachi are a two handed Mounted Sword designed to charge and slice through a battle field. They were not meant to be dueling swords. But when Japan was unified and Samurai became an obsolete weapon of war, dueling was all they were allowed to do. Katanas are not a weapon of war, they are a weapon of honor battle.
meanwhile in the world which was always at war the Scimitar style swords became the go to sword of war.
It's like post WW2 military weapons. While the US was refining a precise ranged weapon. The world went with the AK family of rifles because they were durable cheap and easy to use.
You're generally fairly wrong on those counts. Katana are extremely versatile in cuts you can perform, and are also (depending on the blade) quite capable of very, very dangerous thrusts. Defensively, they weren't ideal weapons, but could, in an emergency, and if the blade was forged properly, block attacks. It wasn't encouraged, but that was more a consideration for the limit of the weapon. They also weren't short swords. They were standard-length longswords, roughly comparable to the western TRIBBLE sword.
Nodachi were definitely NOT common weapons like you think they are. They were anti-cavalry weapons, roughly the size of a man. Think the Zweihander or Flamberge. That size. They were more often carried as status symbols (anyone affluent enough to get a sword so impractical forged was clearly rich), rather than overall functional weapons (TRIBBLE, the scabbard of such a weapon had to be discarded most of the time, because it would warp under its own weight).
As to the purpose of the Katana, it was a weapon of war, but, as with almost all societies, a secondary one. Samurai were, first and foremost, bowmen, followed by cavaliers. But in almost all cases, swords were never the first weapon of a culture. They were meant as backups to their other weapons (usually spears or bows)
I can understand why some people want to see TRIBBLE in the game. it's simple. It's on the box right now. If this was the 1990's, there would be many people to demand a TNG console game. But here is the thing, they cannot include TRIBBLE for one very simple reason; it doesnt follow Roddenberry's universe. So TRIBBLE is simply an aberration which should not be included. Have you noticed that the Kelvin stuff was introduced, and then never followed up on? After all the Kelvin stuff we went back to the TNG universe with the Son'a, and of course Geordi la Forge.
So the upshot is this; if iit ain't from Roddenberry's universe, then it shouldn't be included.
Oh and OP, please stop putting TOS and TRIBBLE names together, otherwise i'll be asking for an explaination on if they were part of the same timeline, how technology suddenly 'devolved' by roughly 50 years when Kirk and co took command of the Enterprise.....
Mako, if you want to go that route, we shouldn't have anything from DS9 or VOY, because Roddenberry had nothing to do with them (and he'd likely have hated DS9, with all its warfare and internecine arguments, on up to an attempt by Starfleet to overthrow the Federation government because the admirals thought they could do a better job fighting the Dominion without civilians getting in the way at home).
Mako, if you want to go that route, we shouldn't have anything from DS9 or VOY, because Roddenberry had nothing to do with them (and he'd likely have hated DS9, with all its warfare and internecine arguments, on up to an attempt by Starfleet to overthrow the Federation government because the admirals thought they could do a better job fighting the Dominion without civilians getting in the way at home).
Well I think you might be inaccurate there for the following reasons:
1) The tech/ships were the same in both series.
2) Uniforms. Yes they were different, but then Riker notably sported a DS9 uniform on the Bridge of the Enterprise in Generations and of course the uniform on DS9 did evolve to include the uniforms shown in the TNG movies, so it all nicely tied up together.
3) DS9 included TNG characters, including the same actors playing them.
4) Species. These also stayed the same. Cardassians, Ferengi, Breen etc, all looked the same from TNG to DS9. No weird 'experiements' going on.
5) Lore. This also trailed nicely from TNG to DS9 to VOY.
Now I have to say from the offset that VOY was not my fave whatsoever, but I can give it respect for following on the Roddenberry universe. Even ENT made a respectable job of it.
The KT stuff from the new movie was just silly, and their 're-hash' of the WOK was just an insult to origianl movie. TRIBBLE really is an TRIBBLE of the KT JJ TRIBBLE.
I hear sniveling and whining.... It makes me want to have a bat'leth in-game that looks like the one from Disc
Don't know about 'sniveling and whining', and yes I agree the Disco stuff should be added, hell they should have a full disco package deal with ships uniforms weapons skins, and Klingon options on Klingons to look like that.
Also would love to get a Kelpien bridge officer for the Feds.
Goth, the Klinks we've seen in TRIBBLE appear to be hairless. This can well indicate a cultural tendency toward shaving, and be of no more biological import than the fact that most female humans in North America sport hairless lower limbs.
This, again?
Klingons in Star Trek:Discovery are hairless because of their genetics. This was first stated by the actress who plays Ll'ress and later confirmed by the showrunners when people asked about the "holes in the skulls displayed at comic con".
You remember? "Pheromone emitters and sensors on their skulls"? "Apex predators"? Their hunting skills become impaired if they put on a hat?
TRIBBLE Klingons are another Star Trek: The Motion Picture-style re-imagining of the Klingons. It just is what it is. CBS says so.
Goth, the Klinks we've seen in TRIBBLE appear to be hairless. This can well indicate a cultural tendency toward shaving, and be of no more biological import than the fact that most female humans in North America sport hairless lower limbs.
This, again?
Klingons in Star Trek:Discovery are hairless because of their genetics. This was first stated by the actress who plays Ll'ress and later confirmed by the showrunners when people asked about the "holes in the skulls displayed at comic con".
You remember? "Pheromone emitters and sensors on their skulls"? "Apex predators"? Their hunting skills become impaired if they put on a hat?
TRIBBLE Klingons are another Star Trek: The Motion Picture-style re-imagining of the Klingons. It just is what it is. CBS says so.
The difference is, they re-imagined a very well-defined and fleshed out species. In TOS, the Klingons were barely even fleshed out and were pretty easy to redesign. Now you have 2 full shows which involved Klingons quite deeply, one of which delved into Klingon culture very extensively. Redesigning them just because they were "too familiar" is quite an insult and infuriating.
Comments
It's quite possible that the spore drive was scuttled because of significant, irreconcilable issues. Like...reality-degrading ones
And the weird movie "The Stuff" well before them both. Bonus on that film... Steve Neill who did Leonard Nimoys ears for Star Trek the motion Picture along with other alien crew on the film did EFX's for that movie.
Yes they own it, it's like if I owned a Monet and painted a Green Alien on it. Sure it's mine, I can do with it as I please. However not everyone will agree it is the right thing to do.
JJ Abrams took the Franchise and at least had the common courtesy to set it in an Alternate Timeline. He still acknowledged the Look and feel of Classic Trek and Updated it too, masterfully I might add.
St:Disco has twisted things in strange ways, and as of yet they haven't said which timeline they are in. (On the Show, producers can say whatever they want, it doesn't make it so until it happens on Screen.)
As to my OP, There is a way to make a Klingon TOS, in the tailor, which I was unaware of. I finally fixed my two underplayed Klingons. However making the Hairless Metal Skinned Klingons of Discovery is still not possible, you can sort of get close, but the nose, and odd shaped head are not possible at this time with a Klingon.
And yes I do want to make one. Because I do like Discovery, which is why I'm 'head canon'ing it to an Alternate Timeline where Fek'Ihri were united with the Klingons, not driven off. Which if you pay attention to the Dialog in 'the Vulcan hello' fits what T'Kuvma was saying:
"But there is no honor without unity. There is no home for any of us, unless it is shared by all."
"(in Klingonese) They are coming. Atom by atom, they will coil around us and take all that we are. There is one way to confront this threat. By reuniting the twenty-four warring houses of our own empire. We have forgotten the Unforgettable, the last to unify our tribes: Kahless. Together, under one creed, remain Klingon! That is why we light our beacon this day. To assemble our people. To lock arms against those whose fatal greeting is... (in English) we come in peace."
Rules of Star Trek canon: TV (TNG=DS9=Voyager>TOS>Enterprise) > Movies > TAS > extra material (Books, comics, and video games)
If you bring books into a TV discussion then can just use the lore in STO, since it is equally worthless. It also means that Doctor Who is a part of Star trek Canon, you know that is a big can of worms right there. So if the explination is a book, I'm sure we can bring out all kinds of lore from Memory Beta that makes Discovery look really bad lorewise. Only I wont as I actually like the show even though it flies in the face of established canon, to sell more online subscriptions.
really strange argument, It is highly illogical. What does you having male pattern hair loss have to do with it? Even in classic Trek there were a few Klingons with male pattern baldness, like you they have facial hair and a bit behind the head.
I'm sure there are even a few rebellious Klingons who shave their hair altogether. However what we have in Discovery is different, these Klingons are Hairless. And it's not a random few, they showed Leaders of the great houses on Hologram, all hairless even the women. The production designed these Klingons intentionally and even have an in depth reasoning for the design. Which is all good, only it ignores Previous Canon.
p.s. I deny the tales of any Book without physical evidence, so Samson is right out.
I'd take an Origanal Bat'leth over a Katana for self defence any day of the week. It's easy to use, great for blocking, allows for amazing leverage, using a classic Bat'leth is like a Sword, Shield, and Heavy Ax all in one. The Disco Bat'leth...
a bit scary to use, as it has blade pointing at the user.
>
> I'd take an Origanal Bat'leth over a Katana for self defence any day of the week.
>
>
>
> Well good. Katanas are actually pretty terrible weapons, that even samurai only really used as last resort weapon if they lost their bow, or whatever weapon they were using, because of how bad they were. Most weapons, even poorly designed fictional ones, are better then kanatas.
In defense of Katanas, the design is actually fairly good. In the future, with advanced materials (hell, even today), the katana is a solid design for a sword
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/House_of_Kor
Same house.
Kol Disco Klingon
Kor TOS klingon, and DS9 Klingon same actor BTW.
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Kol_(Klingon)
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Kor
The level of difference, and with the known Cannon Prior to Disco, something doesn't add up, unless we place Disco in a new Timeline similar yet different than TOS.
Yes, he's an Alien not a Klingon. Closest you can get is General Chang as a Klingon.
Not really, it's designed for one kind of cut, it's not capable of blocking or parrying with out significant damage to the blade, unless you and your opponent are trained in the same exact fighting style. Katanas are by far the most graceful two handed short swords, and they have a lot of mythology making them look cooler than they really are.
If you want a great short sword style that is functional go to the Middle east around 1400. Although these swords are Calvary One handed designs, they can withstand side impacts, blocking, parrying, and imprecise Slashing, the thinness and the curve provide reinforcement for things which would destroy a Katana.
Which is understandable since Katanas as we know them are not the swords Samurai went to war with, Most Classic Family blades were Nodachi cut down to meet an Imperial edict to shorten all sword blades. Nodachi are a two handed Mounted Sword designed to charge and slice through a battle field. They were not meant to be dueling swords. But when Japan was unified and Samurai became an obsolete weapon of war, dueling was all they were allowed to do. Katanas are not a weapon of war, they are a weapon of honor battle.
meanwhile in the world which was always at war the Scimitar style swords became the go to sword of war.
It's like post WW2 military weapons. While the US was refining a precise ranged weapon. The world went with the AK family of rifles because they were durable cheap and easy to use.
You're generally fairly wrong on those counts. Katana are extremely versatile in cuts you can perform, and are also (depending on the blade) quite capable of very, very dangerous thrusts. Defensively, they weren't ideal weapons, but could, in an emergency, and if the blade was forged properly, block attacks. It wasn't encouraged, but that was more a consideration for the limit of the weapon. They also weren't short swords. They were standard-length longswords, roughly comparable to the western TRIBBLE sword.
Nodachi were definitely NOT common weapons like you think they are. They were anti-cavalry weapons, roughly the size of a man. Think the Zweihander or Flamberge. That size. They were more often carried as status symbols (anyone affluent enough to get a sword so impractical forged was clearly rich), rather than overall functional weapons (TRIBBLE, the scabbard of such a weapon had to be discarded most of the time, because it would warp under its own weight).
As to the purpose of the Katana, it was a weapon of war, but, as with almost all societies, a secondary one. Samurai were, first and foremost, bowmen, followed by cavaliers. But in almost all cases, swords were never the first weapon of a culture. They were meant as backups to their other weapons (usually spears or bows)
So the upshot is this; if iit ain't from Roddenberry's universe, then it shouldn't be included.
Oh and OP, please stop putting TOS and TRIBBLE names together, otherwise i'll be asking for an explaination on if they were part of the same timeline, how technology suddenly 'devolved' by roughly 50 years when Kirk and co took command of the Enterprise.....
Well I think you might be inaccurate there for the following reasons:
1) The tech/ships were the same in both series.
2) Uniforms. Yes they were different, but then Riker notably sported a DS9 uniform on the Bridge of the Enterprise in Generations and of course the uniform on DS9 did evolve to include the uniforms shown in the TNG movies, so it all nicely tied up together.
3) DS9 included TNG characters, including the same actors playing them.
4) Species. These also stayed the same. Cardassians, Ferengi, Breen etc, all looked the same from TNG to DS9. No weird 'experiements' going on.
5) Lore. This also trailed nicely from TNG to DS9 to VOY.
Now I have to say from the offset that VOY was not my fave whatsoever, but I can give it respect for following on the Roddenberry universe. Even ENT made a respectable job of it.
The KT stuff from the new movie was just silly, and their 're-hash' of the WOK was just an insult to origianl movie. TRIBBLE really is an TRIBBLE of the KT JJ TRIBBLE.
My character Tsin'xing
Don't know about 'sniveling and whining', and yes I agree the Disco stuff should be added, hell they should have a full disco package deal with ships uniforms weapons skins, and Klingon options on Klingons to look like that.
Also would love to get a Kelpien bridge officer for the Feds.
Klingons in Star Trek:Discovery are hairless because of their genetics. This was first stated by the actress who plays Ll'ress and later confirmed by the showrunners when people asked about the "holes in the skulls displayed at comic con".
You remember? "Pheromone emitters and sensors on their skulls"? "Apex predators"? Their hunting skills become impaired if they put on a hat?
TRIBBLE Klingons are another Star Trek: The Motion Picture-style re-imagining of the Klingons. It just is what it is. CBS says so.
The difference is, they re-imagined a very well-defined and fleshed out species. In TOS, the Klingons were barely even fleshed out and were pretty easy to redesign. Now you have 2 full shows which involved Klingons quite deeply, one of which delved into Klingon culture very extensively. Redesigning them just because they were "too familiar" is quite an insult and infuriating.
My character Tsin'xing