The Riddle of The Phaser

[359]

Do you knowhat are the standard stun and kill settings, what is the difference between settings?

As far as I know they never associate a numeral setting with "phasers on stun" and "set phasers for kill."

You also have to factor in the network sensors as well. They tend to be one of the reasons why you don't see graphic effects like those at the end of "Conspiracy" often on "Family Friendly" television shows.

But from time to time the shows do show graphic effects such as those in TNG: "Night Terrors" and TNG: "Conspiracy", and they always differentiate those effects from kill or stun. In TNG: "Night Terrors" the effects left by phaser hits were indicated to be abnormal and associated with setting six or seven.

[Lucky]

As far as I know they never associate a numeral setting with "phasers on stun" and "set phasers for kill."

RIKER: Data, tell me about noranium. It vaporises at? 


DATA: Two thousand three hundred fourteen degrees. Of course, noranium carbide 


RIKER: Thank you, Data.


LAFORGE: Setting seven ought to do it.

RIKER: No. If this is a real phaser, then I was on the Enterprise. But I fired it on myself, so I should be dead. None of this is real. I'm setting this to level sixteen, wide field. That should destroy half of this building. Unless, of course, this isn't a real phaser.

I think we can conclude that setting 7 would count as a kill setting, and the settings become more deadly as they go up, but we don't know where stun stops, and kill begins.

But from time to time the shows do show graphic effects such as those in TNG: "Night Terrors" and TNG: "Conspiracy", and they always differentiate those effects from kill or stun. In TNG: "Night Terrors" the effects left by phaser hits were indicated to be abnormal and associated with setting six or seven.

True, but graphic deaths are rarely shown on screen do to sensors and budget. If they do it too often they get a higher rating.

For some reason they think seeing characters die in a realistic fashion will promote violence, or something like that rather then promote the idea that there are consequences to actions taken. I suppose that is why Deep Space Nine is so loved.

[359]

I think we can conclude that setting 7 would count as a kill setting, and the settings become more deadly as they go up, but we don't know where stun stops, and kill begins.

Certainly setting seven is quite lethal, but it seems to be diffrent from the setting when they order phasers set to kill. That setting is much cleaner leaving less visible burns than we see with setting seven.

True, but graphic deaths are rarely shown on screen do to sensors and budget. If they do it too often they get a higher rating.

For some reason they think seeing characters die in a realistic fashion will promote violence, or something like that rather then promote the idea that there are consequences to actions taken. I suppose that is why Deep Space Nine is so loved.

It is true they do not show graphic deaths for those reasons, but sometimes they do for dramatic intent. Because both those effects are used and acknowledged as being different by the characters, there must be a setting on phasers which is not visibly damaging but still lethal. This is most easily explained by being a similar effect as stun, but more powerful to the point of being lethal to most creatures.

[Praeothmin]

We know there are at least two Stun settings, light and heavy, at least in TNG, and so, if settings 1 and 2 are Stun, the we still have settings 3 to 6 for Kill settings, with setting 7 as heavily damaging whatever it hits...
Like when you don't just want to kill, but the bastard you're shooting at made a pass at your girlfriend and kicked your dog before killing your mother... :-)