I say weapon because it gets to complicated with all the super powers you can get. Turning invisible, walking through walls, teleporting. So for this I want to limit it to sci fi weapons that at least attempt to have a tech basis. So like not the masters device that turns people into dolls. However we don’t care if we can completely explain how it might be done now. Like lightsabers are fair game. As for me I would go with the star gate zat guns as initially put in. Both lethal and nonlethas and very portable. I want to put an honorable mention for tthe minority report sonic shotgun that seems to run on wind up energy so you should never theoretically run out of ammo. although not so sure as there was no indication you could power up more than one shot at a time.

EDITED: Its a little late at this point as the answers have went way off the rails but in case it gets more replies my intention was a weapon someone might carry around and could use as one person. not a weapons system or vehicle. Also no robots or things that essentially are their own entities. It should be a weapon used in a weapon like manner. aim and fire. also that quote about sufficiently advance technology looks like magic. if it looks like magic to us instead of technology then its to far afield. I hope this makes it more clear what I was looking for. Honestly I would have like to not use weapons as a basis but there are just to many things when you look at all of sci fi.

  • HubertManne@piefed.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    6 days ago

    yeah I disallowed things like this because then you have all kinds of technology like personal transporters or such to contend with. so wanted to limit it to weapons.

    • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      The problem with misclassifying transporters as “non-weapons” is largely down to Starfleet and the sum entirety of its personnel being blithering idiots with the tactical prowess of a beached flounder. Even taking into account all the caveats and technicalities of how and when transporters could or couldn’t be used in canon, the combat utility of such a thing is criminally overlooked.

      Myriad are the times when it is apparently perfectly feasible to beam onto the enemy ship, or vise-versa, to engage in merry yet largely ineffective laser beam battles in the corridors wherein practically nobody hits anybody because in the 31st century everyone forgot how to put sights on their guns.

      Or, you could just use your transporters to set them up the bomb. You have got a bomb, haven’t you? I’m sure your replicators can make you one. Or you could just pull the pin on a torpedo and then park it on their captain’s lap.

      Have the Scary Dogmatic Aliens boarded your ship? Beam their punk asses out into space. Preferably sans their clothes, especially if your transporter chief is any good.

      Sustained some battle damage but your transporters are still working? Just start nicking spare parts from your enemy’s ship. Warp coils, antimater injectors, computer consoles, any or all of their guns… I’m sure you can think of plenty of things you could do with some extras of. Or, and I’m just spitballing here, precisely however many square meters of their hull can fit on your transporter pad. Like, maybe the bit of it that separates their bridge from the vacuum of space.

      Etc., etc. The possibilities really just suggest themselves. With the technology available in the 'Trek universe, space battles should be significantly shorter, much more chaotic, and an awful lot more interesting than they’re ever depicted on screen. Basically once anyone’s shields are down it should be an out and out prank war, one with lethal stakes that are decided by whoever’s engineers are the most creative and/or vindictive, and who can type the fastest.

      That’s before even getting into the wrinkle that photon torpedoes are supposed to travel at warp velocities. Faster than light. There’s no need to even bother to put warheads in the damn things, antimatter based or not. The impact energy alone should be able to core a planet, if only anyone on the writing staff could be trusted to do the math.

      • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        Long story, but a means of transport is still a means of transport, not a weapon.

        Like the pen is not a weapon, even though they say it is mightier than the sword.

        • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          It’s kind of like saying a missile is a means of transport, not a weapon. Transporters are arguably more useful as weapons than transport, but it would end half the episodes in 2 minutes.

          • Darkonion@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 days ago

            You could also selectively beam away important parts of a thing, or just dematerialize and never rematerialize.

          • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            It’s kind of like saying a missile is a means of transport, not a weapon.

            I know only 2 kinds of missiles, both are built for very specific purposes. No good general example …