The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Duros 2.0 (and a poll!)
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Characters, Droids, and Species -> Duros 2.0 (and a poll!) Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Which version of Starship Intuition best fits Duros?
v1.00 as presented in WEG's GG4
22%
 22%  [ 2 ]
v2.00 excellent pilot/navigators, well traveled through the galaxy
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
v2.01 excellent pilot/navigators+
66%
 66%  [ 6 ]
v2.02 excellent pilot/navigators
11%
 11%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 9

Author Message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3606
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2017 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
The main thrust I was going for was simply that what characters can't do well is a pretty important aspect of the character... sort of like the negative space in a painting or the silence between notes in a melody.
Negative space. I like this way of describing the gaps in character ability. Very Happy

I find that the older I get the more I want characters to have some negative space and I want players who are willing to incorporate that negative space into their play at times rather that always or even mostly trying to paper over the negative space.

But that can be a tricky issue for people. Incorporating your character's negative space doesn't work well in competitive play. It's not something I would do or expect someone else to do in old style OD&D play. There you need to use that 10' pole and listen at the door and look for traps and set ambushes. But Star Wars is a different sort of game. There the player needs to know that the GM won't use that negative space to to unfairly hammer or kill the PCs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 11239
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, ohio.

PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2017 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bren wrote:

As for me, the exact and detailed answer depends what decade of my GMing are we talking about and what system we are playing.
In the 1970s and 1980s the answer would be no. The primary systems would be OD&D, Runequest, Pendragon, and Call of Cthulhu. If it got rolled at the table that's what you got. The DM/GM or what have you was a referee who was supposed to fairly arbitrate not try to impose a story. Yes, even I even ran Pendragon that way.


For me it more depends on the player on if i 'go easy' for a little. if a brand new person to rpgs period, i usually go 'easy (kid gloves, enemies never go for kill, just ko and capture), for say 5 or so sessions. If role players in other systems, but just new to this game (say they've been used to playing shadowrun, and come into an adnd 2e game), then its 3 or so sessions.
If they are just new to ME being their dm, but are used to the system. Then maybe 1 session of being with kid gloves. BUT even then, i don't alter (fudge rolls), i just alter what the enemy DOES. Such as that lightsaber weilding dark jedi.. Maybe he instead of going for a kill shot, decides to slice your leg off (or weapon arm).

Bren wrote:

Then we played Star Wars. The rules tell the GM to fudge sometimes.


It says the DM CAN fudge, not that they must or should always.. And even then it couches the DM to only do so in critical junctures, and NOT just to save a player from his own stupidity, and also do it AGAINST them as well as for them. WAY too often when i see DM's speaking about fudging, its ONLY done to save pcs, cause they feel a dm should never kill a PC...

Bren wrote:

Mostly fudging just isn't really my style. Part of it is early experiences. But a lot of it is that I play (and run) RPGs to find out what happens not to tell a specific story. So I have little incentive to change the result of the dice either for or against the PCs.


That's part of why i don't fudge. BUT also cause (as page 159 in the R&E rulebook says)
Quote:
Don't go overboard with this technique. If the players suspect that you've been altering die rolls and difficulties, they'll start to lose interest because it will seem that their free will has been taken away. You shiould fudge rules only at critical moment.s and you should always be fair, giving the benefit sometimes to the gamemaster characters and sometimes to the player characters


And on page 59
Quote:
Sometimes the players will come up with a great idea, but roll poorly: a charshouldn't die just because of a bad roll— you can "fudge" the results, rewarding the player for his ingenuity.


Bren wrote:
But that can be a tricky issue for people. Incorporating your character's negative space doesn't work well in competitive play. It's not something I would do or expect someone else to do in old style OD&D play. There you need to use that 10' pole and listen at the door and look for traps and set ambushes. But Star Wars is a different sort of game. There the player needs to know that the GM won't use that negative space to to unfairly hammer or kill the PCs.


Heck, talking on some adnd boards, some players rabidly HATE any aspect that gives them a negative.. To the point they will keep rolling new pcs up after killing the old one off quickly, till they get a character who ONLY has positives..
Hell, one player said "I could have a character with three stats 17 or 18s, but if even ONE is 8 or under, i will scrap it, cause it sucks."[/quote]
_________________
It's Not who you kill, but how they die!
You cannot dodge it if you do not know it is coming, and you cannot hit it if you do not know its there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 3920
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
If a bunch of PCs are generalists, then no individual PC has a chance to shine other than by luck of the dice.

Please try to still your jerking knee for a minute. You are unfairly polarizing my position.

A PC being "more well rounded" does NOT mean all skills die codes are the same. An advanced PC group being "well rounded" does NOT mean none of the PCs have higher skills than the other PCs. There is a very large middle ground between hyperfocused and "generalist". Here is a simplified example of three PCs in the same group to see what I'm really talking about...

Pilot PC
DEX 3D
Blaster 4D
Dodge
MEC 4D
Starship Gunnery 6D
Starship Piloting 8D
TEC 3D
Computer Programming/Repair
Starship Repair 4D

Gun Bunny PC
DEX 4D
Blaster 8D
Dodge 6D
MEC 3D
Starship Gunnery 4D
Starship Piloting
TEC 3D
Computer Programming/Repair 4D
Starship Repair

Tech Wiz PC
DEX 3D
Blaster
Dodge 4D
MEC 3D
Starship Gunnery
Starship Piloting 4D
TEC 4D
Computer Programming/Repair 8D
Starship Repair 6D

Let's say that the PCs didn't have these 4D skills before. All three PCs could have increased their 8D skills to 9D for 24 CPs, but instead they each raised two 3D skills to 4D and still have 6 CPs left over. These three PCs will still each have their chances to shine.
_________________
*
"Would you trade that necklace for a glimpse into your future? ...What do you know of kyber crystals?"
"The Force moves darkly near a creature that’s about to kill... I'm gonna follow Jyn. Her path is clear."

"Tell that to Kanjiklub."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Naaman
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 1983

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry, everyone. There are three people who seem to more or less agree with each other and support each other's points in apparent opposition to mine.. As I am still limited to my phone, my posts are not a clean or proper as they should be.

I've been responding in general but I may have mixed up who posted what. I think it was Bren who may have said some folks might wantto play a jack of all trades/generalist. I'm simply advocating for a player to be able to play whatever and let shortcomings be addressed through play rather than through a rule.


In my OPINION, its a much more interesting way to develop a character, since it provides for more opportunities for that character to grow through failure.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3606
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
Sorry, everyone. There are three people who seem to more or less agree with each other and support each other's points in apparent opposition to mine.
I can see how it would seem that way. But I really don't think that Garhkal, myself, and Whill are in strong agreement about almost any topic. Not unless those two have changed their play styles a lot while I was gone from the forum. It probably seems that way in this thread because we are mostly disagreeing with some of the things you have said. But if you look closely (which will be difficult to do on a phone) we don't agree on exactly which things we disagree with nor do we uniformly agree on the reasons why we disagree. In support of our lack of uniformity, from memory and just off the top of my head...

    Garhkal does a lot of organized play (which he enjoys) and that has a strong effect on what issues he is concerned with. For one thing, it means he is a lot more inclined to have new players or characters in a game sessions and he needs to be concerned people bringing characters they have created and run with some other GM into a game he is running (and vice versa). Plus he has to track a bunch of stuff with special sheets, make sure things are group approved and according to standards and that the right boxes are ticked and all that. Me, I loathe organized play as the antithesis of an enjoyable leisure activity. I'm an RPG DIY anarchist from way, way back and I tend to run multiyear campaigns with every game system I run. Our Star Wars campaign ran from NOV 1994 - DEC 2005 with the same core players and characters.

    Whill has run a lot of WEG adventures. Many multiple times. I've never run a single one, despite owning most of them.

    Garhkal tends to favor having competent Imperials with good skill levels in line with the competence of many real world military personnel. Myself, I'm perfectly happy to have stormtroopers outclassed by combat oriented PCs. Except for major villains I'd never give stormtroopers Force Points and I'd seldom give most stormtroopers any Character Points. I'm not sure how Whill views the Imperials.

    Whill on the other hand doesn't really like Star Wars Rebels* (kind of seems to disparage it actually, at least that's how I interpret well my kid likes it). I find the series delightful and a really good mirror of the PCs and their antics in a good RPG campaign. The series is a better mirror of an RPG campaign by by far than any or all of the films.

* This is a shocking lapse of good taste and judgement on his part which I can only attribute to his having been repeatedly dropped on his head as a child. Razz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 11239
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, ohio.

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Its not that i Prefer organized play, but that if it was not for that organized play with the Sparks group, there would have been an almost 10 year segment of time, i would have had NO GAMING what so ever..

I would LOVE to have a home group of star wars players to run through stuff i just make up on the fly (though i might still dip into sparks stuff for ease of reference for certain things), but most of the players i have come across that have been willing to game either do pathfinder, shadowrun 5, dnd5, or some other new game, if they do rpgs at all.. Hell when i was in Guam and gulfport, damn near all the gamers i found either stuck to MtG, Warcraft, or warhammer online / evercrack etc..
_________________
It's Not who you kill, but how they die!
You cannot dodge it if you do not know it is coming, and you cannot hit it if you do not know its there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 3920
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
Sorry, everyone. There are three people who seem to more or less agree with each other and support each other's points in apparent opposition to mine...

I'm simply advocating for a player to be able to play whatever and let shortcomings be addressed through play rather than through a rule.

In my OPINION, its a much more interesting way to develop a character, since it provides for more opportunities for that character to grow through failure.

But that's not all that is happening here. You are giving your personal philosophy as a player here, but also more. You are also making absolute statements about the game in general and also statements about my specific house rules, GM style, etc. For the most recent example, here is the last single sentence of yours that I replied to above:

Naaman wrote:
If a bunch of PCs are generalists, then no individual PC has a chance to shine other than by luck of the dice.

You're not talking about you here. You are talking about whole PC groups and all of them in general. In that sentence, you are polarizing the issue by taking my statements about "well rounded" advanced PCs to a ridiculous extreme I don't take it to, and thus using the straw man fallacy.

And in my previous post above, I provide an example of what I actually mean by "more well-rounded". Please look at the partial PC stat blocks in my previous post and tell me if you really think those three PCs are too similar in stats and would never have a chance to each shine. I do not say well rounded to mean homogenized or without focus. All advanced PCs in my game have what I call 'signature skills' but none of them have gotten above 8D. And I have no prohibition about raising skills higher - I've just never had a player with a character concept that actually required a higher level skill. When they've gotten their signature skills to that level, then they have went back and improved some lower skills. Not all - There are still some weaknesses. The "more well rounded" part is on the lower value skills. All the PCs in the party are still unique from each other. They all still have their players' focuses. They all still have their chances to shine. And the main purpose of some degree of advanced PC well roundedness is to deal player attrition.
_________________
*
"Would you trade that necklace for a glimpse into your future? ...What do you know of kyber crystals?"
"The Force moves darkly near a creature that’s about to kill... I'm gonna follow Jyn. Her path is clear."

"Tell that to Kanjiklub."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 3920
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 12:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bren wrote:
* This is a shocking lapse of good taste and judgement on his part which I can only attribute to his having been repeatedly dropped on his head as a child. Razz

And until now, everyone else had the good grace not to mention it!

Actually it's not that I dislike Rebels so much as I despise the "everything is canon" policy that says this show is on equal footing with the films. I can and do appreciate Rebels for what it is, a kids's show inspired by Ralph Mcquarrie and WEG. Many aspects of the show do not seem to me like they could possibly exist in the same universe as the films.
_________________
*
"Would you trade that necklace for a glimpse into your future? ...What do you know of kyber crystals?"
"The Force moves darkly near a creature that’s about to kill... I'm gonna follow Jyn. Her path is clear."

"Tell that to Kanjiklub."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Naaman
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 1983

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
Naaman wrote:
Sorry, everyone. There are three people who seem to more or less agree with each other and support each other's points in apparent opposition to mine...

I'm simply advocating for a player to be able to play whatever and let shortcomings be addressed through play rather than through a rule.

In my OPINION, its a much more interesting way to develop a character, since it provides for more opportunities for that character to grow through failure.

But that's not all that is happening here. You are giving your personal philosophy as a player here, but also more. You are also making absolute statements about the game in general and also statements about my specific house rules, GM style, etc. For the most recent example, here is the last single sentence of yours that I replied to above:

Naaman wrote:
If a bunch of PCs are generalists, then no individual PC has a chance to shine other than by luck of the dice.

You're not talking about you here. You are talking about whole PC groups and all of them in general. In that sentence, you are polarizing the issue by taking my statements about "well rounded" advanced PCs to a ridiculous extreme I don't take it to, and thus using the straw man fallacy.

And in my previous post above, I provide an example of what I actually mean by "more well-rounded". Please look at the partial PC stat blocks in my previous post and tell me if you really think those three PCs are too similar in stats and would never have a chance to each shine. I do not say well rounded to mean homogenized or without focus. All advanced PCs in my game have what I call 'signature skills' but none of them have gotten above 8D. And I have no prohibition about raising skills higher - I've just never had a player with a character concept that actually required a higher level skill. When they've gotten their signature skills to that level, then they have went back and improved some lower skills. Not all - There are still some weaknesses. The "more well rounded" part is on the lower value skills. All the PCs in the party are still unique from each other. They all still have their players' focuses. They all still have their chances to shine. And the main purpose of some degree of advanced PC well roundedness is to deal player attrition.


Whill, That particular sentence was a response to Bren's remark about people wanting to play jacks of all trades, and the overall discussion has been amalgamized in my mind for lack of access to my computer, which would allow me to interact with the forum contents in a much more fluid and reasonable way.

Specifically, I am not saying that all characters should or should not be this or that. What I was saying was simply that enforcing dice allocation rubs me the wrong way. I didn't fully understand your character creation rules, as I had never seen them in full (and I suspect that what has been presented in this thread may still be incomplete), but with the insight you have provided, I now interpret your original comment about over focus more closely to how you probably meant it.

I'm totally convinced already that you and I agree in general about character creation and advancement as far as what are reasonable allocations of resources. And where we don't agree, I find it to be a wash because you are offering more dice than RAW which compensates and then some for any "loss" experienced by the requirement to have starship skills. The extra dice also allow for a specialist to specialize more safely by providing an "auxiliary" pool of dice to either apply toward the support skills which might otherwise have been neglected (for sake of adherence to the concept) or to truly specialize in a skill set (provided the player meets the basic requirement to spend some of the dice on the "team" skills for starship combat) by allowing for additional specializations in specific skills or else providing for more skills in that area in general (for example, having a strong ability in repulsorlifts, starfighters and space transports as opposed to just one of those skills).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3606
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
Actually it's not that I dislike Rebels so much as I despise the "everything is canon" policy that says this show is on equal footing with the films. I can and do appreciate Rebels for what it is, a kids's show inspired by Ralph Mcquarrie and WEG. Many aspects of the show do not seem to me like they could possibly exist in the same universe as the films.
Several of the films don't seem like they could possibly exist in the same universe as do others of the films so I don't especially fault the Rebels cartoons for that problem. If I get to run a new Star Wars campaign, the only canon I will allow is the first three films. And even there I'm going to pick the best parts of my recollections of the various editions of each of the first three films, e.g. Greedo didn't shoot.

From a practical matter, once you have over 60 episodes of a TV show (are the Clone Wars cartoons canon too? cause then it would be way over 100 episodes), plus 8 movies and counting trying to maintain real consistency is highly improbable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 11239
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, ohio.

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:

Actually it's not that I dislike Rebels so much as I despise the "everything is canon" policy that says this show is on equal footing with the films. I can and do appreciate Rebels for what it is, a kids's show inspired by Ralph Mcquarrie and WEG. Many aspects of the show do not seem to me like they could possibly exist in the same universe as the films.


I feel the same way. Films are cannon, everything else is official..
_________________
It's Not who you kill, but how they die!
You cannot dodge it if you do not know it is coming, and you cannot hit it if you do not know its there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 3920
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
Whill, That particular sentence was a response to Bren's remark about people wanting to play jacks of all trades

I was the one who said some players possibly might want to play a "jack of all trades". That still doesn't mean completely without focus, and no one was suggesting all PCs should play one, or even entertaining the possibility of all PCs in any party all being jack of all trades. (I personally have never had any advanced PCs I would consider to be jacks of all trades.) You seem to tend to overreact to some statements taking them to an extreme no one else does.

Naaman wrote:
What I was saying was simply that enforcing dice allocation rubs me the wrong way.

"Enforcing dice allocation"? I don't remember anyone saying anything like that. All I was saying was that overall, PC group creation is a collaborative process in my game. Absolutely no forcing. There are three dimensions of PC creation in my game:

(1) Entire gaming group discuss campaign and hammer out basic concepts/roles for the PC group
(2) Each player for his PC
(3) GM and each player for his PC

Sometimes the last step is nothing more than me saying "approved as is" which means player is getting 100% of the result of Step 2. If I have concerns or suggested alterations, we still do not proceed to the campaign until the GM and player are both 100% satisfied with the starting PC. I have not once had a PC that the player and I couldn't 100% agree on.

Naaman wrote:
I didn't fully understand your character creation rules, as I had never seen them in full (and I suspect that what has been presented in this thread may still be incomplete), but with the insight you have provided, I now interpret your original comment about over focus more closely to how you probably meant it.

I'm totally convinced already that you and I agree in general about character creation and advancement as far as what are reasonable allocations of resources.

I'm happy to see it wasn't all in vain. Thanks!

Naaman wrote:
And where we don't agree, I find it to be a wash because you are offering more dice than RAW which compensates and then some for any "loss" experienced by the requirement to have starship skills. The extra dice also allow for a specialist to specialize more safely by providing an "auxiliary" pool of dice to either apply toward the support skills which might otherwise have been neglected (for sake of adherence to the concept) or to truly specialize in a skill set (provided the player meets the basic requirement to spend some of the dice on the "team" skills for starship combat) by allowing for additional specializations in specific skills or else providing for more skills in that area in general (for example, having a strong ability in repulsorlifts, starfighters and space transports as opposed to just one of those skills).

So my value of not having any PCs that just strap into the passenger lounge during space combat is what your main issue has been? Starting PCs in my game still aren't forced to allocate dice to space skills in my game. There are many possible character concepts that may have no prior starship experience. But in my game, every PC will have some role on the ship, even if they start with no skill in it, so they will have opportunities to gain experience and get better at it over time. If your only strict character concept for a campaign I'm running includes the PC having an extreme phobia of touching starship stations, then yeah maybe I would have my first player walk away from a campaign. Otherwise, if your concept involves no starship experience prior to the campaign, you'll learn!
_________________
*
"Would you trade that necklace for a glimpse into your future? ...What do you know of kyber crystals?"
"The Force moves darkly near a creature that’s about to kill... I'm gonna follow Jyn. Her path is clear."

"Tell that to Kanjiklub."


Last edited by Whill on Sat May 27, 2017 12:05 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 3920
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2017 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bren wrote:
Several of the films don't seem like they could possibly exist in the same universe as do others of the films so I don't especially fault the Rebels cartoons for that problem. If I get to run a new Star Wars campaign, the only canon I will allow is the first three films.

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with only having the classic trilogy in your game's canon. I have had campaign universes where only ANH is canon but most of them include all the films.

I love all the films so much that I enjoy reconciling any apparent discontinuities between them. It's all about where you are able to draw the line. To me it's funny that you draw it around the original trilogy because TESB and RotJ have some discontinuities with the first film, requiring "a certain point of view" to resolve. (Why did Obi-Wan say Vader was a "pupil" until he turned to evil and why did Vader say he was "but the learner" when he left Obi-Wan, but Anakin was full-fledged Jedi Knight and not a padawan when he turned to the Dark Side? Why did Obi-Wan call Vader "Darth" on the Death Star?) SW ANH is internally consistent but if you want to get technical, each sequel film you stack on strains continuity, not just sequels after the original trilogy.

Bren wrote:
From a practical matter, once you have over 60 episodes of a TV show (are the Clone Wars cartoons canon too? cause then it would be way over 100 episodes), plus 8 movies and counting trying to maintain real consistency is highly improbable.

I don't see it as just an increasingly higher number of total SW episodes leading to a continually greater chance of inconsistencies. There are significant and extreme differences between the different media. The live action theatrical films do not have anything nearly as ridiculous as hyperspace whales and flying helicopter lightsabers. My son was 6 at the time of these things and even he thought they were silly. I'm perfectly ok with this wacky animated stuff existing in a separate universe from the films, but not the same universe.

And the very premise of TCW spits in the face of film continuity but having Anakin get promoted to Knight only a mere month after Yoda felt Anakin's terrible pain literally across the galaxy when Anakin's mother traumatically died in his arms. And then only a few days after that, the high council thinks this troubled and controversial Jedi should be given his own padawan. That seriously makes sense to you? Yes, the Jedi Order is flawed but they are still not complete idiots in the film universe. IMO, TCW was in state of severe discontinuity with the film universe on day one.

If none of this animated stuff poses any problems for your view of the film universe then I am a little jealous.
_________________
*
"Would you trade that necklace for a glimpse into your future? ...What do you know of kyber crystals?"
"The Force moves darkly near a creature that’s about to kill... I'm gonna follow Jyn. Her path is clear."

"Tell that to Kanjiklub."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3606
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2017 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
(Why did Obi-Wan say Vader was a "pupil" until he turned to evil and why did Vader say he was "but the learner" when he left Obi-Wan, but Anakin was full-fledged Jedi Knight and not a padawan when he turned to the Dark Side?
Don't we only know Anakin is a full-fledged Jedi Knight from the prequels?

Quote:
Why did Obi-Wan call Vader "Darth" on the Death Star?
Because that's the name Anakin took when he turned to the Dark Side and Obi-Wan (unlike Luke) gave up on Vader ever returning from the Dark Side. So when Obi faces him, to Obi-Wan Anakin is dead. He is Darth now.

Quote:
SW ANH is internally consistent but if you want to get technical, each sequel film you stack on strains continuity, not just sequels after the original trilogy.
Indeed, I alluded to that in my previous comment. I just chose to pick all three of the original movies. I feel like without any of the movies it isn't really Star Wars so I have to pick something. And I like having some sense of where the bigger picture is going and of not having the fate of the galaxy depend on any one particular group of PCs.

Whill wrote:
Bren wrote:
From a practical matter, once you have over 60 episodes of a TV show (are the Clone Wars cartoons canon too? cause then it would be way over 100 episodes), plus 8 movies and counting trying to maintain real consistency is highly improbable.

If none of this animated stuff poses any problems for your view of the film universe then I am a little jealous.
<Yoda voice> As you should be. As you should be. </Yoda voice>

I used to watch the Highlander TV show. It was fun, but I found that to rationalize how there could possibly be so many immortals that a new one or two could wander onto MacLeod’s barge on the Seine or into his shop in Seaview every week yet the rest of the world is totally unaware of the lighting storms and headless corpses that show up out of the blue once or twice a week I had to do one little thing. I had to mostly ignore the previous shows that I watched. I played a mental game where I pretended this show I was watching was the only show or maybe one of a handful of encounters that occurred over several years.

Similarly I think it helps to take each set of Star Wars stuff on its own rather than trying to hold all of it in your conscious mind or try to reconcile all of anything. Remember too that the Flash Gordon serials had their own continuity issues and try thinking of several separate continuities for Star Wars.

    1) Treat the original trilogy as one continuity. Yes there are some oddities and inconsistencies. But they have an overall similarity of tone and spirit. Then treat the rest of the films and TV shows as being vaguely connected.

    2) Similarly treat the prequel trilogy with its midichlorians and Jedi masters who are uber powerful combat machines with the political savvy and insight of an only averagely bright six year old as a different continuity with the Clone Wars cartoon and what comes after as being only vaguely connected.

    3) Treat the Clone Wars TV show as being about lots of Clone battles and Jedi’s swinging their sabers while being only vaguely connected to the movies.

    4) Treat the Rebels TV show as being only vaguely connected to the rest.

    5) You can probably fit Rogue One in with the first three movies, but my feeling is why bother beyond? It’s cool that it ends just before ANH begins but I’m not going to worry about how the Princess’ consular ship got from the diplomatic mission she mentions when questioned to the middle of the battle over Scaris.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 3920
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2017 2:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bren wrote:
Don't we only know Anakin is a full-fledged Jedi Knight from the prequels?

No.

Obi-Wan: Yes, I was once a Jedi Knight, the same as your father.

Bren wrote:
Because that's the name Anakin took when he turned to the Dark Side and Obi-Wan (unlike Luke) gave up on Vader ever returning from the Dark Side. So when Obi faces him, to Obi-Wan Anakin is dead. He is Darth now.

Joe Sidious? Joe Maul? Joe Tyranus? Joe Vader? "Only a master of evil, Joe." Darth is more of a title than some common first name. Obi-Wan wouldn't just call this evil betrayer who slaughtered Jedi younglings and joined the Sith by his current first name as if the last time they met it was a drinking contest in a cantina.

By the way, I have answers to all those questions I asked because I like having all the films work together. But I don't think you missed the point that in the original SW film, Vader and Luke's father were separate characters. Obi-Wan's pupil actually named Darth Vader betrayed the Jedi and killed Luke's father, a full-fledged Jedi Knight. On the Death Star, Obi-Wan calls his former pupil by his actual first name, Darth. The sequels retconned all this and now we have "truth from a certain point of view."

Bren wrote:
I’m not going to worry about how the Princess’ consular ship got from the diplomatic mission she mentions when questioned to the middle of the battle over Scaris.

Even in 1977 the diplomatic mission was always just a lie, and it still is. Now we know that after being tasked with seeking out the assistance of Obi-Wan on Tatooine, Leia's ship was still inside of Admiral Raddus' ship getting some repairs when he took off for Scarif. Which was fortunate since Raddus's ship got damaged in the battle so the plans were sent to Leia who now had the mission to retrieve Obi-Wan and the plans for the Death Star.

You don't worry about it out of dismissal of any concern. I don't worry about it because it makes sense. Cool
_________________
*
"Would you trade that necklace for a glimpse into your future? ...What do you know of kyber crystals?"
"The Force moves darkly near a creature that’s about to kill... I'm gonna follow Jyn. Her path is clear."

"Tell that to Kanjiklub."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Characters, Droids, and Species All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0