What's at stake?

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

High stakes: The fate of the universe, the timestream, the Federation, etc.
Mission stakes: Communicating with a lifeform, battling another ship, saving your crew from a threat
Personal stakes: Two characters' relationships, an officer's career, the life of one guy
Planetary stakes: Prime Directive keeping/breaking, first contact, society's ideals butting heads

Most people will agree that having too many high stakes stories can get a bit tiresome because you're compelled to keep raising the stakes to make things matter. They work better as films. Many become annoyed when everything becomes blatantly personal for characters (something directly affecting a character-long - lost sibling/love interest/relative), instead of relatable (something someone can understand due to personal experience/POV, or tries to understand, or gets drawn into despite themselves)

So my question is, what's your opinion of stakes in Trek stories? What's a good example of stakes done right? How should they not be done?

 

[Shawnster]

How should they not be done?

High stakes can be overdone. Nearly every season of DISCO was high stakes. It was overdone. Same with Picard - S1. It's too much. It's felt as if short 10 episode seasons demand the highest stakes to captivate audiences.

That's tiring. I don't need such major stakes to keep interested, especially if that comes at the expense of character development.

A rich tapestry has many colors. Some bold, others muted. They all work together to make a wonderful piece of art.

 

[fireproof78]

So my question is, what's your opinion of stakes in Trek stories? What's a good example of stakes done right? How should they not be done?

Stakes depend greatly on the story being told, and the investment of the characters. You can do lower stake stories that take great personal pains and magnify them. Or, you can take larger stakes and threaten larger targets to support motivating the larger powers.

Stakes work depending on the investment of the characters. If I'm invested in the characters, the stakes can be low or high and I'll stick with it. If the characters seem unaffected or the results feel rather predetermined then it lands a little flat.

Characters drive it more than anything else.

 

[Tosk]

My problem with "the highest of high stakes!" (the universe is gonna 'splode, the multiverse goes poof, etc) is that it's obviously not going to happen.

The stakes have to matter to the characters beyond 'I live in the universe' or I'm not gonna care either.

Don't try to make me worried. Make me care.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

My problem with "the highest of high stakes!" (the universe is gonna 'splode, the multiverse goes poof, etc) is that it's obviously not going to happen.

Or if it does happen, it'll magically un-happen (all a dream/vision, alternate timeline that manages to be undone, etc.)

 

[FredH]

Mission, personal & planetary stakes are fine, but I personally feel “high” stakes as defined here should mostly only be used when the story actually does end up changing something gigantic — Vulcan gets destroyed, the timeline is changed, etc. So very rarely, and never as a simple threat-of-the-week (or season).

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

High Stakes should be farely rare in the grand scheme of things within a show.

Far smaller stakes like Personal, Planetary, Mission stakes should be the vast majority of stakes in the majority of story lines.

 

[publiusr]

A storyline where a kind word prevents a war would be nice—though perhaps more of a Doctor Who story.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

High Stakes should be farely rare in the grand scheme of things within a show.

I agree. High stakes 24/7 very quickly = no stakes at all. Cry existential wolf often enough and the townsfolk ignore your pleas.

However, if you're made to care sufficiently about someone, their concerns increase in perceived magnitude. The entire universe needn't be in peril if you fear for your favorite character or, by extension, somebody they come to care about.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I agree. High stakes 24/7 very quickly = no stakes at all. Cry existential wolf often enough and the townsfolk ignore your pleas.

However, if you're made to care sufficiently about someone, their concerns increase in perceived magnitude. The entire universe needn't be in peril if you fear for your favorite character or, by extension, somebody they come to care about.

That's one of the reasons I liked Star Trek: Beyond.

The stakes weren't that high, only a StarFleet Space Station was at risk and potentially any other Space Stations nearby.

But the stakes still mattered, a lot of people were living on that Space Station.

 

[The Salt Umpire]

A storyline where a kind word prevents a war would be nice—though perhaps more of a Doctor Who story.

"Don't you think she looks tired?"

 

[fireproof78]

"Don't you think she looks tired?"

Tragic, potentially.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I definitely rolled my eyes when Discovery's first season pulled the "the entire multiverse will be destroyed!" trope. Michael's redemption was far more interesting than nonsense so-big-it's-meaningless stakes.

 

[Etbj SMY]

So my question is, what's your opinion of stakes in Trek stories? What's a good example of stakes done right? How should they not be done?

Restricting it to TOS, I'd say A PRIVATE LITTLE WAR. Then, negatively, THE MARK OF GIDEON