Okay. Lots of good questions. Thanks for the prompts here.
moparman76_69 wrote:
I'm assuming we move forward in time without becoming utopian or dystopian society? So a more realistic type future?
I would think of government like this.
solar system > planet > country
By that time we will have colonized other worlds, at some point they will seek independence from their earth based governments. This will lead to a UN type organization between planets and a EU type organization between countries. Other more advanced and equally advanced species will exist, perhaps with other types of government (think socialist or fascist dictatorship). There will be other less advanced races that maybe at a 20th century level (think exploring local space) or perhaps less than that.
Much more realistic type future.
EU-type organization makes the most sense. People still like to maintain distinct national and cultural identities. This would be about as far into the future as the Civil War was in the past, and there are still people who feel sore about the War of Northern Aggression (never mind things like they are in Europe with Sicilians who despise being called Itallian, and Franconians who hate that they were ever conquered by the Bavarians, let alone the Deutsch). But when there are whole other planets out there, you need to be able to present a unified front. We'd need something strong than the UN, because that's more to negotiate between members. But we wouldn't be as unified as the U.S., or even as much as the USSR was. EU is the closest model.
The sovereignty of colonies will likely depend a lot on how long they have been around. Most are probably something like protectorates, since they will likely not have a big enough population and resources to supply all of their technology or handle all their defense.
I kind of see it a bit like European countries settling the Caribbean... only if they discovered that the Apache, Navajo, etc. had guns and ships equal to their own.
With other species you'll have anatomical differences and also different reactions to certain chemicals. What's poisonous to us maybe a powerful LSD type drug to certain species. This will open up a drug trade between species. Think humans and another species in relation to the US and Mexico when it comes to an illegal drug trade. Both agree its bad and try to stop it from their respective ends.
With more advanced species you'll have either an open market for their technology and/or perhaps a black market, depending on the species willingness to sell their advanced weapons and defenses. Heck it could even be that we only became capable of faster than light travel through reverse engineering crashed/captured/purchased technology.
You may also have a cold war level of espionage and weapons manufacturing between humans and another species. Our first reaction to meeting an alien race will be to keep a certain peace until we can learn how advanced they are, while bolstering our defenses in case of war.
Yup. Pretty much. Although the basics of chemistry and physics probably apply across all worlds. So essentially all complex life forms are going to generate energy through oxidation reduction reactions (although they might tolerate more/less of other compounds in the atmosphere). Also they are going to have anatomies that maintain a sense of symmetry. Intelligent social life forms are not going to be big, tough monsters either, because creatures that have lots of natural advantages do not need to get creative with tools and such to survive.
Our hero can be a jack of all trades profiteer who will do anything for some money in the bank, or a man with a certain skill set who can be a problem solver for whomever is willing to pay.
Definitely the later. He has certain skills, creativity, and ruthless efficiency to get tough jobs done.
Which brings us to...
HappyAndy wrote:
Is the protagonist a moral or amoral character?
He is fundamentally moral, but not a bastion of morality. He has the moral fluidity for the ends to justify the means required for the job. He is perfectly willing to kill to accomplish jobs, although he does not delight in it. He certainly would not do so wantonly, and would be quite bothered if he caused civilian collateral damage. Soldiers, spies, and pirates do not bother him. He would not hesitate to vent life support on a ship of pirates. He would definitely not do the same to a civilian transport to recover a fugitive on board. He would sacrifice a few innocents to bring down a terrorist who he knew would cause widespread death and destruction, although he would probably need some time to meditate over a bottle of gin at the end of a bar for a while.
Does he care about anything other than the paycheck, if so why?
He cares about humanity in general and has a sense of British patriotism in particular.
He sees large political and bureaucratic organizations as not only slow, but cumbersomely careless. He has a great distaste for foolishness. On a number of levels he detests the idea of a large organization sending a bunch of heavily armed, indoctrinated grunts who have been withheld the information they need to do a job effectively. That sort of thing just makes situations messier.
Now, the person who can go in and handle a situation cleanly is very rare and deserves to be well paid.
What would he do if he found out that he was on the wrong side of the conflict?
That would depend. He would not break a contract, although he is probably smart enough to write in an escape clause. If it were just a moral gray area with both sides being wrong (which is what he expects most to be), he is doing his job by tidying things up, and probably the other side is employing people of talents similar to his own, so the cosmic scales are balanced. If the people who hire him turn out to be scoundrels preying on the weak he will inform them that the contract is nullified, and 50% of their deposit is being returned.
I'm thinking like the train job in Firefly. He would not steal medicine from poor, working families. It is not that he is out to right the wrongs in the universe, but there are enough people in need of his services that he has the luxury of being picky with what he does for money.
Is there anything or anyone that he cares about enough that it could be used as leverage against him?
Does he have any long term enemies looking to settle old scores, someone that might pop up at the most inopportune time?
Good questions that I need to think about. He really needs to have some good weaknesses and flaws.
He has family on Earth. Dear old Mum and Dad. I think he should have a younger sibling as well. Dunno whether it would be better as a sister or brother. I can see them coming out to maybe traverse the stars like their older brother, and him not being entirely pleased by their naivete.
Long term enemies also needs thought. A friend suggested he may have spent a bit of time in the Royal Navy and left on grounds that were a bit displeasing to some of the superior officers. There may have been a few particular incidents that led to his feelings of distaste towards governments and militaries crudely mucking things up. I don't see a dishonorable discharge, but perhaps an incident of him telling his C.O. to "go to hell and take the damned orders with him", preventing a major disaster that it was just easier to keep things quiet with an administrative discharge or re-stationing him to the most remote outpost they could find for the last 8-months of his commission which no one saw any need to re-up.
JamesMcD wrote:
He should look like Higgins from Magnum P.I.
Actually, I picture him very much like Mr. Higgs from the comic series Girl Genius.
I want him to have sideburns and smoke a pipe. Being a bit pudgy or frumpy isn't bad. He is definitely not imposing. One of the thing about him is that he aught to be the sort of person easily underestimated. I was picturing him a bit lanky and gangly. Not in an impressively tall and angular sort of way, but more like a younger Hugh Laurie.
