Starbases - Mission Profiles?

I thought so. I was basically trying to support your point there. Sorry, if I was unclear, there. No offense intended.

No offense taken, and I knew what you meant, I was just being a little bit of a smart-aleck. It’s a problem I have on occasion. The medication isn’t working for it, unfortunately. :stuck_out_tongue:

There’s medication for that? :smiley:

Yup. It’s called Boottothearseium. You can get it in pill form! It works wonders, most of the time…:crazy_face::sunglasses:

1 Like

I think I’ve had that before, but in a suppository.

1 Like

I updated a document I’ve been working on for this which combines SSiron’s sheet with the Duty Profiles as well as the Traits and Talents from Continuing Missions pages.

There’s some placeholder info at the moment, but the stats and such should be there for all the discussed starbases. :slight_smile:

Let me know what think?

(The link displays best in Chrome, and when we get things more along I’ll convert it to a PDF… )


Looks good. With it, the Starbase 173 from my campaign would be a Sigma Class station with the Administration duty profile, the Border Outpost trait and the Sector Command talent - very much like I envisioned it for the campaign.

I have a few comments/suggestions about your page. One, great work on it so far, although some fluff/background on each frame needs to be added as well as basic timelines for each type of station.

That said, I think the scale you have listed for Helios needs to be larger, and I think the Kepler class should have the advanced sensor suite instead of the enhanced defense grid and Firebase. Also, the scale for the Cardassian Kelvas Repair Facility needs to change. That suggested scale was going off of a Nor class being scale 8. Since DS9 is scale 12, the Kelvas needs to be at least scale 14, maybe as high as 16. It is probably close to 2 times the size (generally speaking) of a Nor class station, if not 3 times the size. (Although don’t do that with scale, cause that would just be ridiculous…)

1 Like

Thank you. :slight_smile: I agree that some fluff needs to be added for sure. I’ll probably grab most of that from Memory Alpha/Memory Beta/Ex-Astris-Scientia which I hope will let me fill in some of the timelines as well.

Your points have been noted and updated. :slight_smile: The Helios was a typo, I’ve corrected it to Scale 12. I also went with a 15 for the Kelvas and upped the Docking to 22 (Scale 15) (I know there’s no scale that size, but I’m guessing it could be used to repair another station maybe?)

Hopefully I should be able to get some fluff in in next few days. :slight_smile:

This is just my first remark, but the one I am sure of proposing. I would suggest to give ‘Commerce and Recreation’-moduled Starbases access to the ‘Diplomatic Suites’ talent.

Good point! Done. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Just to say, I like the looks of this :slight_smile:

Mission Profile: Saving the universe, guide the Minbari, with Valen. Hopefully it was for Babylon 4 and not for DS9.
Can’t believe that they will reboot Babylon 5 and Star Trek soon. All I can think is, don’t do it or at least don’t mess up and do modiphius will have rights on Strange new world series?

What reboot of Star Trek are you referring to? Strange New Worlds is a prequel (to TOS) and/or a sequel/spinoff of Discovery, not a reboot. The 2009 film was a reboot.

Then again, I consider Discovery an alternate timeline from the Prime Timeline because of all the breaks from TOS canon in seasons 1 and 2, but I wouldn’t call that a reboot.

OK prequel of TOS (or reboot of the pilot, that could have been TOS).

My personal head canon is that all the temporal cold war stuff we saw in Enterprise caused ripple changes that we see in Discovery.


Youmean all the breaks from fanon in the first two seasons. If you look closely enough you will eventually notice that most of the breaks from canons are no real breaks. The few breaks that are left are simply mistakes which happened in every single Trek show.

No, I mean stuff like redesigning and resizing the Enterprise so that it went from a canon length of 289 meters in TOS to a length of 442 meters in DISC, not to mention its completely different warp engine pylons going from straight to swept-back. This was not a “mistake” nor were they “breaks from fanon,” it was a deliberate decision by the DISC showrunners to give the Enterprise a Cosmetically Advanced Prequel visual look. I’m not the only Trekkie with whom this decision doesn’t well.

See the Star Trek entry at the above link under “Live-Action TV” for further details.

1 Like

Sorry, but the size of the USS Enterprise was never mentioned during TOS. Thus it is not a break from canon if they mention a different size than the one used since the 1960s. it is only a break from fanon. And that applies to every single so called break from canon in DIS, PIC and even LD. They could do that because those things were never really mentioned in all the series and movies from TOS to ENT. And that’s the reason fans react so strongly because the producers decide to ignore fanon. But they never ignored canon. If you find something that seems to break canon, do a little research. You will often discover that there is no break because the item in question was never mention in canon but only fan speculation.
A change in the visuals is never a break from canon, especially in science fiction, because technology marches on and visuals which looked futuristic several decades ago often look completely out of date today. The movies have aged well, TNG and the later series have aged well, but TOS and TAS had not. So they had to update the visuals and included technologies which were completely unknown at the time TOS was produced but exsist now or are atleast in development.
And BTW Roddenberry himself said that the only reason the Klingons looked different in TMP was the advancement of the prosthetics. For him the look of the Klingons never changed. And you can say that this also applies to the Starfleet uniforms and the design of the Enterprise.
Just because you do not like something from a Franchise does NEVER remove from canon (or place it in a different timeline). There had been many time travel episodes in every single Star Trek series. And you can assume that these were not the only ones in the history of Starfleet. So, if you place DIS in a different timeline than you should place every single series (or even season of a series) in a timeline of its own.

I refer you to The Official Starships Collection by Eaglemoss which has officially published all the canon sizes of Federation, Alien, Massive, and Small starships all across the Star Trek franchise. As this collection has been authorized and licensed by CBS Paramount, it is canon by word of the owners of the Star Trek franchise.

Feel free to have a look at them. You’ll see the TOS Enterprise has a canon length of 289 meters while the Discovery Enterprise has a length of 442 meters. Hence, they’re different ships. Yeah, there was a hologram of the DISC Enterprise in the first episode of ST: Picard along with other starships named Enterprise, including the Enterprise-D, but this retcon strikes some of us as hamfisted. My headcanon is different from yours, Caranfang. The key words in my post above were the words “I consider.” when I said “I consider Discovery an alternate timeline.”

And Star Trek is filled with alternate universe even in-story. Remember the Mirror Universe? Remember all the alternate universes we glimpsed in Paralells (TNG 7x11)? Since we saw them in a television series, aren’t they all canon too?

1 Like