The age of the antihero

[Refuge]

Except, it wasn't...

This is the part that frustrates me. Every other series will get a pass for similar problems...

Not so sure about that

 

[Crazy Eddie]

According to our friend Memory Alpha it is an important component to warp propulsion systems.

Only to the extent that a warp engine won't work without it. Of course, a smashed and disabled warp engine that has an intact diliuthium processor is still a smashed and disabled warp engine, so...

An important component Voq needed and found on the Shenzhou. Starfleet were well aware of the importance of dilithium

So were the Klingons, but when it came to the Corvan colony, they were aiming to DESTROY the facility, not capture it. Evidently, the Klingon Empire has no particular shortage of dilithium or the processors thereof (Praxis being not-yet exploded at this point) and has no real need to capture resources from the Federation.

Voq is another matter altogether. He's been reduced to a scavenger at this point and will never again be a major contributor to the war effort. In fact, the only other thing the ship of the dead ever actually does in this war is get its ass kicked by Discovery.

It makes no sense that given its importance the idiots on the Shenzhou left theirs for the picking.

There doesn't seem to have been any actual dilithium left in the processor, though, seeing how it had all broken down into a thin residue around the device. The ship of the dead had its own dilithium, apparently, they just needed some way to mount the crystal.

 

[fireproof78]

Yes, it was. I've rewatched the first 5 episodes so far. I was pleasantly surprised to see the traditional warp core column in the Shenzou, which I hadn't noticed the first time.

When they "uncouple" the processor, the whole thing powers down. And...

..it was a joke.

Mine was a joke too...lighten up

Not so sure about that

You don't know Star Trek then

 

[Prax]

Mine was a joke too...lighten up

You don't know Star Trek then

Emoji saves the day. I'll have to work on that.

 

[Prax]

Not so sure about that

I think you will find more success and fulfillment with a new subject of dispute. Let's let telescopes be telescopes, and search for other items to discuss. I will support your choice.

 

[ralfy]

Which they didn't know at the time. And "At the time" is what I'm asking you. What reason did they have AT THE TIME THEY ABANDONED SHIP to remove the dilithium processor? Based on what they knew at the time or could have reasonably been expected to guess?

Which they didn't have to know at the time, as it is expected for crews in armed ships to follow SOP. Logically, given auto-destruct mechanisms, that would mean automated mechanisms to disable devices. We see similar in some automobiles today. How hard is that to do for a ship with much more advanced technology?

"Prevent them from taking control of the ship" is the purpose of scuttling. Discovery, being disabled, is in no danger of falling under enemy control. Salvage -- even military salvage -- is common enough that trying to prevent it is something you would only do if the leftover parts have intelligence value. Shenzhou is too old for this to be the case.

And yet the enemy managed to make use of it. Another example of lack of common sense, and the reason why it's a plot hole.

None of which have EVER been used to further immobilize a ship that was already disabled or wrecked. A dozen examples have already been shown to you of this being the case. Why do you continue to ignore them?

Which doesn't counter the claim that it's a plot hole, as that shows a lack of common sense.

I didn't do that either. Is there any reason why I should have?

Because it's easy to do so.

Because they're the only ones we know of who were actually present on the ship at any time between the Battle and Burnham's receipt of the telescope. Until we have evidence that someone else visited the wreck off screen, it's logical to assume the crew packed it themselves when they evacuated. And again, it was pointed out that they were in no particular hurry to do this, with the battle being over and the only reason to abandon the ship was its apparently irreparable loss of motive power.

And yet they failed to disable what the enemy managed to use. There's your plot hole.

Didn't assume that the enemy could use it? Reasonable point for "hippie explorers," maybe, but not a Star Fleet crew trained for combat.

Assumed that the enemy didn't need outdated devices? That's expected for anyone who lacks common sense.

As explained earlier, if my old house could be burned down, it should be easy to burn down or booby trap it so the global communist conspiracy can't use it.

Exactly, and not just a "global communist conspiracy" but even nearby enemy.

So is there any particular reason to burn down my old house?

So that the enemy can't use it. Also, booby trapping is better, and given fancy technology seen in this franchise, not hard to imagine.

It's not a plot hole. The crew of the Shenzhou didn't know scuttling the Shenzhou would be necessary. Characters acting on imperfect knowledge is a plot element, not a hole.

No, that's due to lack of common sense. And given the ease in which it could have been done as well as claims that they had all the time to do so makes things worse.

Romeo poisoning himself because he doesn't know Juliet is still alive is not a plot hole. Oedipus murdering his father and banging his own mother is not a plot hole. Picard taking a box of personal belongings from the Stargazer that happens to contain Bok's mind control device is not a plot hole. Gul Dukat beaming onto Deep Space Nine to and giving the computer his access code -- only to discover his code doesn't work and now he's as trapped here as they are -- is not a plot hole.

That's faulty analogy. In this case, an armed, trained crew with a ship that has advanced features and that spent time to retrieve a telescope (with a will and instructions to give both to the mutineer, or did that take place later?) could have disabled devices that the enemy could use and did not. There's your plot hole: lack of common sense.

If Saru had known that the one-in-a-million scenario of a stranded Klingon warship needing their dilithium processor was going to happen six months later, he would have simply sabotaged the processor so the Klingons couldn't use it. But if he had known that, he also would have known that the boarding action on the Ship of the Dead would prove crucial to overcoming the cloaking device in the first place, in which case he probably would have painted a giant "get your dilithium processor here!" sign on the hull.

Exactly, or disabled or booby trapped it, and easily. That's why it's a plot hole.

Common sense tells you that the Klingons have no reason to salvage a dead hulk for parts they can just as easily get from their own supply stores. Voq's situation only occurs because it is extraordinarily uncommon.

It's the other way round: common sense tells you that they do, especially when they have no access to their own supplies.

 

[ralfy]

According to our friend Memory Alpha it is an important component to warp propulsion systems. An important component Voq needed and found on the Shenzhou. Starfleet were well aware of the importance of dilithium as Lorca said in protecting one of the mines - "Every starship, Klingon or Federation, runs on dilithium crystals. If we can't protect Corvan, the war is lost." It makes no sense that given its importance the idiots on the Shenzhou left theirs for the picking.

Probably another problem with the series, i.e., if the mines were not adequately protected. Given that, what we're seeing are not just antiheroes but characters who may also be complacent.

 

[ralfy]

In the grand scheme, the telescope/scuttling issue in DSC isn't any worse than, say, Scotty bringing Peter Preston to the bridge in TWOK instead of taking him directly to sickbay. Both can be rationalized in-universe, but both emphasize dramatic sentimentality over expectations of how things should be done based on real-world standard practices. Even so, TWOK didn't suffer because of that Preston scene, and the telescope is pretty far down on the list of the issues that DSC has.

Indeed, one of the points raised about the telescope scene is that it was melodramatic.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Which they didn't have to know at the time, as it is expected for crews in armed ships to follow SOP.

And since it has been CONCLUSIVELY demonstrated that self destruct of disabled starships is not and has never been standard operating procedure, it is a fact that the crew of the Shenzhou did, in fact, follow SOP.

This was already explained earlier. Why are you choosing to ignore this?

Which doesn't counter the claim that it's a plot hole, as that shows a lack of common sense.

Common sense is knowledge based on what should NORMALLY happen. Voq's situation was anything but normal.

Didn't assume that the enemy could use it?

Didn't assume that they would use it. It's not a reasonable thing to expect of an alien species that has its own military logistics and supply chains. It's certainly not reasonable to expect that the Klingons would have abandoned their so-called "flag ship" in space for six months without bothering to rescue the crew or send a ship to help with repairs.

And in hindsight, that assumption wound up being correct. If Voq hadn't salvaged the dilithium processor, it would have changed nothing about the outcome, as Kol still would have come to take the ship and its technology anyway.

Exactly, and not just a "global communist conspiracy" but even nearby enemy.

So my failing to booby trap my old house so my rivals can't move into it is a plot hole now?

So that the enemy can't use it. Also, booby trapping is better

When has the Federation EVER deliberately booby trapped abandoned ships?

It's the other way round: common sense tells you that they do, especially when they have no access to their own supplies.

And IF the crew had known they had no success to their own supplies -- a situation that is itself EXTREMELY uncommon in a military conflict literally hours old -- they would have acted differently.

So it's a choice by the crew convenient to the circumstances of the plot. It is not a "plot hole" as such since their actions were totally reasonable under the circumstances.

 

[Prax]

Can I just say, these uberlong messages can be tedious for us cell phone users.

 

[fireproof78]

Can I just say, these uberlong messages can be tedious for us cell phone users.

Not only that, but this is feeling entirely circular now. @ralfy and @Crazy Eddie and others (myself included, to be fair) have made up their minds about the telescope. Whether it's a plot hole or not, it really isn't relevant any more.

 

[Refuge]

^ I think the discord is more to do with so-called Standard Operating Procedures and how the Starfleet of this Trek conduct themselves. You are right about relevance. Because this time line is where it is I don't (personally) give a rat's arse about what regulations and SOP happened after 'Discovery' and the rules of war in its universe. That only leaves 'Enterprise' as a yardstick if that. Now if someone could produce regulations current to 'Discovery' that excused the placement of this and that (avoiding the 't' word but the processor as well) not requiring the Shenzhou to be a convenient floating writer's prop then good job.

The other conclusion is that those on the Shenzhou and frankly Starfleet thereafter were not overly smart. That would also fit.

 

[fireproof78]

The other conclusion is that those on the Shenzhou and frankly Starfleet thereafter were not overly smart. That would also fit.

There are other conclusions as well. That's the point. It isn't just a "plot hole" or "lazy writing" or whatever.

But, whatever helps others deal with it...

 

[KittyHAWK]

Hmm.. Refuge admitted he/she has not watched the episodes. So this discussion about antiheros is rather moot, Refuge? Why don't you watch the first 9 and maybe we can take your ah "gander", as RPGers, call it, "lawful stupid." Simply, by comparison, Burnham is not a a true lawful good character. She does not completely abide by the err so-call military laws that govern the chain of command and decisions that are either black or white and nothing between. Neither is she defined as anti-hero character. You may have miscontrue the true nature of such. Anti-heros do not necessary risk their butts - it is not their propensity to do so but do unwillling because he/she has some semblance of responsiblity for others.

Certainly, being in Starfleet, a ranked officer must follow procedures, and the obey the precepts of command without question. That is the essence of lawful good. Wouldn't that make it quite predictable in the outcome or decision of Burham? She was being attacked by the torch-bearer and survived by striking a death-blow in the first episode. Tis sublte foreshadowing of how the Klingons will "negotiate" in the future. She was not going to abide by sitting on her arse while knowing how Klingons entreat their counterparts. She even stated that "Vulcans attacked first when encountering Klingon warships, always." Tis obvious foreshadowing of how Burham will make swift decisions and ulimately sacrifice her prosperity over obeying commands. This does not make her a criminal as a dishonored officer by Starfleet's judgement.

Far from it, she is more like a Chaotic Good Character. Bend the rules, see what true evil is like or masquerade as one - even help less-honorable ones. These types of characters are what true heroes are made of. They find exceptions from exceptions. They are not bound but free and righteous in his/her own way.

One of best CG hero I read was Drizzt Do"Urden. A elf born into an evil society of drow, dark elves that live competely underground, enemies to all races. Guess how he survived this enviroment? And when he ventured to the surface, he was shunned, nearly everywhere he went. He did, however, met some exceptional friends and exceptional enemies - as Burham has, so far - give or take - the former and latter could be interchangeable in the future.

 

[Refuge]

That's a lie Kitty, I've watched every single one but tonights.

 

[KittyHAWK]

I read in a post you mentioned you did not watch

No I haven't watched a thing.

Err right here.. Unless your are beings sarcastic?

 

[KittyHAWK]

I wouldn't want to discredit Lorca as a shady character, yet. there were hints that he was a POW. He also stated that he knows what the Klingons do to POWs.

So far, Lorca's decisions (oh, recommending his admiral to walk into a trap was definitely intentional) are desperate measures of a man who was, most likely, traumatized and still, somehow, held command after. In this way, his motivations are tainted. Which begs the question, how long can he sustain such strain until he breaks as Ash did? the eventuality is that he will be relieved, maybe forceabley, of his command by Burham.

Oh, there is Ash.. I am not touching not subject.

 

[KittyHAWK]

I am not trolling, that's your post.. Can't tell unless you use an emoji. :O)

 

[Refuge]

I am not trolling, that's your post.. Can't tell unless you use an emoji. :O)

Kitty, I think there might be a language barrier between us. I was kidding and will be more aware of using emojis in such situations. Your responses to the topic were interesting.

 

[Refuge]

Damn I'm right. This show IS about glorifying antiheroes.