As long as we're just having fun, I'll continue on. I just don't like annoying people or getting folks angry. Seems to be hard nowadays on the interwebs to avoid causing drama
My argument for recap is that Discovery does 2 things: 1). Have rediculously huge stakes (universe-altering) and 2. that they can only be stopped by Discovery. Not another starship, not the Enterprise, not Voyager, it HAD to be Discovery because "reasons."
From an in-universe POV, despite the fact that I despise the spore drive and it's magical resolution to problems, it does make sense that a ship with an experimental propulsion system would be needed to resolve issues. Like, for example, I don't have any issue with why Pike basically commandeered it at the beginning of S2; the red angel was a huge threat, and they needed to move quickly, and the Discovery was the only ship that could do that. What doesn't make sense is that said ship just happens to be in the right place at the right time TO resolve those issues, but I suppose that's just plot convenience.
I suppose I look at it like this - if you replace the Enterprise in TOS (or the Ent-D in TNG, or Voyager, etc) with a different ship, is there something wholly unique about that particular crew on that ship at that time that would be the only way to resolve the situation without the universe ending as we know it? Of course each crew is unique and may end up with different outcomes. But universe-ending ones? That's rare. I mentioned Sisko before - often times he is uniquely positioned because he's the Emissary - that can only be him. Endgame was a good example - Old Janeway could be the only one to get Voyager home earlier. All Good Things would qualify too, although I'm not completely certain that even happened in reality. Data likely was the only one who could've gone back in Time's Arrow, because, well...no one else could've had his head reattached hundreds of years later lol.
But anyway, taking those 2 points into account:
TMP: Could be. But that doesn't mean there was no one else in Starfleet who would've made the same call.
III: First off, 1 doesn't apply. Spock being dead is not universe-ending. It sucks, but life goes on. And there's no way Kruge could have gotten the secret of Genesis from going there, either, so the stakes are relatively small. You could possibly make the argument that McCoy needed to be there because of the katra, but that's just because Spock gave it to him in the first place.
V: Convince me Picard or Sisko would've fallen for Sybok's crap. I highly doubt it.
VI: I'd argue Kirk's presence made that whole situation much worse based on his bigotry, despite Spock's statement.
Point is, I'm not arguing whether a particular person might have made the situation better or not. I'm arguing that they HAD to be there. Literally only Burnham could have figured out the Red Angel, even though her presence was completely arbitrary based on her assignment to Discovery. Saru was the only surviving Kelpien, so he is literally the only being in the universe that could have solved the dilithium issue, even though it was, again, completely arbitrary that he was even there.
I think you're right, though; and so is Pauln6a, that its really about these ridiculously inflated stakes. If the stakes weren't so big, I wouldn't have anything here to really even complain about
.
I wonder, though, if that's an offshoot of these season-long story arcs. After all, the last time we saw one of those - in Enterprise - the stakes were indeed that high. If a crew has to spend a whole year solving a problem, it better be a damn big problem.
I really think the way Enterprise went in season 4 would be the way to go. Smaller arcs with smaller stakes. Ongoing stories weaved through. Strange New Worlds is supposed to be episodic, so I have high hopes.
I know this is the one previously shown in Nanjin's collection, but a sign nonetheless?...
