I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice needed

[Extrocomp]

When it’s complete, it will include every fictional species that appeared or was mentioned in a Star Trek episode, movie, comic, novel, video game or RPG book. It will also include unique mutants, hybrids and species from other universes that appeared in crossover stories. Every species will have a citation of the story where the species was named. Due to the editing restrictions on TrekBBS, I won’t be posting this list here until I’m pretty sure it’s complete.

I’ve run into several problems in making this list that I hope you guys can help me with.

1. There are multiple instances where an unnamed species that appeared on TV is given two different names in non-canon sources. Should I put both names on the list as separate species or should I count them as the same species?

The Edoans and Triexians are the easiest example to deal with, since both species exist in the same continuity.

The Efrosians and Atreonids are both supposed to be the species of the ST VI Federation president. In the Pocket Books continuity, he’s an Efrosian named Ra-ghoratreii. In the Decipher continuity, he’s an Atreonid named Eteon tar-Chereos.

The Caitians and Regulans are both supposed to be the species of the feline humanoids seen in ST IV.

The Markalians and B’kaazi are another example. Emissary had a thief from an unnamed species being caught by Odo. The novelization said he was a B’kaazi. The episode Hippocratic Oath had a character named Regana Tosh who appeared to be the same species as the thief from Emissary. Although the episode only says that he was involved with a “Markalian smuggling operation” the CCG says he is a Markalian.

The Elachi and the Vertians are both supposed to be the unnamed race from Silent Enemy, but they were fleshed out in different ways.

2. There are several occasions where the same species has a completely different appearance or a completely different description in different sources. Should I count them as separate species or just inconsistent interpretations of the same species?

In the video games A Final Unity and Generations, the Chodak species looked like egg-shaped molluscs, but in the game Future’s Past, the Chodak were reptilian humanoids.

In Star Trek Enterprise, the Axanar were bald pink-skinned humanoids with a vaguely reptilian appearance. In the Last Unicorn Games RPG, the Axanarri were more human-like in appearance and had a wide range of hair colors.

If I remember correctly, the Ceti Eel was a lot more eel-like in the Wrath of Khan novelization.

The Kryonian Tiger from the Starfleet Survival Guide is a large cat that lives in arctic environments. The Kryonian Tiger from the Creatures RPG sourcebook is a simian creature that lives in the forests and jungles of Kryon V.

The Wanoni Tracehound from the Starfleet Survival Guide is native to Arak III and has exoskeletal armor plates and venomous spines on its neck. The Wanoni Tracehound from Creatures is native to Betazed and closely resembles a mastiff dog.

The Kinshaya from the FASA RPG had a very different appearance than the ones in the Pocket Books continuity.

The Denevan neural parasites from the IDW comics encase the victim’s head, rather than attaching themselves to the back.

3. Different novels had different explanations of the nature of the mutations caused by the galactic barrier. According to Q-Squared, Gary Mitchell was possessed by Q, who was trapped inside the galactic barrier at the time, while Elizabeth Dehner had absorbed a smaller portion of Q’s essence. In Greg Cox’s Q Continuum trilogy, it’s implied that Gary Mitchell was given his power by 0, a malevolent being who was imprisoned on the other side of the Barrier. In the novels Valiant and Maker, the mutations have nothing to do with any omnipotent being.
Should “Galactic Barrier mutant” be counted as a separate species from “Human with Q powers”? Or should they all be lumped together as “Human with goldlike powers”?

4. Should I add unnamed species to the list?

 

[Christopher]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

There are multiple instances where an unnamed species that appeared on TV is given two different names in non-canon sources. Should I put both names on the list as separate species or should I count them as the same species?

If they're explicitly meant to be the same species, then I'd say list them under the most commonly used or best-supported name and mention the other name as a variant. After all, it makes sense for a species to have more than one name for itself. Am I a human, a menschlich, a ningen, a binadamu, or something else?

The Efrosians and Atreonids are both supposed to be the species of the ST VI Federation president. In the Pocket Books continuity, he’s an Efrosian named Ra-ghoratreii. In the Decipher continuity, he’s an Atreonid named Eteon tar-Chereos.

And in the movie novelization, he's a Deltan named Ra-ghoratreii. The novels cribbed the character name from the novelization and the species name from behind-the-scenes sources. The name "Efrosian" was coined by the movie's makeup staff as an homage to the film's production manager Mel Efros.

The Elachi and the Vertians are both supposed to be the unnamed race from Silent Enemy, but they were fleshed out in different ways.

And I still don't understand STO's conceit that a species whose defining trait was total silence somehow has a phonetic name for itself.

2. There are several occasions where the same species has a completely different appearance or a completely different description in different sources. Should I count them as separate species or just inconsistent interpretations of the same species?

Most of the time, inconsistent interpretations would seem the better path. But in some cases, like the two different Ktarian makeups seen in "The Game" and Voyager, I often think that maybe we're dealing with two different species that share a national/cultural identity and thus use the same name for themselves. I made this more or less explicit with the various Rigelian species in Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel.

In Star Trek Enterprise, the Axanar were bald pink-skinned humanoids with a vaguely reptilian appearance. In the Last Unicorn Games RPG, the Axanarri were more human-like in appearance and had a wide range of hair colors.

Naturally, canon trumps apocrypha. Onscreen Trek is the "real" thing, or as close to it as we're going to get. Tie-ins are just conjectural expansions of the canon -- the "historical fiction" to the canon's "history." If two apocryphal sources disagree, then it's a matter of choice. But if canon says one thing and tie-ins another, then canon wins, period. No harm listing the alternative version mentioned by the apocryphal source, but be clear that it's apocryphal.

The Kinshaya from the FASA RPG had a very different appearance than the ones in the Pocket Books continuity.

IIRC, the Kinshaya were actually created by John M. Ford in his novel The Final Reflection. He then did some work on the FASA game and incorporated them there.

The Denevan neural parasites from the IDW comics encase the victim’s head, rather than attaching themselves to the back.

They also arrive on Deneva about a decade earlier in that timeline. I tend to assume, therefore, that they're a different subspecies of the parasites.

Should “Galactic Barrier mutant” be counted as a separate species from “Human with Q powers”? Or should they all be lumped together as “Human with goldlike powers”?

A single altered individual of a species doesn't constitute a separate species. You need an ongoing, self-reproducing population to constitute a species. I don't think Galactic Barrier powers would be inherited; they were just a supercharging of "esper" potential that was already inherent in certain humans.

4. Should I add unnamed species to the list?

If you want to be comprehensive, then yes. As with the question of multiple names, there's more to identity than nomenclature. Names merely describe things rather than defining them.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

Hmm. I'd never even noticed that the Ktarian makeup had changed (but then again, Naomi is half-Human, which might be reasonable as an in-universe explanation). Far more noticeable would be the difference in the Trill makeup (has anybody come up with an in-universe explanation for that?)

 

[Idran]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

Yeah; I forget all the details, but "Forged in Fire" offhandedly mentioned a mutation of the Augment virus spreading to Trill (the planet) from a visiting group of Klingons.

 

[Christopher]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

Hmm. I'd never even noticed that the Ktarian makeup had changed (but then again, Naomi is half-Human, which might be reasonable as an in-universe explanation).

It was initially changed because we saw Naomi's birth in "Deadlock" (though she wouldn't be named until some time later) and they weren't going to put an elaborate forehead prosthetic on a baby, so they changed it to those few bitty horns. For a while, I assumed that maybe the fuller "The Game"-style forehead would grow in over time, but the adult Naomi seen in "Shattered" had just horns.

Far more noticeable would be the difference in the Trill makeup (has anybody come up with an in-universe explanation for that?)

I think it was Trill: Unjoined that explained Odan's host species from "The Host" as a different subspecies of Trill humanoid. I think the idea is that they're sort of the Trill equivalent of Neanderthals, a near-extinct early form of the species, although I can't quite remember whether that's what the book said or just my own pet theory.

EDIT: Oh, I see Forged in Fire said differently. Since Unjoined was from the same authors, I guess the "Neanderthal" theory must just be mine.

 

[Markonian]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

And I still don't understand STO's conceit that a species whose defining trait was total silence somehow has a phonetic name for itself.

That's the Romulan name for that faction of amoral Vertians. It's derived from a Human word relating to sponges/fungi.

Dogs don't have a phonetic name for themselves either, yet we call them dogs. People name things.

 

[Christopher]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

^Okay, as long as it's someone else's name for them. But when I looked up the entry for the "Elachi" in the STO Wiki, all their ship classes seemed to have distinct alien-sounding names. Were those Romulan too?

(I'm still waiting for someone to explain how a silicon-based rock creature that makes sounds like grinding boulders can call itself the Horta.)

 

[Markonian]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

^ Good catch. No explanation is given for the ship class names, e.g. the Sheshar-class dreadnought, but it is not uncommon for classes to have alien names. For example, all the Voth classes have English names. The science vessel from "Distant Origin" (and the Turei ship from "Dragon's Teeth") is the Palisade class.

 

[Extrocomp]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

Most of the time, inconsistent interpretations would seem the better path. But in some cases, like the two different Ktarian makeups seen in "The Game" and Voyager, I often think that maybe we're dealing with two different species that share a national/cultural identity and thus use the same name for themselves. I made this more or less explicit with the various Rigelian species in Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel.

My personal theory is that normally only male Ktarians have horns and Naomi got them due to her hybrid genetics.

A single altered individual of a species doesn't constitute a separate species. You need an ongoing, self-reproducing population to constitute a species. I don't think Galactic Barrier powers would be inherited; they were just a supercharging of "esper" potential that was already inherent in certain humans.

According to Valiant, the powers are inherited. The descendants of the SS Valiant crew all have minor telepathic and telekinetic abilities.

If you want to be comprehensive, then yes. As with the question of multiple names, there's more to identity than nomenclature. Names merely describe things rather than defining them.

I'm not sure how comprehensive I want to be. In Star Trek there are many examples where we have a name like "Bardeezan", and we don't know if it's a species or a nation or a cultural group. I don't like including names like that. In real-life taxonomy, a new species is only accepted when it has a name and a description, so maybe I should follow a similar approach.

I think it was Trill: Unjoined that explained Odan's host species from "The Host" as a different subspecies of Trill humanoid. I think the idea is that they're sort of the Trill equivalent of Neanderthals, a near-extinct early form of the species, although I can't quite remember whether that's what the book said or just my own pet theory.

Oh, I see Forged in Fire said differently. Since Unjoined was from the same authors, I guess the "Neanderthal" theory must just be mine.

No you were right the first time. In Trill: Unjoined, Dax experiences the memories of Sef, one of the first symbionts to merge with a humanoid host. The host is described as having a "steeply ridged brow".

 

[JD]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

I've came up with my own theory for Naomi's ridges. The Ktarian we saw in The Game had to enlarged sections of their forehead, with a ridge going down the middle. My theory is that the horns are under the sectioned forehead and ridges, and since Naomi is only half-Katarian, she didn't develop the forehead sections or the ridge.

 

[Christopher]

Re: I’m making a list of all fictional species in Star Trek. Advice ne

I'm pretty sure that other Ktarians, including Naomi's father, have been described in the books as having forehead horns like hers. As I said, I prefer the idea that they're two different species and that "Ktarian" is a shared nationality. It's a demonymic form of the name of a planet, after all, so why can't it be a planet with residents from more than one humanoid species? Maybe two different species evolved there, like the Valakians and the Menk in "Dear Doctor." Or maybe one was native and the other colonized the planet long ago. Or maybe they're both colonists. Not every name has to be a species name. There are other ways of defining group identity.

(Sometimes I wish TV Trek had gone with the assumption that ridged Klingons and smooth-headed Klingons were different species and that "Klingon" was their shared cultural identity as races of the Klingon Empire. Then it would've actually made sense as an empire, i.e. a multicultural state where one nation rules over others. Or maybe "Klingon" could've been more a religious/philosophical designation referring to people of any species who swore allegiance to the ways of Kahless.)