Quote from: yosemitemike;927624You don't really need to know any of that stuff to watch and follow the shows though.  In the case of Enterprise, knowing the canon just makes the show more confusing because Enterprise doesn't give a fuuuuck.  Only a hardcore Trekkie would get everything referenced and know its full meaning but that's not necessary to watch the shows at all.

I started getting lost with Voyager and their snapping of my disbelief suspenders. By the time Enterprise came on I was completely disinterested.

And I will admit that while I loved a lot of the writing in DS9, the final episode where Sisko fights Dukat in a reskinned version of Christ descending into Hell to fight Satan for the souls of the Damned was one of the lamest series finales I have ever seen. Only exceeded in craptasticness by the finale of Voyager.

Quote from: jeff37923;927670I started getting lost with Voyager and their snapping of my disbelief suspenders. By the time Enterprise came on I was completely disinterested.

Voyager hardly even referenced the canon because it was set in the Delta quadrant.  Voyager created its own problems like basing several episodes on one of the dullest, least interesting villain races in Trek: the Kazon.  Enterprise drove Trekkies nuts with how often it flipped the bird to the continuity.  

Quote from: jeff37923;927670And I will admit that while I loved a lot of the writing in DS9, the final episode where Sisko fights Dukat in a reskinned version of Christ descending into Hell to fight Satan for the souls of the Damned was one of the lamest series finales I have ever seen. Only exceeded in craptasticness by the finale of Voyager.

I think DS9 was the best written of all the Trek series but the finale was short on subtlety.  It carried through with the religious themes set up around Sisko as the Emissary but it did so in a rather ham-handed way.  The voyager finale was just really rushed and contrived.  We need to get them the rest of the way before the end of this season.  Blah blah time travel blah blah Borg conduit they're home now done.

Quote from: yosemitemike;927674Voyager hardly even referenced the canon because it was set in the Delta quadrant.  Voyager created its own problems like basing several episodes on one of the dullest, least interesting villain races in Trek: the Kazon.  Enterprise drove Trekkies nuts with how often it flipped the bird to the continuity.  

I think DS9 was the best written of all the Trek series but the finale was short on subtlety.  It carried through with the religious themes set up around Sisko as the Emissary but it did so in a rather ham-handed way.  The voyager finale was just really rushed and contrived.  We need to get them the rest of the way before the end of this season.  Blah blah time travel blah blah Borg conduit they're home now done.

That pretty much sums up the Voyager finale. There was no denouement. Poof, we're home, no reflection on what just happened, and yes, more time travel shenanigans (I felt like Brannon Braga couldn't write an episode without some form of time travel--though he isn't credited as a script writer for the finale). And, yeah, did the Kazon just simply suck.

Speaking of time travel stuff: Enterprise and that "Temporal Cold War." That stuff...sheesh (and there he is, Brannon Braga, all over the place in seasons 1-3 Enterprise).

Oh yeah....time travel endings, TNG did it, too. But at least the interplay between Q & Pic was interesting.

Quote from: yosemitemike;927674Voyager hardly even referenced the canon because it was set in the Delta quadrant.  Voyager created its own problems like basing several episodes on one of the dullest, least interesting villain races in Trek: the Kazon.

Never did watch Voyager, looked up the Kazon in Memory Alpha, and another ridged-forehead proud warrior race? Seriously?

Quote from: yosemitemike;927674The voyager finale was just really rushed and contrived.  We need to get them the rest of the way before the end of this season.  Blah blah time travel blah blah Borg conduit they're home now done.

Quote from: cranebump;927685That pretty much sums up the Voyager finale. There was no denouement. Poof, we're home, no reflection on what just happened, and yes, more time travel shenanigans (I felt like Brannon Braga couldn't write an episode without some form of time travel--though he isn't credited as a script writer for the finale). And, yeah, did the Kazon just simply suck.

I could deal with the time travel junk in the Voyager finale, but could not believe how the character of Admiral Janeway just completely abandoned the majority of her strong personal convictions to go back in time to save the crew from the "Trail of Tears" that she and the survivors went through.

Quote from: jeff37923;927690I could deal with the time travel junk in the Voyager finale, but could not believe how the character of Admiral Janeway just completely abandoned the majority of her strong personal convictions to go back in time to save the crew from the "Trail of Tears" that she and the survivors went through.

Worse than that. She went back in time to save ONE person. Knowing she was going to undo and possibly ruin everyone else who survived's  established lives.

Quote from: jeff37923;927690I could deal with the time travel junk in the Voyager finale, but could not believe how the character of Admiral Janeway just completely abandoned the majority of her strong personal convictions to go back in time to save the crew from the "Trail of Tears" that she and the survivors went through.

The character of Janeway was extremely inconsistent.  Her personality changed depending on who was writing a given episode.  Her personality shifted around so much that Mulgrew thought the character must be manic-depressive if not outright nuts.  Sometimes she was adamant about her principles.  Other times...not so much.  The extreme inconsistency of Janeway's character was one of Voyagers main writing issues.

Quote from: yosemitemike;927795...Mulgrew thought the character must be manic-depressive if not outright nuts.

Well then, there's your rationale for her changing the timeline to save one person. Now that I think about it, the USS Relativity and 29th Century Starfleet certainly knew about Janeway and her ability to seemingly zero in on time paradoxes. If future Janeway was changing their history, wouldn't they have tried to stop her?

Quote from: Krimson;927804Well then, there's your rationale for her changing the timeline to save one person. Now that I think about it, the USS Relativity and 29th Century Starfleet certainly knew about Janeway and her ability to seemingly zero in on time paradoxes. If future Janeway was changing their history, wouldn't they have tried to stop her?

The final timeline with Voyager getting home after 7 years was the "correct" timeline and Janeway was actually doing what she was meant to do.  There's always a handwave.

Quote from: yosemitemike;927811The final timeline with Voyager getting home after 7 years was the "correct" timeline and Janeway was actually doing what she was meant to do.  There's always a handwave.

You yourself said her character changed depending on who was writing the episode. So there is a meta explanation right there, but yes it would be nice to have a canon rationale. I personally handwaved it in my head canon in that Janeway really did seem to be Mrs Columbo when it came to time related stuff.

Quote from: Krimson;927816You yourself said her character changed depending on who was writing the episode. So there is a meta explanation right there, but yes it would be nice to have a canon rationale. I personally handwaved it in my head canon in that Janeway really did seem to be Mrs Columbo when it came to time related stuff.

The simple canon explanation was that Janeway had changed in the intervening years because of the hardships that she and her crew had gone through.  She wasn't the same person any more.  She did seem to be involved in a lot of time travel shenanigans even when she didn't mean to be.

Quote from: DavetheLost;9270320D&D, Holmes Basic, B/X, BECMI, Cyclopedia, AD&D1e, AD&D 2e, 3e, 3.5e, 4e, 5e. That's eleven editions by my count.  Mike can't count, he lists six editions then says "three of five". Pretty sure it's in six of eleven.

Three out of five in what he listed is correct.
In yours it would be six out of ten.

4e is not D&D.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;927627So do you think 1) the OP was a troll, 2) we scared the OP away, or 3) the OP has died from boredom?

4) OP dealt with the issues, and moved on with his life. Unlike us.

Alright then!

Our group played again yesterday and we decided to discuss my issues after the session.

Long story short: It was a honest and fruitful discussion. Our group consists of 4 people (DM, F, N and myself)
I stated that I found the story dragging in parts - especially the cattle-investigation plot - and I also told everyone what I liked about playing adventures in a medieval fantasy setting and what I liked about the DMs adventure in particular. Our discussion centred mostly around the cattle plot and we discussed for about 25 minutes.
F agreed with me, as in that he found the investigation part dragging and while playing he realised that I was bored, but he also hoped that the plot would gain more pace and did not say anything. N did not care as much for the plot as he had just as much fun in any adventure. F is a very experienced P&P player and I thought that he pointed out pretty sophisticated stuff.
For instance

Quote: "It's funny, that problems of a hobby that is all about communication, are the result of a lack of communication."

He also suggested that we could play a system in which no DM is needed and that is all about what the players want to play together, to get a better feeling for overall succesful storytelling and gameplay. (some western setting system?)
To sum up:
We agreed on giving the DM (whoever it is) suggestions what we want to experience while playing beforehand and to communicate (not discuss) more in the sessions to come. Discussing which things we liked or did not like to play was a good idea, but I also believe that it does not work with every group. We've been playing now for almost 3 years (?) straight and an open critique also could do a lot of harm to a group.

My advice: Keep the discussion problem oriented and suggest solution for whatever might concern you.

I am sorry, that I did not go into too much detail about the discussion, but I am short of time at the moment and I did not want to keep you waiting.
 
If you want more details or in case you got questions please write them down, I ll answer later!

Quote from: RPGPundit;9287254e is not D&D.

I'll have to take your word on that. I don't think I've ever so much as cracked the cover on a 4e product.