DSC shouldn't have been a TOS prequel

talonxv · October 2018

Now before anyone slips a gear ams flies off the handle, just hear me out.

These are my opinions and mine alone take as you will.

I really think DSC got a few things off beat. Ship design, weapons and a few other plot points that I think if DSC had moved to a different point in the timeline.

IMHO I think DSC was put 20 years too far in the past. Instead of 2254, the show should of been put in 2274. About 2 years after the events of TMP.

To me the ship design of Starfleet, pulse blue weapons and a few others things would make much more sense as a bridge to TWOK instead of where they sit now.

1. Ship weapons. This makes sense from my PoV. The same blue style weapons, but now pulse firing much as we see in TWOK. So it's an evolution forwards, not an abberation.

2. Ship design. As I've said before and others have pointed out, the ship design interior and exterior resembles more TMP era Trek rather than pre TOS. In fact had they put the show here then shown the ship designs, I wouldn't of bat an eyelash.

3. Uniforms. Generally I'm meh on starfleet uniforms for DSC plus as many have said the Delta wasn't a uniform thing till after TMP. Well stick the show here and that's no longer an issue. Plus I'd of liked to see what tje costume designers would of done with a reimaged "pajama" uniform from TMP.

4. Story. I'm not going into all of the plot points I'd change. That's a thesis level paper all it's own, but I actually wouldn't change too many plot points. I'd of had Sarek more of his cold, logical distanced self and had Burnham be more attached to his wife Amanda, and Spock being more empathetic than his father but still stand off ish. And a few other plot points out of season 1 I'd change to change Burnham from less a Mary Sue and more of a character.

5. Into season 2. Because of my idea instead of Pike coming and taking command of Discovery, instead it's Admiral Kirk. Which I think would really change the dynamic of season 2, and give a reason for Kirk to shift his flag since Discovery can cover more ground than Enterprise can. And since Spock is missing, Kirk can shift flag and leave Enterprise in the hands of Scotty.

Well these are my thoughts as to some of my disconnect with DSC and where I think DSC could of gone with a few plot points to make more sense.

From my PoV. This is in no way an attack on anyone who liked it. And if you liked it as is, more power to you.

(Fixed title grammar. -- StarSword-C)

brian334 · October 2018

[SERMON]Using 'of' as a synonym of 'have' is a pet peeve of mine. 'Should'nt have' is the correct way of stating your intent. Should've often sounds like should of, but it is very different.

Of is a preposition, and as such requires an object. Have is a verb, (a special kind of verb,) and it requires a subject. In this case, the subject is DSC. Of in that position has no object. Of what?[/SERMON]

I see your point, but thematically a Klingon war at that point in the timeline doesn't make sense. The Enterprise C made sure of that, and gave us Empress Sela too. The point in time they chose is exactly where FASA placed its Four Years War in the Starfleet Battles Universe, which is not canon, but is given a nod in many ways, especially in the various starship designs seen later in the series, many of which are derivative of FASA art.

starswordc · October 2018

brian334 wrote: »

[SERMON]Using 'of' as a synonym of 'have' is a pet peeve of mine. 'Should'nt have' is the correct way of stating your intent. Should've often sounds like should of, but it is very different.

Of is a preposition, and as such requires an object. Have is a verb, (a special kind of verb,) and it requires a subject. In this case, the subject is DSC. Of in that position has no object. Of what?[/SERMON]

I see your point, but thematically a Klingon war at that point in the timeline doesn't make sense. The Enterprise C made sure of that, and gave us Empress Sela too. The point in time they chose is exactly where FASA placed its Four Years War in the Starfleet Battles Universe, which is not canon, but is given a nod in many ways, especially in the various starship designs seen later in the series, many of which are derivative of FASA art.

He said "a bridge to TWOK", that's almost a century before the Enterprise-C incident.

However, putting the Klingon War there would also conflict with the Organian episode.

ryan218 · October 2018

Agreed. Between TOS and TUC its made pretty clear the Federation and Klingon Empire are locked in a Cold War.

However, for most of the OP's points I agree, TMP-era would have been a better [i]visual[/i] fit. However, I disagree with the Mary Sue remark. While Burnham certainly [i]could have been written better[/i], IMO it doesn't meet Mary Sue level. Mary Sues are depicted as always in the right. From start-to-finish Burnham is depicted as either being in the wrong or dealing with having been so. Burnham's is a redemption story; Mary Sues don't need redeeming because they're beyond reproach (at least within the narrative).

talonxv · October 2018

> @starswordc said:
> brian334 wrote: »
>
> [SERMON]Using 'of' as a synonym of 'have' is a pet peeve of mine. 'Should'nt have' is the correct way of stating your intent. Should've often sounds like should of, but it is very different.
>
> Of is a preposition, and as such requires an object. Have is a verb, (a special kind of verb,) and it requires a subject. In this case, the subject is DSC. Of in that position has no object. Of what?[/SERMON]
>
> I see your point, but thematically a Klingon war at that point in the timeline doesn't make sense. The Enterprise C made sure of that, and gave us Empress Sela too. The point in time they chose is exactly where FASA placed its Four Years War in the Starfleet Battles Universe, which is not canon, but is given a nod in many ways, especially in the various starship designs seen later in the series, many of which are derivative of FASA art.
>
>
>
>
> He said "a bridge to TWOK", that's almost a century before the Enterprise-C incident.
>
> However, putting the Klingon War there would also conflict with the Organian episode.

How so? This is in the 10 years in between TMP and TWOK. Plenty of time in there.

jonsills · October 2018

I'd have preferred one set after VOY; I was particularly fond of the idea our hivemind here came up with of following a ship (or small multicultural fleet) on a voyage to begin exploring one of the Milky Way's satellite galaxies. (Most folks said the Lesser Magellanic Cloud, probably because it's so obvious, but I was plumping for the Canis Minor Dwarf galaxy, both because it's relatively close and because it's passed through the plane of the Milky Way enough times to leave a trail of stars and nebulae connecting the two, so it wouldn't be "several years of passing through the intergalactic void" levels of boring.)

That being said, I'm content with what we got - so far, at least.

talonxv · October 2018

> @jonsills said:
> I'd have preferred one set after VOY; I was particularly fond of the idea our hivemind here came up with of following a ship (or small multicultural fleet) on a voyage to begin exploring one of the Milky Way's satellite galaxies. (Most folks said the Lesser Magellanic Cloud, probably because it's so obvious, but I was plumping for the Canis Minor Dwarf galaxy, both because it's relatively close and because it's passed through the plane of the Milky Way enough times to leave a trail of stars and nebulae connecting the two, so it wouldn't be "several years of passing through the intergalactic void" levels of boring.)
>
> That being said, I'm content with what we got - so far, at least.

That would of been great as well. I was merely speaking to what DSC is now and why I think that it's not in the correct era.

That being said, I would be happy as a pig in hog heaven to get a show as you postulated.

rattler2 · October 2018

talonxv wrote: »

How so? This is in the 10 years in between TMP and TWOK. Plenty of time in there.

Because the Organians imposed the treaty during TOS.
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Treaty_of_Organia

As of right now in Discovery... we don't have peace. We have an armistice. Essentially the war's gone cold while L'Rell consolidates her newfound power. Starfleet is off of a FULL war footing for now, but they are still technically at war.
Kinda like the current relations between the US and North Korea.

It won't be until 2267 that the Organians impose the treaty. So we still have about 10 years of tension, as shown in TOS.

starswordc · October 2018

talonxv wrote: »

starswordc wrote: »

He said "a bridge to TWOK", that's almost a century before the Enterprise-C incident.

However, putting the Klingon War there would also conflict with the Organian episode.

How so? This is in the 10 years in between TMP and TWOK. Plenty of time in there.

Because the Organians arbitrated an end to hot war between the Federation and Empire in "Errand of Mercy", ergo you can't have an entire story arc about the Federation and Empire being in a shooting war unless you either A, retcon that away (not desirable, just witness how many people have a conniption over the merest of graphical differences between TOS and its prequels), or B, give an explanation for how an entire civilization of Q-level beings are no longer a factor less than twenty years after they originally made their move.

talonxv · October 2018

> @starswordc said:
> talonxv wrote: »
>
> starswordc wrote: »
>
> He said "a bridge to TWOK", that's almost a century before the Enterprise-C incident.
>
> However, putting the Klingon War there would also conflict with the Organian episode.
>
>
>
> How so? This is in the 10 years in between TMP and TWOK. Plenty of time in there.
>
>
>
> Because the Organians arbitrated an end to hot war between the Federation and Empire in "Errand of Mercy", ergo you can't have an entire story arc about the Federation and Empire being in a shooting war unless you either A, retcon that away (not desirable, just witness how many people have a conniption over the merest of graphical differences between TOS and its prequels), or B, give an explanation for how an entire civilization of Q-level beings are no longer a factor less than twenty years after they originally made their move.

Well my work around T'Kuvma's house is a rogue house missing for a long time and that's why they look different and have different tech.

There are work arounds.

khan5000 · October 2018

I’d prefer a series between UC and TNG.

starkaos · October 2018

Discovery feels like it should be set after Nemesis. Get rid of all the name drops, rename the Klingons as a different alien race, and a few other minor tweaks and it is turned into a sequel instead of a prequel. There would be no need to worry about why the Spore Drive is never mentioned again and why it took a century for holographic communicators to make a reappearance. The majority of the problems with Discovery would be removed by simply changing it to a sequel and renaming the Klingons to a different race.

khan5000 · October 2018

Holographic communication was used in Undiscovered Country

angrytarg · October 2018

No, it shouldn't from. The whole writing and setting was in my opinion a mistake. What they should by done is either continuing the timeline or work within the established canon if they insisted on a prequel. I disagree with the setting should to been in the TMP era though. I would in liked to see more TOS aesthetics, though.

khan5000 · October 2018

I don’t see a show using TOS aesthetics staying on the air long.

legendarylycan · October 2018

starswordc wrote: »

talonxv wrote: »

starswordc wrote: »

He said "a bridge to TWOK", that's almost a century before the Enterprise-C incident.

However, putting the Klingon War there would also conflict with the Organian episode.

How so? This is in the 10 years in between TMP and TWOK. Plenty of time in there.

Because the Organians arbitrated an end to hot war between the Federation and Empire in "Errand of Mercy", ergo you can't have an entire story arc about the Federation and Empire being in a shooting war unless you either A, retcon that away (not desirable, just witness how many people have a conniption over the merest of graphical differences between TOS and its prequels), or B, give an explanation for how an entire civilization of Q-level beings are no longer a factor less than twenty years after they originally made their move.

uh, that hardly stopped them in SFC2, and the organians had to intervene by bringing in the interstellar concordium to 'pacify' the quadrant - which just resulted in even MORE war and bloodshed

angrytarg · October 2018

khan5000 wrote: »

I don’t see a show using TOS aesthetics staying on the air long.

This argument is repeated over and over and over and over again. And it's a good one, since it's impossible to proof or refute. We'll never know. However, TOS aesthetics could from been improved gradually, there was no reason for that drastic change of aesthetics. I mind DSC's visuals the least to be honest and even like some things, but ultimately I really would after applauded adherence to the true, canonized aesthetics of the era. Or, if they really think nobody would between watched it like this, maybe, I don't know, don't choose that era?

artan42 · October 2018

Most of your objections are about the look of the show. So, yes it would not look out of place between TMP and TWoK. But it also doesn't look out of place after ENT and the Kelvin era.

talonxv wrote: »

Ship weapons. This makes sense from my PoV. The same blue style weapons, but now pulse firing much as we see in TWOK. So it's an evolution forwards, not an abberation.

The Franklin used pulse weapons a century prior to DSC. TOS uses the blue phasers. DSC ships using blue pulses is not an aberration. TWoK using pulse weapons is an aberration however as it means Starfleet goes from using beams in TOS to beams in TNG with pulses in between.
(I am also aware the USS Kelvin used beams despite being in between the Franklin and the DSC ships).

talonxv wrote: »

Ship design. As I've said before and others have pointed out, the ship design interior and exterior resembles more TMP era Trek rather than pre TOS. In fact had they put the show here then shown the ship designs, I wouldn't of bat an eyelash.

Bare metal and grey azteing? Nope. They look like the Kelvin and ENT era ships not the smooth white gulled TMP era ships. Angled corridors with a mixture of touchscreens and buttons and more or less single colour saturation? Yesh, still ENT and Kelvin.

talonxv wrote: »

Uniforms. Generally I'm meh on starfleet uniforms for DSC plus as many have said the Delta wasn't a uniform thing till after TMP. Well stick the show here and that's no longer an issue.

And those people are wrong. ENT Starfleet command used the Delta. The Franklin crew used the Delta. The Kelvin crew used the Delta. Other ships in TOS and TAS used the Delta. Stick to canon not fanon.

talonxv wrote: »

I'd of had Sarek more of his cold, logical distanced self and had Burnham be more attached to his wife Amanda, and Spock being more empathetic than his father but still stand off ish.

Why? Amanda is a pretty useless mother. She does nothing to buffer Sarek's selfish and cold parenting in any show or timeline. If Burnham's being raised in the same way Spock was then she'll end up just like him.

talonxv wrote: »

And a few other plot points out of season 1 I'd change to change Burnham from less a Mary Sue and more of a character.

She wasn't a Mary Sue.

talonxv wrote: »

Into season 2. Because of my idea instead of Pike coming and taking command of Discovery, instead it's Admiral Kirk. Which I think would really change the dynamic of season 2, and give a reason for Kirk to shift his flag since Discovery can cover more ground than Enterprise can. And since Spock is missing, Kirk can shift flag and leave Enterprise in the hands of Scotty.

Not an inherently bad idea other than oversaturating us with Kirk rather than showing someone new (i.e. Pike). Yes I know Oike has been in two episodes and two films but he's hardly Kirk level.

And it's 'should have', 'would have', 'might have'. The 'ov' sound in should've is pronounced exactly as 've' because it's still short for 'have' not 'of'.

starkaos wrote: »

There would be no need to worry about why the Spore Drive is never mentioned again and why it took a century for holographic communicators to make a reappearance.

There's no more need to worry about those things than there is for wondering where the Excelsiors transwarp went or why ship's phasers no longer have a stun setting.

artan42 · October 2018

In fact, @starswordc could you edit the title to correct that 'of' to a 'have' please? It's driving me mad. The show's acronym is correct and 'shouldn't' has a correct apostrophe, but for reason there's a rogue 'of'.

talonxv · October 2018

> @artan42 said:
> In fact, @starswordc could you edit the title to correct that 'of' to a 'have' please? It's driving me mad. The show's acronym is correct and 'shouldn't' has a correct apostrophe, but for reason there's a rogue 'of'.

Hey look I usually got an A or so in math and science. English on the other hand, I averaged a C at best.

So sue me.

starswordc · October 2018

talonxv wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

In fact, @starswordc could you edit the title to correct that 'of' to a 'have' please? It's driving me mad. The show's acronym is correct and 'shouldn't' has a correct apostrophe, but for reason there's a rogue 'of'.

Hey look I usually got an A or so in math and science. English on the other hand, I averaged a C at best.

So sue me.

[Mod Hat] Don't worry about it, hardly the first time anyone's made that mistake. Fixed. [/Mod Hat]

ryan218 · October 2018

Yeah, I think people are getting way too hung up on grammar here.

qqqqii · October 2018

Enterprise shoudn't have been a TOS prequel, either, but it's an imperfect Universe.

talonxv · October 2018

> @starswordc said:
> talonxv wrote: »
>
> artan42 wrote: »
>
> In fact, @starswordc could you edit the title to correct that 'of' to a 'have' please? It's driving me mad. The show's acronym is correct and 'shouldn't' has a correct apostrophe, but for reason there's a rogue 'of'.
>
>
>
>
> Hey look I usually got an A or so in math and science. English on the other hand, I averaged a C at best.
>
> So sue me.
>
>
>
>
> [Mod Hat] Don't worry about it, hardly the first time anyone's made that mistake. Fixed. [/Mod Hat]

Fun fact. The US Military for linguists considers only 2 widely spoken languages category 5(IE hardest to learn).

1 is Mandarin Chinese. The other? English.

starswordc · October 2018

talonxv wrote: »

Fun fact. The US Military for linguists considers only 2 widely spoken languages category 5(IE hardest to learn).

1 is Mandarin Chinese. The other? English.

"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse wh*re. We don’t just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
-- James Nicholl

cbrjwrr · October 2018

starkaos wrote: »

Discovery feels like it should be set after Nemesis. Get rid of all the name drops, rename the Klingons as a different alien race, and a few other minor tweaks and it is turned into a sequel instead of a prequel. There would be no need to worry about why the Spore Drive is never mentioned again and why it took a century for holographic communicators to make a reappearance. The majority of the problems with Discovery would be removed by simply changing it to a sequel and renaming the Klingons to a different race.

This is what they have should have done, using the Magellan idea. STO has the tech and ships to do it, Quantum Slipstream and Transwarp could easily handle intergalactic travel, and with ships like the Oddy, it isn't a problem being that far from home.

qqqqii wrote: »

Enterprise shoudn't have been a TOS prequel, either, but it's an imperfect Universe.

Technically it wasn't - it was set post-First Contact.

My own theory is thus: TOS-TMP-TNG-DS9-VOY are semi-coherent (temporal incidents abound of course) - they finish up with one timeline as charted through the shows and movies. But in First Contact, time travel means changes happen that can't reconcile with the Prime timeline - Cochrane gets altered heavily, the Borg are retconed, and with ENT first contact with Klingons are altered, first contact with Romulans, not using nuclear weapons in the Earth-Romulus war, swapping the name from Dauntless NX-01 to Enterprise NX-01, all that kind of stuff.

Hence, ENT-DSC-KT has a coherent style and development; take Klingons. In the original timeline, Klingons always looked the way they did in TMP onwards (as per Roddenberry) they just lacked the resources in TOS. (which is understandable)

ENT however, comes up with the augment stuff to explain the same issue, which perfectly ties in with DSC and KT alterations to Klingons (as permutations of the effects of the virus, effects of attempts to cure it, or reactions to having tried to cure it, etc.) to create the situation where TOS Klingons had a plausible background, and the Klingons in TOS who reappear later have another reason for their changed appearances. (both ways work out in the end)

It is the same sort of phenomenon as the Mirror Universe - Star Trek is portrayed as having a "supposed-to-be" timeline, and the variants like KT, Mirror and ENT-DSC-KT still end up in that kind of supposed to be frame, just differently.

Viewing DSC as a prequel to TOS has issues; surmountable ones of course, especially to the faithful. But it does not have issues with being an ENT sequel. (or at least, I assume so; having read various boards and threads and similar over the years, complaints are universally about it's contradiction to what it is supposed to precede, I've not seen any comments about contradicting ENT yet; I'll accept correction though, as I have not watched it)

It is a known maxim that the simplest explanation that explains all the evidence is the correct one; the above is convoluted (anything involving temporal mechanics is) but it does explain everything that I am aware of. Well, care about. (obviously for brevity I haven't covered the whole thing)

legendarylycan · October 2018

but on the flipside, we did improve several words by removing those idiotic superfluous extra letters...*cough*honor*cough*armor*cough*color*cough*

jonsills · October 2018

That being said, however, this is now more of a failure to learn from mistakes than poor prior education.

Back to the topic, however...

You really should watch all the TOS episodes. You'll find a couple where ship's phasers shoot out blips, much like the depiction of photon torpedoes when they're used.

And once again, aesthetics are not the show. What you see in TOS is the most futuristic stuff they could get - in the 1960s. (Did you know that most of McCoy's medical instruments are salt shakers? They tried to find the most "futuristic" salt shakers they could for the dinner scene in "The Man Trap", but wound up with a collection of things that someone would have had to hold up and say, "This is a salt shaker!", so instead they swiped a shaker from the NBC commissary and repurposed all their new ones as protoplasers and medical scanners and whatnot.)

Star Trek was also tremendously expensive to produce - the average cost of an episode was $190,635 according to Memory Alpha, which converts to $1,381,260 in inflation-adjusted dollars. ("The City On the Edge of Forever" went tremendously over budget, costing over $250,000 in 1968 dollars, or just shy of two million adjusted for inflation!) So what you're seeing on screen, fuzzy and small as it is, represents the cutting edge of television technology in the late '60s. Claiming that the technological improvements seen "violate canon" is like complaining that the 1980s Twilight Zone revival "violated the canon" of the show because it was filmed in color.

ryan218 · October 2018

> @shadowfang240 said:
> but on the flipside, we did improve several words by removing those idiotic superfluous extra letters...*cough*honor*cough*armor*cough*color*cough*

You misspelt 'honour', 'armour', and 'colour'.

snowwolf · October 2018

I've always been curious as to why Starfleet was making massive ships like the Discovery.. Then going back to making very small and fragile ships like the tiny little Constitution Class Kirk was in command of.. Oh wait, now I know.. Because Star Trek Discovery makes zero sense being in the prime universe.......

jonsills · October 2018

Bigger isn't always better, Snow. A Fletcher-class WW2 destroyer is larger in every dimension than one of the brand-new Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, but the newer version is faster, more maneuverable, and more survivable than the old, while packing as much firepower as a guided-missile cruiser.

Sometimes you make them big because you can't make them any smaller yet.

DSC shouldn't have been a TOS prequel

Comments