Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ErikModi

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    New Brighton, Minnesota, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. "1993 was the year Superman died and Venom got his own series. Just keep that in mind." -- TvTropes page quote for the Dark Age of Comic Books. Anti-heroes are a lot older than the Prequels, but even going by the presentation of Obi-Wan, Yoda, and even Luke in the OT, they aren't Anti-Heroes. They're straight-up virtuous, righteous, morally upstanding heroes. They may not have always been right, but they held to what they believed in and did the best they could to see good done. I've brought this up before in discussions about Grey Jedi, and it's the reason I opened with that quote. Grey Jedi are older than the Prequels. . . I recall the term being kicked around back in the WEG d6 days. To draw the analogy as clearly as I can: Jedi are supposed to be Superman: Incorruptible and always doing their very best within a solid, old-fashioned, black-and-white view of Good and Evil. But a lot of people think Superman is boring, lame, and no fun, so want to be Batman, because he's cool and edgy and does whatever it takes to put the bad guys down. (Neither of these simple sentences are truly representative of the characters of Superman and Batman, just the broadest strokes most who aren't dedicated fans are familiar with.) Thing is, you can still tell really interesting stories even with a character who cleaves to good-old-fashioned values system. I was one of very few people who didn't object to Superman killing Zod in Man of Steel because I recall (secondhand) the time in the comics where he did kill Zod and his followers with Kryptonite (alternate universes were involved). And that decision weighed on him in future comics, which is good character development. A character who has rules they never break means you can get a lot of drama out of what happens when they have to, or perhaps more importantly should, break those rules. At what point are Joker's murders Batman's fault? It's not Batman's fault Joker is insane, but it is Batman's fault he's still breathing. Is breaking the rules just this once the right thing to do for a greater good? Or does it open the door and make it easier to break the rules next time? And the time after that? Does the threshold keep dropping, until finally you're just as bad as the bad guys you're getting rid of? Anyone who's played the Injustice games knows what I'm talking about. But. . . there's a lot of gamers who just don't want to engage with that narrative. Maybe they just violently reject the idea of any checks on their character's behavior. Maybe they just look at all scores on a character sheet as "higher is better," and if they're forced to lose a score, even one as abstract as Morality, see it as a punishment to be argued against. Maybe they just want to kill monsters and get phat lewtz and ignore any of the moral ramifications of their actions. And that's where, in my experience, Grey Jedi really had their inception. The "Screw Morality, I wanna be a murderhobo and not get punished for it" mentality. Not saying that's every single person who's ever had an interest in Grey Jedi, just every single one I've encountered in my Star Wars gaming life thus far.
  2. Or those realities have different entities that also exist outside what we perceive as time. . . (head asplode)
  3. Well, WELL before the Prequels ever came out, I remember seeing a Star Wars special with George Lucas saying, and I quote to the best of my misty memory: "The Force is basically boiling religion down to its most fundamental aspect, that of some "force" that guides our destiny." Okay, my memory really failed me on the last part, but I clearly remember "boiling down religion to its most fundamental aspect." In that light, yes, the Force is God in A Galaxy Far Far Away. To get greatly philosophical, Free Will and Prophecy (not necessarily predestination) can coexist in a few ways. One I thought about when. . . uh. . . um. . . okay, when watching the second Matrix movie the first time, I said it, happy? Anyway, the bit where Neo has the choice between saving all humanity or saving Trinity. . . well, Neo being Neo, of course he was going to choose her. There was no other choice he could make. Was he predestined to make that choice? No. He could have chosen differently. . . but he wasn't going to, because he wasn't the kind of guy who could choose to let the woman he loves dies. But that choice was easy to see coming, especially for self-aware computer programs for whom calculating the future is their function (like, say, The Oracle). A harder one to wrap your brain around was suggested by a friend of mine. But consider: If an omnipotent, omniscient entity exists, it must exist outside what we perceive as time. Therefore, it can see all of time at once. Therefore, while we have Free Will, because it exists outside time, it sees the choices we have already made. That sounds contradictory, but it isn't. Roll it around in your head a bit, you'll get it. Or a Scanners-level headache. But, yes, Force Healing abilities have existed well before in Legends. Whether it's Force Healing or Transfer Essence or Essence Transfer or Force Drain or Dark Transfer or several others I can't recall, it's been there. Just not visible onscreen. Until now.
  4. Ya know, I never really thought of it that way. . . but yeah, "Grey Jedi" doesn't make sense as a term. You're either trying to live up to and uphold the Jedi Code, in which case you're just a Jedi, or you're not, in which case you're just a Force-User. I could see it as a gradiation of meaning. . . like "Fallen Jedi" meaning someone who was a Jedi but now is not, and "Dark Jedi" meaning that they were a Jedi but went full-tilt Dark Side, while "Grey Jedi" means they just stopped adhering to the Jedi Code and listening to the Jedi Council (or whatever authority exists at the time). But yeah. . . using "Grey Jedi" to mean "My Jedi has a red lightsaber with a curved blade three meters long and wears a black leather outfit that exposes half his chest with just this badass trenchcoat that looks smashing with his long, flowing white hair and his cold smirk that tells everyone 'you mess with me, you're gonna have a bad time' because he's a master lightsaber duelist and can throw Force Lightning at will but it ain't Dark Side lightning coz he GREY, you see". . . yeah, no. Just no.
  5. So, there's a good bit about this in the Shadows of the Empire novel. Darth Vader is trying to use the Dark Side to repair his damaged body, so he can breathe without his suit. He's making progress, focusing on his rage and hate and willing his lungs to inflate and absorb oxygen. And he breathes in unaided, and is so happy at his success he loses the focus on the Dark Side that was enabling it, and his effort falls apart. Now, this is an extreme version, since he was trying to do something very difficult (and something the Dark Side isn't all that good at, healing) but you could see using Light Side pips in a similar way. Just like a Force User drawing on the Dark Side is momentarily overcome with raw passion, a Dark Sider using the Light Side could be having a moment of simple, pure joy, feeling suddenly and unusually protective of a comrade when it's of no benefit to him. . . there's a lot of possibilities based on the character and exactly why they're a Dark Sider.
  6. Yeah, pretty much what I was thinking. There's a small window to hit with relativistic force, and an even smaller window to hit with really high relativistic force. Beyond that, it's either a standard ram or just being in hyperspace.
  7. So, I wrote this up with the idea of making a YouTube video about it, but. . . well, here: Holdo Maneuver Explained Okay, so, I know I’m a little late to the party on this, but I wanted to address the common complaint about this scene from The Last Jedi. It comes in a lot of forms and variations, but basically boils down to “if this is possible, we should have seen it before, and it breaks how warfare works in Star Wars.” I disagree, and I’d like to explain exactly the various reasons why. A note on terminology. I’ll be referencing both “Legends” and “Canon” as I talk about this. For the uninitiated, Star Wars has a long, proud history of “Expanded Universe” materials. Books, comics, video and card and tabletop role-playing games. . . basically, any medium you can think of, Star Wars expanded into it. When Disney bought LucasFilm and went forward with a sequel trilogy of movies, the decision was made to take that Expanded Universe material and dub it “Legends,” essentially an alternate universe of Star Wars canon, which the new Canon can draw from, modify, or ignore as new Canon works see fit. This means that there are literally thousands of years of Star Wars history that may or may not still apply. This is what TvTropes calls “Schrodinger’s Canon,” and you can check that out for more information if you like. Try not to get lost. Anyway, I’ll be referencing both Legends and the new Canon as we go forward, and I’ll try to make it clear what’s what, hopefully you can follow me. Ready? Here we go! So, first, the reason why we haven’t seen a hyperspace ram before is. . . because you can’t actually ram something in hyperspace. Star Wars FTL travel is via hyperspace, which is explicitly an alternate dimension where you can travel faster than the speed of light, which you cannot do in normal, or “realspace.” So, you can’t actually ram an object in realspace while you are in hyperspace. Now, according to Legends, objects in realspace cast “mass shadows” in hyperspace, which you can hit, and hitting a mass shadow in hyperspace is just like hitting the object itself in realspace. . . at a zillion times the speed of light and on another plane of existence. You get smashed into subatomic particles and radiation, and the object in realspace doesn’t even realize you were there. Now, there is at least one Legends source I’ve heard of that claims hitting an object I hyperspace does affect the object in realspace, annihilating it, but I can’t find that particular source and nowhere else in Legends that I am familiar with has this been treated as true. Except. . . Holdo does exactly that, ram an object in realspace while in hyperspace. Well, I don’t actually think so. You’ve seen it plenty of times, when ships enter or exit hyperspace in Star Wars. What Timothy Zahn calls in his Star Wars novels a “flicker of pseudomotion,” a ship transitioning between realspace and hyperspace or vice versa. It lasts just a second before the ship is gone. I would contend that, during that flicker of pseudomotion, owing to a quirk of Star Wars physics, a ship entering or exiting hyperspace is treated as a relativistic object in realspace, moving at a substantial percentage of the speed of light. As this excellent Because Science video shows, relativistic objects can pack near-infinite amounts of kinetic energy, making them extremely destructive. So, the Holdo Maneuver can be very, very effective, but only within that second while the vessel is straddling hyperspace and realspace. It requires very precise timing to pull off, and you need to be very close to the target, which negates the main advantage of relativistic or faster-than-light ramming attempts. . . by the time you see them coming, it’s too late to do anything about it. You’d have to be close enough that the enemy could potentially shoot you down before you engage your hyperdrive. And as we see in The Last Jedi, the Supremacy could detect that the Raddus was about to enter hyperspace, but blew it off as a distraction. . . until they saw the Raddus had turned to point at them. By the time Hux gave the order to “fire on that cruiser,” it was too late to stop Holdo. Against a more prepared (or more competent?) commander, this window may not have been as large, or existed at all. (Side note. . . I don’t think this was the first ever time a near-hyperspace collision had ever happened in Star Wars, in part because its such a big galaxy with such a long history lots of things must have happened before and will probably happen again, but because Hux loses all his **** as soon as he figures out what Holod’s up to.) So, you only have a limited window to hit your target while transitioning between realspace and hyperspace, and this requires you to be fairly close to your enemy and engage your hyperdrive at just the right moment to hit them with relativistic power. Already, its limitation as a tactic is becoming apparent, but there’s another drawback: accuracy. Holdo is pretty clearly aiming for dead-center on the Supremacy. But she hits it. . . here. Fully halfway between the centerline and the tip of the starboard wing. The Supremacy is 60 kilometers wide (the largest ship ever in Star Wars Canon that isn’t a Death Star), which means that if she was aiming for dead-center, she missed her target by a full 15 kilometers. The next biggest ship in Star Wars Canon, Darth Vader’s Super Star Destroyer Executor, is only 19 kilometers long. If Holdo had been trying to ram that dead-center from the side, that 15km margin of error is the difference between hitting it and missing completely. And again, that’s the largest Star Wars ship known to exist outside of the Supremacy and the Death Stars. So assuming this 15km margin of error is normal, this tactic is basically completely useless against anything that isn’t ridiculously big. Granted, that does make scenes like this (Rebel fleet in Return of the Jedi jumping to hyperspace in tight formation) seem incredibly reckless, but maybe their navicomputers are linked in such a way so that if hyperdrives are off by about 15km per jump, the whole fleet is off by the same 15km. Slave circuits are a thing in Legends, just saying. That’s two strikes now against this being a viable, common tactic. . . proximity and accuracy. But there’s also damage to consider. Look at what the ram actually does to the Supremacy. That’s not superweapon levels of damage. The ship itself is still functional, all the major characters on board survive, and enough minor characters and redshirts survive that the First Order can launch a full-scale ground assault on the base on Crait not long after. It’s bit nebulous exactly how long it takes for the ground assault to get going, but I don’t think it was much over half an hour, if that long. Sure, the Supremacy’s support fleet gets destroyed by the relativistic shrapnel, but the Supremacy itself is largely intact, and may even be repairable (expanded material goes back and forth on this, as far as I’m aware). And the Raddus is three kilometers long, bigger than anything the Rebellion had available in the Original Trilogy. Twice as long as an Imperial Star Destroyer. Using something closer to OT-size ships, the damage would be much less, especially to something far more massive than the Supremacy, like a Death Star. Now, this amazing Because Science video shows that, were the Raddus traveling at something like 99.99% the speed of light, it would have annihilated the Supremacy and its support fleet in a massive nuclear fission explosion. But that’s not what we see happen in the film, so it’s likely the Raddus wasn’t “travelling” that fast, maybe more like seventy or sixty percent the speed of light. I don’t know, somebody way, way smarter than me would have to crunch the numbers. I love science, but I don’t speak its language. Anyway, there’s probably a point during that “flicker of pseudomotion” where hit those really high relativistic speeds, but precisely timing, within the span of that one second, where that point will be and where you need to be to hit your target with that force, is beyond the abilities of everything except, I’d venture, specially programmed flight computers and droids. Because it’s just not a problem most computers and droids would be expected to address. So, damage and precision, two more strikes. Finally, we come to the main problem I foresee with this: gravity wells. Remember when I talked about mass shadows in hyperspace, and how hitting one would be devastating? Well, because of that, hyperdrives in Legends have safeties that cause them to cut out if the ship is within a gravity well, precisely to try and prevent ships from hitting mass shadows in hyperspace. In a gravity well in realspace? Can’t flip on your hyperdrive, you might crash right into what’s causing the gravity well. In hyperspace and hit a gravity well? The hyperdrive cuts out, dropping you into realspace, hopefully before you crash into the thing that made the gravity well (either in hyperspace or realspace). These safeties aren’t perfect. In the Thrawn Trilogy, Talon Karrde tells a story involving a ship he once served on having a near-miss with a mass shadow that killed several of the crew, blew out the main hyperdrive, and severely damaged the ship, forcing them to limp home on the backup hyperdrive. But they do tend to save you from the worst. . . potentially. “Now wait a **** minute!” I hear you cry. “That may work in Legends, but obviously not in the new Canon, since Han made a landing approach at lightspeed and Rogue One shows a ship jumping to hyperspace while within Jedha’s gravity well!” Well, I think I can explain both of those. For Rogue One. . . I’d long maintained that the hyperdrive safeties would be built-in and hardwired, so they couldn’t be bypassed without deactivating the hyperdrive itself. This is because I’ve run many Star Wars role-playing games, and my players are exactly the kind of psychotic morons who’d turn those safeties off and then have the nerve to act surprised when one bad astrogation roll results in the whole campaign being smashed into a cloud of quarks. “Rocks fall, everyone dies” Star Wars style. However, in the new Canon, this may not be the case. The safeties might well be able to be bypassed or turned off, allowing Cassian’s U-Wing to hyperspace while within Jedha’s gravity well. Why would he do this? Well, as shown in the film, being able to jump to hyperspace when you really shouldn’t be able to can be very helpful, letting you escape from otherwise-certain doom. Now, I’m talking more “hot Imperial pursuit” than “planet-destroying superlaser,” but same difference. Also, there are Interdictor cruisers. In Legends, a very popular Imperial ship that projected gravity wells to stop ships from escaping into hyperspace or yank them out if they were on a known course. They’ve been ported to the new Canon by appearing in an episode of Rebels, but they also exist from a more important source: “We’re not going to attack?” “The Emperor has something special planned for them. We’re only to keep them from escaping.” In Return of the Jedi, when the Rebellion assaults the second Death Star, the Imperial Starfleet emerges from behind the moon of Endor to catch them in a pincer, preventing their escape and leaving them to be picked off by the unexpectedly-operational Death Star. The only way this is possible is if the Imperials have some means to prevent the Rebel fleet from just jumping back into hyperspace. Yes, Admiral Ackbar starts to order a retreat and Lando talks him out of it, but the Empire couldn’t just sit back and hope the Rebels would be nice enough to decide to stick around once it became clear that— “IT’S A TRAP!” Yeah, that. The Empire must have had some means to keep the Rebel Fleet from escape at Endor, and Interdictor Cruisers, or something like them, is that explanation. So, Cassian might have disabled his hyperdrive safeties not only to make unexpected escapes, but so he could thumb his nose at some of the Empire’s most expensive toys. And, let’s be honest. Doesn’t this guy seem just unhinged enough to cut away his safety net because he thinks it’s slowing him down? Sorry, Cassian, I love you bro, but. . . that’s a really dumb move. Please don’t shoot me. As for Starkiller Base. . . Han seems to take the dangers of hyperspace travel much more seriously than Cassian. Too seriously, as this excellent Because Science video points out. (But, it doesn’t talk about planets, moons, asteroids, black holes, etc., just stars. . . ah, whatever. The Star Wars galaxy is apparently more full of mass shadows than anything we know of in our observable universe, just like their asteroid fields are nothing like asteroid fields we’re familiar with. Just roll with it.) Anyway, it seems highly unlikely Han would disable his hyperdrive safeties, so how does he make his landing approach at lightspeed? Well, the planet Starkiller Base was on was gutted for that gigantic superweapon. Gravity is a function of mass, and the planet’s mass had been substantially reduced, resulting in a smaller gravity well. I posit that Han’s maneuver was probably only possible on Starkiller Base, since the reduced planet mass meant there was enough space between the shield and the gravity well for limited hyperspace travel. He came out well below that, but. . . that flicker of pseudomotion goes both ways. So, what does this have to do with near-hyperspace rams and Death Stars? Well, the Death Stars are massive, and I mean that technically. They’re huge hunks of metal and have a lot of mass, and thus they would have their own gravity wells. Probably not one full Earth gee, but noticeable, and quite likely enough to trip the safeties on hyperdrives near them. By the very nature of their gigantic design, they may be proof against this attack. Even if they aren’t, in the Battle of Yavin all the Rebellion had left after Scariff was a few snubfighters to throw against the Death Star. Given the limited amount of damage the Raddus was able to do to the Supremacy, and the probably inaccuracy of near-hyperspace ramming in general, those tiny ships wouldn’t have done sufficient damage accurately enough to cripple or destroy the Death Star. And in the Battle of Endor, where the Rebellion had larger ships available, there are the Interdictors to consider. In addition to preventing the Rebels from escaping along their incoming hyperspace lane, they may have been close enough to keep the Rebel ships from entering hyperspace at all. Even if not, the damage and inaccuracy problems remain. And a near-hyperspace ram on the second Death Star really only would have been an option while the Death Star’s shield was up. . . once the shield was down, they could go with the original plan of flying inside and attacking the main reactor directly. Remember what Han said about Starkiller Base in The Force Awakens: “Their shields have a fractional refresh rate, stops anything slower than lightspeed.” If the second Death Star’s shield didn’t have that fractional refresh rate, it would have blocked even lightspeed ramming attempts, and I’d go so far as to say even if it did have a refresh rate, it would still block near-lightspeed ramming attempts (since you’re still slower than light, even if not by much). So. . . the Holdo Maneuver. Extremely tricky to pull off, unlikely to succeed in a wide variety of situations, and probably not going to pack the bang to make it worth it if you do manage it. Pretty good reasons why it’s not a standard tactic, huh? Look, I know I’m assuming a lot of facts not in evidence. This is not necessarily how everything works in the new Canon. I might be wrong about most or all of these assumptions. And I’ll be the first to admit that the filmmakers probably weren’t thinking any of this through with this level of detail and just said “Hey, wouldn’t it be cool if?” But these facts stand: near-hyperspace ramming is possible in Star Wars, it happened in The Last Jedi. It wasn’t used in any other Star Wars media before, so there have to be reasons why not. I just went looking for some, and found a bunch. Personally, I love it when filmmakers leave some things for the audience to figure out, it engages us and lets us feel more connected to this universe. Being thought-provoking doesn’t have to mean only making you think about philosophy and the nature of good and evil and big, fundamental moral questions. . . it can also be about just making you think about how this universe works, about what rules are in place to allow the cool things we see on screen to occur in this fictional world. So, have I changed your mind about the Holdo Maneuver? If so, feel free to tell me how. If not, and you still have a beef with it that goes beyond “it’s stupid and the movie still sucks,” bring it up in the comments. Maybe I’ll do another video to address those. Maybe you’ll convince me that it really is stupid. Thanks for watching, thank you for your time and attention.
  8. Exactly. Kurt Russel says of The Thing that he thought it was a great movie, he had a great time working on it, and if it took five, ten, or fifteen years to find its audience, that's just fine by him. And yeah, the comparison between TFA and TLJ always amuses me. "TFA sucks because it's just a remake of ANH!" "TLJ sucks because it's nothing like other Star Wars movies!" While there's certainly a middle ground between "remake" and "too different," I really think both those films are in that butter zone. TFA hits a lot of the same story beats as ANH, but it's different enough and setting up its own story, so I wouldn't write it off as just a remake. TLJ goes in a very different directions, but it raises some excellent questions that have existed within and about Star Wars since the beginning, and I praise it for doing so.
  9. Her lightsaber. Anakin/Luke's lightsaber was destroyed at the end of TLJ. She retrieved the pieces and apparently repaired it, but it's hers now. From what I've heard, Abrams liked Johnson's "Rey is no one" twist, and it was pretty much what he'd intended initially anyway, so I don't think they're going to retcon that out. My fear is that it's Ben Solo's redemption arc, which he absolutely does not deserve, or in-universe, want. But there might be another Skywalker who might finally "Rise," and continuing on from TLJ's theme of failure and learning from it, pass on some of his own hard-learned lessons. . . I honestly don't think they'll be retconning much, if anything, from TLJ. I've said it before, but ESB got a lot of the same reception when it was released, and it wasn't until years later, when the whole trilogy could be watched backwards and forwards, that it got its status as the best Star Wars film ever made. And TLJ has a lot of the same "problems" that made Empire so divisive when it came out. . . a tonal shift, big revelations, straight-up telling the audience that a lot of what you thought you knew was wrong, or at least terribly incomplete. . . and I have to be honest, a lot of the hate TLJ gets is just really, really petty. "They didn't validate my Snoke theory! They didn't make a Rey a Skywalker/Kenobi/Palpatine! Phasma didn't get to be a badass and kill everyone! Luke wasn't the same starry-eyed, naieve farmboy who left Tattooine 40 years ago!" Star Wars may, in part, belong to us, its fans, but we do not create it. We leave that in the hands of professional filmmakers, and they are not beholden to give us what we say we want, their job is to tell the best story they can the best that they can. Once people get over knee-jerk "that's not how I would have done it" and accept that, I think TLJ will be seen as a much better film than a lot of people give it credit for. And already, the "love it/hate it" narrative is decaying, with more people falling into "it's mostly good but has some flaws" or "I didn't care for it, except X, Y, and Z." But yeah, I have loved pretty much all the new Star Wars films we've gotten, so I am definitely excited for this.
  10. This. . . this is truly beautiful. Thank you.
  11. That is more clear, yes. And one should certainly be able to play a morally ambiguous character, even a Force-Sensitive one. But the Dark Side is inherently corruptive, it pretty much the only constant in all Star Wars media. The only difference is in what one considers to be "the Dark Side." Take the Bendu from Rebels, who calls himself "the one in the middle" and states the Sith Holocron can't make one evil. All he's really saying in the latter case is that no knowledge is forbidden, only certain practices. Understanding, intellectually, how to channel "OMFG I WANT YOU SO DEAD RIGHT NOW" into creating Force Lightning to make that happen doesn't draw one to the Dark Side. . . but actually doing it will. That, I think, is what he meant by "the one in the middle," he understands the Dark Side and how to use it. . . and thus knows better than the Jedi, who just say "don't do it" why it should be avoided. The whole concept of the Force having a "neutral" side, neither Light nor Dark, also stems from the very same arguments used in favor of Grey Jedi: if a Dark Side then a Light Side, and those are opposites and therefore extremes, thus there must be middle ground of compromise. That's a logical fallacy, not every extreme position has a rational middle ground. The Empire wants to completely destroy Alderaan to make a statement. Everyone else would rather they not blow up whole planets. The middle ground is. . . only blow up half the planet? Still just as wrong as blowing up all of it.
  12. Ah, yes, the good old "Path of What I Was Going To Do Anyway." How I have not missed you.
  13. That's an interpretation, but I doubt it's the official one (since the Mortis arc wasn't even conceived until well after Revenge of the Sith, and thus after the saga was complete, as far as Lucas was concerned). Near as I can tell, the "official" position is that Anakin was to destroy the Sith, which he did by killing Palpating and suffering fatal injuries in the process. Fans frequently add in that all but eliminating the Jedi, erasing their narrowminded rules and strictures, was also something the Force had in mind. The dumbest interpretation (from my perspective) is that Anakin was to kill all but two Jedi and join the Sith, "balancing" their numbers ("balance" only in the crudest sense of the word). The Mortis arc was far more metaphorical in than literal in any event.
  14. You have to separate the observed facts from the religious dogma that grew up around those facts. I will be the first to admit the Jedi of the prequel era were deeply, irrevocably flawed, and agree wholeheartedly that part of Anakin's destiny to "bring balance to the Force" was to wipe the slate clean of their narrow, dogmatic teachings. Their view of the Force, however, is not wrong just what they decided that view means. It is fact in the Star Wars universe that the Force has a Dark Side, and this Dark Side is corruptive, seductive, and lures you into ultimate evil even if you initially use it for the best of intentions (this has been well-established both in-universe and by statements from the creators). Consider: the Force has always been presented as something of an enlightenment superpower, as you gain knowledge and wisdom in the Force you gain power. And the ultimate knowledge is knowledge of oneself. Thus, to achieve ultimate power in the Dark Side, one must, at some point, look in the mirror, realize that by every civilized metric one is completely evil, and be okay with that. The Jedi, recognizing the corruptive nature of the Dark Side and the passions that lead to it, established the quite logical and completely wrong practice of forbidding all emotional attachments, removing a potential source if corruptive influence. Then comes Anakin, and they're totally unprepared to help this boy deal with his emotions, instead just telling him to cast them aside and ignore them, which he doesn't know how to do and probably couldn't if he did. Then comes Luke, who turns those passions and attachments into a strength, redeeming Anakin through his love. The old Jedi considered all emotions as potential paths to the Dark Side, and instead of teaching essentially emotional intelligence, they just tried to teach how to ignore emotions. I highly doubt Anakin was the first failure of this doctrine, just the last and most dramatic. Basically, while the Jedi view of the Force is not wrong, many of the conclusions they came to about that view were. Just like real life. . . many observable facts have lead to many wrongheaded conclusions, ranging from highly amusing to utterly horrific.
  15. Well, yes Force in d6 could be powerful, but if you earned 6 Dark Side Points the GM got to take your character sheet away. But you still needed to learn the powers and develop the skills to use them well, and multiple actions (like deflecting a blaster bolt and then making it hit the person who fired it) were rather brutal. So on the whole, yes Force Users could be obnoxiously powerful, but usually by the time they got there, the other characters had hit "obnoxiously powerful" in their bailiwicks as well. As for The Force Unleashed, the canon policy was always that the events of a game and it's light-side ending are canon, the game mechanics are not. So Kyle Katarn stole the Death Star plans then stopped the Dark Trooper project, but he didn't have a personal shield generator that let him take a blaster cannon shot to the face. Likewise, Starkiller being Vaders's secret apprentice could be canon, his ability to implode TIE Fighters with a wave of his hand less so. (The games are still pretty definitely "what-if" and the whole Legends universe ended not long after their release, so Starkiller could be canon. . . or not.)
  • Create New...