The Retro Axiom

[Treymiar]

The Retro Axiom

There appears to be a syndrome within Trek simming. If technology was not seen during Trekisodes, then it's not canon and it cannot be used without approval after months of committee evaluations.

A problem arises with retro-technology. Sometimes ancient weapons succeed where the ubiquitous hand phaser fails. The Kirk vs. man in horrible plastic Gorn suit is a prime example. It would constitute no canon-shattering event for someone to lug around and use a 9mm German Luger.

Within the context of simming, I have found myself in multiple uproars against using antiquity-tech.
- The first occasion was, I wanted to craft a replica NASA X-20 in order to safely navigate an atmospheric briar patch which, by mission designer decree, would guaranteed fry any Federation small ship, but not a scratch built chemical rocket crafted by survivors. The X-20 design would easily be available or replicatable by ship's computer. Computers are designing new technology during our day. They will do moreso in the future.
- The second occasion was, I suggested evacuating huge numbers of colonists by inducing medical comas, fitting slow feed triox bracelets, lowering the gravity to 10% on the ship, and then pile up the bodies. When someone threw Sovereign specifications at me, I warmed up my calculator and took a closer look. 5,000 people on a ship, each individual enjoys his own individual "habitable deck area" square footage to that of a spacious 3-bedroom house! People balked at the disruption of canon, to which I pointed out that doctors are inducing medical comas during our current day and age. If we do it now, then now much better can it be done in the 24th century?

Folks, using tried and true, real life retro tech is far better than Jordy LaForge's positronic treknogeek miracle gadgets. It doesn't imbalance Trek canon technology because it constitutes no advancement... at all!

I don't respect blind adherence to the "that's just not the way things are done" mentality, especially in Gene Roddenberry's universe of so-called "infinite possibilities". That's the mantra of people who are intimidated by change, even if it's healthy. An analogy is ammo-starved British troopers lining up to have bullets distributed to them one by one in orderly fashion because that's the proper, orderly way it's done!... while Zulu warriors are swarming down on them. Break the containers open and pass 'em out, for heaven's sake!

Don't punish players who find ways to apply retro-tech to solve modern problems. If it takes hula-hoops, playdough, or beenie babies, then so be it!

I propose an Axiom to be incorporated into Trek simming philosophy:

"All real life Retro Technology is inherently, by proven history, de facto part of Trek canon."

- PSF

[Treymiar]

I'd like to balance in a little ying with my yang, here.

I am a believer in bringing generations together, not dividing them. Rather than tearing down past creations and reinventing them (Abrams), expand upon the legacy which came before.

Draconian adherence to procedures is one ditch along the side of the road. But the ruinous ditch on the other side of the road is change merely for the sake of change. The healthy road balances honoring what came before with exploring what can come ahead. There's no reason that you can't do both.

Destroying Vulcan or Romulus? That's just sensationalist Herostratus'ism, in my opinion. Consoling simmers with logic fractured timeline'ism doesn't change the glaring reality, those who want to enjoy the TOS legacy are now separated from the new 'yeah, but it has cool special effects' world.

Ying & Yang, Creativity & common sense, Tradition & innovation...
The best world accommodates artful harmony in contrasts.

[Alex]

A random thought on your induced coma bit, but we saw plenty of cases where a doctor used a hypospray on someone and they were knocked out. I suppose one could argue that that is a form of anesthesia, but then one could also argue that a medically induced coma is also caused by anesthesia. Therefore, knocking someone unconscious with a hypospray is inducing a short-term coma.

But that being said, there are drawbacks to using retro technology as well. Would a 9mm Luger do the job as effectively as a phaser? Yes and no. Yes, you could certainly threaten and kill someone with a Luger, as well as any other chemically propelled projectile weapon (slug thrower), but is it as versatile? No, it's not. A phaser has multiple settings for multiple functions. It is capable of stunning someone, essentially inflicting non-lethal damage. A firearm could do that, but it takes either a specially designed weapon or at the very least specially design ammunition, and even then isn't guaranteed to drop someone as easily as a phaser on stun. Plus, a phaser could be used to generate heat, such as lighting campfires or melting metal. A 9mm Luger can't do that. And of course, a phaser could just as easily kill someone, perhaps more easily, than the gun. Is a phaser better than a retro styled firearm? That's debatable, but for a Starfleet officer, it doesn't make much sense to be carrying around something that isn't standard issue. Having a collection of ancient firearms is one thing, but actively carrying one around on duty is something else, and would likely be pretty heavily frowned upon by the superior officers.

Then there's your NASA X-20. While there isn't necessarily anything wrong with your suggestion, one could argue that your using technology that is even less advanced than believable. I would find it hard to believe that there has been no other chemically propelled spacecraft since the X-20, a craft that was last flown in 1968. Now I don't know the specifics of the mission, but a more advanced airframe coupled with rocket propulsion feels like it would have made more sense. I understand your point is that retro technology would work, and that there isn't a reason why we should reinvent the wheel, but the wheel has already been reinvented. By 2391, I find it hard to believe that the best rocket propelled space plane capable of flying in an atmospheric briar patch is a craft cancelled in 1968. Perhaps it only looked like one on the outside but was equipped with contemporary Starfleet technology since computers will have improved immensely. Just look at how much computers have improved by 2015. Another 400 hundred years would make a huge difference.

Maybe it's better to clarify your axiom. Contemporary (for 2391) technology made to look retro or based on something contemporary to real life (2015 or earlier) presumably still utilizes 24th century technological advancements. Is it really an X-20, or a spacecraft designed to look like the X-20? Is it really a 9mm Luger from 20th century Earth, or is it a 24th century firearm made from updated materials and improved designs, that just happens to look like a Luger. Considering how much pistols have advanced since WWII, I doubt that you would find many Luger's that are standard issue. Do they still shoot? Certainly. But that doesn't mean that there isn't better technology already available.

I don't think we should reject ideas because "that's just not the way things are done," but I don't agree that something 400 years old is better just because we know that it exists in real life. Part of the appeal of Star Trek, for me at least, is seeing that advanced technology, and the dream for what might be possible. I'll grant you that we should probably consider breaking out of using only what was seen in canon, but I disagree with saying that retro is going to necessarily be better.