Palpatine versus Yoda fight... really necessary?

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2005-12-30 04:59pm

What if instead of Palpatine versus Yoda, Yoda goes to Palpatine's office. But instead of clonetroopers he find that Palpatine has been making speeches, behind the scenes to ordinary citizens warning about the dangers of the evil Jedi. So instead of fearsome clonetroopers Yoda enters a street and finds a mob of people lining the streets. This is "the Gauntlet". As he walks up the street he's pelted with rocks and oranges. By the time Yoda reaches the front steps of the Chancellor's office and lights his lightsaber he's covered in food and has scratches and bruises all over him. Then Palpatine goes, "See, he comes now to kill me" and walks up to Yoda and says "You may kill me now but you will never stop the will of the people!" and then thousands of citizens boo Yoda and cheer Palpatine and Yoda has Palpatine's neck two inches from his lightsaber and Palpatine gives this little smile and talks in his evil Sith voice, "You have lost, Jedi. The people are with me." Then Yoda realizes this, throws down his lightsaber and is arrested by ordinary police (not clonetroopers) and exiled with that really really sad look on his face.

More moving than Yoda versus Palpatine isn't it, and gets around the retarded Mace can kill Palpatine but Yoda can't issue (yes I am aware Mace was uniquely qualified to kill Palpatine but the fact that you have to resort to a dark-light combination to extinguish the dark rather than the light side being able to defeat the dark on its own has always left a bitter taste in my mouth).

Brian

Cykeisme · Post by **Cykeisme** » 2005-12-30 05:30pm

I'll leave a proper dissection of symbolism in epic stories to someone more qualified.

I believe the battle was critical to the plot. Yoda had to fight Sidious, and he had to fail.

Anyway, the movie trumps the novelization's portrayal of the duel. Sidious' victory was due to luck, rather than the complete hopelessness of the light against the shadow.
Arguably, there's no such thing as luck, as the Force steers the fate of the galaxy, but whatever the case, it wasn't as clear cut as in the book.

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2005-12-30 05:38pm

I don't think that Yoda had to physically fight Palpatine with a lightsaber or for there to be a battle between Yoda or Palpatine at all. Only that Yoda had to try. Yoda in ATOC could easily collect force lightning with his bare hands from Dooku. Now okay, Sidious is much more powerful than Dooku. But, with a lightsaber, Yoda should be able to do even better than with Doku... Yoda should be a master of the force and the worst that should happen is someone can match his knowledge, not have superior knowledge. Like you said, leaving it to chance seems inconsistent.

Now... with this scenario, Yoda coming to fight Palpatine but finding he has the support of the people... Yoda gets hurt being pelted by rocks and doesn't want to use the force to hurt ordinary citizens. Also he gets his ligthsaber stripped from him and thrown into a cell. Yoda is broken. Imagine thousands and thousands of people booing Yoda as he is about to kill Palpatine, and Palpatine just stands there and gives this little smile, "In death I shall become more powerful than you can imagine." Now, what irony, if Obi-Wan used this same tactic on Vader, decades later! Except Yoda gets it and this time, he drops his lightsaber and knows he is defeated (unless he wants to turn to the dark side and kill all those innocent people or let the innocent people see him cut down a defenseless man).

Brian

Crazedwraith · Post by **Crazedwraith** » 2005-12-30 06:29pm

You're scenario is completely flawed.

Why don't any of this hating crowd have Blasters?
Why doen't Yoda protect himself with a handy-dandy Tk-bubble?
Why wouldn't Yoda kill Palpatine? It doesn't matter what the people think as long as Sith are dead and Yoda is prepared to sacrifice himself to that end.
And giving you the other to bits, theres no way in hell Palpatine would exile Yoda. Execute, yes, excile so he remains a threat, no? Besides if he were exciled by the Empire why would Obi-Wan know where he went?

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2005-12-30 06:44pm

There are ways around the flaws. My whole suggestion is that Palpatine versus Yoda is not really necessary and that a not fighting would have been a better alternative. If you want me to go into detail fine.

Palpatine could have ordered a ban on all weapons. My EU knowledge is nearly non-existant but I remember from the RPG that certain core worlds require licenses. Also it is not hard to believe that ordinary people would not have blasters. Yoda could draw his lightsaber to deflect blaster shots into the air. Plus no blasters is a symbolism--Yoda can't kill people armed with rocks and food. Palpatine could have told everybody to come with no blasters.

Every time we see the Jedi use The Force in the movies it requires concentration. Perhaps Yoda can't concentrate. Or perhaps he doesn't give a fuck if a bit of food or rocks cuts him up. He doesn't want to waste The Force needlessly. Perhaps all the cuts and food are superficial. The Jedi don't use the force needlessly.

Yoda wouldn't kill Palpatine because he understands that in killing him he would go to the dark side and Palpatine would "become more powerful than he could imagine" like when Vader killed Obi-Wan. Palpatine would become a Martyr, Anakin would become the new Dark Lord. Yoda is not Mace Windu--he would not kill a defenseless man. That is the dark side, that's how Anakin was turned, he saw Mace had a bit of dark side in him. If he does, the crowd turns on Yoda and he has to kill hundreds, thousands of innocents. Yoda is pure light, he will not kill an unarmed man and Palpatine should have taken advantage of that.

Yoda can be put in a little shuttle to disappear "exiled"... then as the clonetrooper is about to kill Yoda the shuttle is shot up and in comes Obi-Wan or Bali Organa and saves him.

The question is not about these little details that any competent writer can deal with, but the big question--was it necessary for Yoda to fight Palpatine in a lightsaber duel? And the answer is no, not when Palpatine could turn the people against Yoda and become a martyr on his death.

<edit>Ok you made me hunt for what inspired this idea...

SWD20 P. 178 wrote:Master Yoda often said that, should the Republic ever challenge the Jedi Order's right to exist, the support of the common citizen would see them through: "If fear us they do, help us they will not. If hate us they do, hunt us they will."

Also, I do not understand why you think Yoda would kill unarmed Palpatine when it is the Jedi way to take prisoners and not kill unarmed men. I do not know why this would not extend to the Sith, especially if Yoda is not going to be a hypocrite. Faced with hordes of innocent people and an unarmed Palpatine, Yoda can only submit.</edit>

Brian

Noble Ire · Post by **Noble Ire** » 2005-12-30 07:34pm

Also, I do not understand why you think Yoda would kill unarmed Palpatine when it is the Jedi way to take prisoners and not kill unarmed men. I do not know why this would not extend to the Sith, especially if Yoda is not going to be a hypocrite. Faced with hordes of innocent people and an unarmed Palpatine, Yoda can only submit.

No. It is made clear in the novelization that the Jedi seek the termination of the Sith at any cost. Mace went to Palpatine's office willing to capture him instead (although I bet he didn't think that was likely), but that was only because if he was captured, the Jedi might be able to take control. That obviously wouldn't be the case in this instance. Yoda is determined to dispell the darkness of the Sith, and killing Palpatine would be the only way to do it.

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2005-12-30 07:38pm

Well the novelization is based on the movie, not the other way around. When I'm suggesting a different alternative to the movie plot, going back to the movie plot and saying "ah ha there you're wrong" is ridiculous.

Anakin didn't want to terminate Palpatine at any cost and he was a Jedi. He saw Mace Windu going after an unarmed old man. If Mace had said "Anakin, arrest Chancellor Palpatine," Mace would not have been killed. Or if he had, Anakin would see Palpatine for who he was and kill him. Mace nearly killed an unarmed man, he went to the dark side and the galaxy was punished for it.

<edit>Revan was a Sith Lord and was captured and the Jedi Council spared his life.</edit>

Brian

Noble Ire · Post by **Noble Ire** » 2005-12-30 07:46pm

Well the novelization is based on the movie, not the other way around. When I'm suggesting a different alternative to the movie plot, going back to the movie plot and saying "ah ha there you're wrong" is ridiculous.

What? I'm pointing out that your scienario is flawed within the universe. If you want to completely discount any movie precedent, this debate becomes pointless.

Anakin didn't want to terminate Palpatine at any cost and he was a Jedi. He saw Mace Windu going after an unarmed old man. If Mace had said "Anakin, arrest Chancellor Palpatine," Mace would not have been killed. Or if he had, Anakin would see Palpatine for who he was and kill him. Mace nearly killed an unarmed man, he went to the dark side and the galaxy was punished for it.

Mace didn't trust Anakin, but that's aside the point. Palpatine had been almost a father figure to Anakin for a decade. He wouldn't kill him immediately, no matter what he did. The average jedi would have a different view.

Revan was a Sith Lord and was captured and the Jedi Council spared his life

They also had the opportunity to wipe his mind. Yoda and Mace didn't.

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2005-12-30 08:32pm

If you want to completely discount any movie precedent, this debate becomes pointless.

Who said anything about discounting any movie precedent? Not when I'm suggesting an alternative plot to ROTS. Pick anything except ROTS or elements in ROTS that can be corroborated outside it. If you have corroboration to this elimination of the Sith at any cost outside ROTS then I'm willing to accept it. There is one cost that the Jedi (that is Yoda being the Master of the Light) should not be willing to pay--that is, turning to the dark side, and killing an unarmed man is turning to the dark side.

He wouldn't kill him immediately, no matter what he did. The average jedi would have a different view.

Who wouldn't kill who immediately, Palpatine wouldn't kill Mace, Anakin wouldn't kill Palpatine, Mace wouldn't kill Palpatine, Palpatine wouldn't kill Anakin? If you are saying Anakin wouldn't have killed Palpatine immediately... sure, but Anakin would have seen Palpatine kill Mace out of spite and Mace being consistent with Jedi tradition. He would have killed Palpatine eventually, turned on him, and not sucuumbed to the dark side. Anakin only turned to the dark side because to him there was no way out--he was directly responsible for Mace's death, Mace the light, chopped off his hand. If he hadn't chopped off Mace's hand, everything would be different. Even if he had stood there watching Palpatine, he could have been turned back to the light by Obi-Wan or could have rationalized it somehow. He saw that he had no other choice than to embrace the dark side.

They also had the opportunity to wipe his mind. Yoda and Mace didn't.

Sure they did. Mace and Anakin arrest Palpatine and he's put in a cell. Mace and Yoda go in and wipe his mind together. And you're ignoring that Bastila did not think of wiping Revan's mind... she did not kill an unarmed man even when he was the Sith Lord and Bastila did not know that the Jedi Council could wipe Revan's mind, she did it either out of compassion or because of the Jedi Code. I'm willing to be the Jedi Code, because she was one of those Jedi's brought up from birth.

The galaxy was plunged into darkness because Mace ignored the Jedi Code to respect life.

Brian

Post by **Surlethe** » 2005-12-30 08:36pm

brianeyci wrote:Yoda wouldn't kill Palpatine because he understands that in killing him he would go to the dark side and Palpatine would "become more powerful than he could imagine" like when Vader killed Obi-Wan.

Incorrect; Palpatine wouldn't become more powerful, because Obi-Wan's "more powerful than you can imagine" is predicated upon the ability to become a ghostie, which Qui-Gon discovered.

Palpatine would become a Martyr, Anakin would become the new Dark Lord.

So, are we also discounting Obi-Wan's victory on Mustafar? Without Palpatine, Anakin is dead within a few hours.

Yoda is not Mace Windu--he would not kill a defenseless man.

Why not? They both have the same sense of duty to the Council and the Order.

That is the dark side, that's how Anakin was turned, he saw Mace had a bit of dark side in him.

Again, this is wrong; Anakin was turned because without Palpatine, he believed he wouldn't be able to save Padme. Mace's Vaapad had nothing to do with Anakin's decision to turn.

If he does, the crowd turns on Yoda and he has to kill hundreds, thousands of innocents

As opposed to force-tricking and force-running his way past them? Or even just knocking some out?

Yoda is pure light, he will not kill an unarmed man and Palpatine should have taken advantage of that.

Again, wrong: you have no evidence Yoda is unwilling to kill Palpatine because of some sense of "fair play". Remember, Yoda is adamant: "Destroy the Sith we must." Not, "Destroy the Sith we must, but only if weapons they possess"; not, "Destroy the Sith we must, but only if fight back they do"; "Destroy the Sith we must."

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2005-12-30 08:46pm

"Destroy the Sith we must" comes from ROTS does it not? Then since I'm suggesting a different plot, there it is.

As for the "more powerful than you can imagine" it is not necessarily based on becoming a ghost but become a martyr. Civilians across the galaxy would see Yoda killing an unarmed helpless elected leader of a civilization. The Jedi would be gone, forever.

Yoda didn't know whether Obi-Wan could have killed Anakin. This is what Palpatine could hinge on.

Mace Windu, using the Vappad, is part-dark. He nearly killed an unarmed man. If you want you can even use the beginning of ROTS--"it is the Jedi way" which is corroborated outside ROTS by events like Bastila and Jedi never killing unarmed foes. You're forgetting that killing an unarmed man is against the order.

If Anakin hadn't chopped off Mace's hand, there would have been a chance for redemption. Since he was directly responsible for killing the second highest member of the Jedi Order, there was no chance.

I cannot believe I'm getting resistance to the idea Jedi respect life and do not kill unarmed prisoners (even Sith prisoners). Bastila captured Revan, killing unarmed people is against the Jedi Code, even if they are Sith. The only evidence you have is referring to ROTS itself, which is what I propose should be changed.

<edit>I'm not trying to be egotistical and saying "oh shit it should be changed", I am not George Lucas and don't intend suppose that I dictate what is and what is not in SW. When I say "which is what I propose should be changed" I'm talking in terms of an alternate writing of ROTS, maybe a fanfiction.</edit>

Brian

Trogdor · Post by **Trogdor** » 2005-12-30 08:59pm

Revan was a special case. They needed his help to find the starmaps that would let them track down the Star Forge or the Republic was doomed, and even then some of the masters were against retraining him and thus giving him a chance to redeem himself. Perhaps if they had caught Revan uninjured they would've only imprisoned him, but how could Yoda and Kenobi hold Palpatine with the rest of the Jedi Order destroyed?

The ideas that the Jedi respect life and yet can kill a currently helpless Sith are not incompatable, if you look at it from a certain point of view

Sith will gladly kill people on their quests for powers, LOTS of people. The murder of a Sith could save untold multitudes of people.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2005-12-30 09:14pm

brianeyci wrote:"Destroy the Sith we must" comes from ROTS does it not? Then since I'm suggesting a different plot, there it is.

The plot change you're suggesting occurs after Yoda speaks that line; there's really no reason to throw out the entire movie before your plot change.

As for the "more powerful than you can imagine" it is not necessarily based on becoming a ghost but become a martyr. Civilians across the galaxy would see Yoda killing an unarmed helpless elected leader of a civilization. The Jedi would be gone, forever.

No, it was based directly upon Obi-Wan becoming a ghost so he could aid Luke in becoming a Jedi. Note Obi-Wan couldn't have told Luke to "use the Force" if he hadn't become a ghost.

Yoda didn't know whether Obi-Wan could have killed Anakin. This is what Palpatine could hinge on.

This has nothing to do with my reply to your point.

Mace Windu, using the Vappad, is part-dark. He nearly killed an unarmed man. If you want you can even use the beginning of ROTS--"it is the Jedi way" which is corroborated outside ROTS by events like Bastila and Jedi never killing unarmed foes. You're forgetting that killing an unarmed man is against the order.

Not when he's too dangerous to live. Mace Windu was right; Palpatine would have manipulated the courts and the senate, and gotten a pardon for himself, and then started working back into power years later. Yoda recognizes this, which is why he determines the Sith must be destroyed; surely you don't think Yoda's adherence to the code is so strict he would sacrifice it to adhere to it?

If Anakin hadn't chopped off Mace's hand, there would have been a chance for redemption. Since he was directly responsible for killing the second highest member of the Jedi Order, there was no chance.

What does this have to do with Anakin actually turning because of Palpatine, not because of Mace?

I cannot believe I'm getting resistance to the idea Jedi respect life and do not kill unarmed prisoners (even Sith prisoners).

When a Jedi is faced with destruction himself, or destruction of an unarmed opponent, he kills the opponent. This is not hard to fathom; Yoda's sense of duty is great enough he would destroy the Sith, which is what he was prepared to do. Besides, what makes you think Palpatine would risk Yoda actually going through with it?

Bastila captured Revan, killing unarmed people is against the Jedi Code, even if they are Sith. The only evidence you have is referring to ROTS itself, which is what I propose should be changed.

You are proposing to change the Palpatine-Yoda fight, not anything leading up to it.

<edit>I'm not trying to be egotistical and saying "oh shit it should be changed", I am not George Lucas and don't intend suppose that I dictate what is and what is not in SW. When I say "which is what I propose should be changed" I'm talking in terms of an alternate writing of ROTS, maybe a fanfiction.</edit>

Brian

I understand that; however, you are indulging in several errors, which I am endeavoring to correct.

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2005-12-30 09:37pm

Surlethe wrote:The plot change you're suggesting occurs after Yoda speaks that line; there's really no reason to throw out the entire movie before your plot change.

No there is no reason to throw out the entire movie, but including this version of events will require a lot of foreshadowing. Palpatine turning the people against the Jedi. Anti-Jedi speeches, maybe Mace's plan to unseat Palpatine becoming common knowledge.

As for the "more powerful than you can imagine" it is not necessarily based on becoming a ghost but become a martyr. Civilians across the galaxy would see Yoda killing an unarmed helpless elected leader of a civilization. The Jedi would be gone, forever.
No, it was based directly upon Obi-Wan becoming a ghost so he could aid Luke in becoming a Jedi. Note Obi-Wan couldn't have told Luke to "use the Force" if he hadn't become a ghost.

In SW it was Obi-Wan becoming a ghost. In ROTS it could have been irony and a billion cameras trained on Palpatine watching whether the old helpless defenseless leader of the free galaxy would be killed by Yoda.

Yoda didn't know whether Obi-Wan could have killed Anakin. This is what Palpatine could hinge on.
This has nothing to do with my reply to your point.

Yes it does, you're saying that in order for my scenario to work Obi-Wan defeating Vader has to be changed. It does not, Yoda only needs to know that there is another, a second to take Palpatine's place, and that if Obi-Wan loses Vader will have the galaxy's sympathy.

Not when he's too dangerous to live. Mace Windu was right; Palpatine would have manipulated the courts and the senate, and gotten a pardon for himself, and then started working back into power years later. Yoda recognizes this, which is why he determines the Sith must be destroyed; surely you don't think Yoda's adherence to the code is so strict he would sacrifice it to adhere to it?

Yes, I think Yoda's adherence to the code is so strict that he would not sacrifice it to destroy the Sith. Yoda filled the Jedi Council with yes men, and the Jedi are Yoda. He's been training people in his code for 900 years, the code is him. If it says don't kill unarmed people, or even if it is tradition (confirmed by Anakin when he is surprised he killed Dooku), Yoda would follow it to the letter.

Yes Mace Windu was right, but Mace Windu was part-dark side, Yoda need not share in that.

If Anakin hadn't chopped off Mace's hand, there would have been a chance for redemption. Since he was directly responsible for killing the second highest member of the Jedi Order, there was no chance.
What does this have to do with Anakin actually turning because of Palpatine, not because of Mace?

Anakin would not have pleged himself to Palpatine's loyalty right away. He could take Palpatine into custody, then try interrogating him and wait til Yoda comes back to force it out of him. But since he chopped off Mace's hand, he can't go back to Yoda. Anakin turned because Mace chose to try and kill Palpatine rather than take him into custody, elsewise he still had other options.

When a Jedi is faced with destruction himself, or destruction of an unarmed opponent, he kills the opponent. This is not hard to fathom; Yoda's sense of duty is great enough he would destroy the Sith, which is what he was prepared to do. Besides, what makes you think Palpatine would risk Yoda actually going through with it?

In my scenario there would be hundreds or thousands of people surrounding Palpatine and the cameras of the galaxy poised to record the treachery of the Jedi. Also there would be kids, adults, ordinary people booing Yoda and willing to throw themselves on him and try and prevent the slaying. Yes they are insignificant and Yoda could kill as many of them as he wanted, but ordinary citizenery is what the Jedi are supposed to protect.

Also Palpatine exposed himself in ROTJ to Luke. It's not hard to see him doing the same thing except with Yoda. Yes he was trying to turn Luke, but instead in this scenario he is trying to turn everybody in the galaxy against the Jedi. Palpatine is very good at playing the old harmless man.

You are proposing to change the Palpatine-Yoda fight, not anything leading up to it.

Very much of the movie would have to be changed, especially the groundwork leading up to Palpatine becoming popular with the people. The anti-Jedi rhetoric would have to be part of the plot.

I understand that; however, you are indulging in several errors, which I am endeavoring to correct.

What you see as errors I see as technicalities. I never expected opposition to my idea that the Jedi do not kill unarmed prisoners.

Can you present an example of a Jedi trying to kill an unarmed prisoner outside of ROTS and Mace? If you can I'll concede that this is a stupid idea.

Brian

Noble Ire · Post by **Noble Ire** » 2005-12-30 09:51pm

What you see as errors I see as technicalities. I never expected opposition to my idea that the Jedi do not kill unarmed prisoners.

For one thing, Sith are never fully unarmed. Mace's death is evidence enough of that. Putting that aisde, the Sith are not like the other groups the Jedi have had to face. They are utterly ruthless, and have attempted to conquer the galaxy and destroy the Jedi no less than a half dozen times throughout galactic history. They have even managed to all but exterminate the Order at least twice. Think of it this way: if Hitler was some how brought back to life, and began to raise an army to finish the job he started during the Holocaust, do you think the Isreali goverment would consider any option other than his immediate assassination?

Can you present an example of a Jedi trying to kill an unarmed prisoner outside of ROTS and Mace? If you can I'll concede that this is a stupid idea.

Aside from Revan, whose case is special due to the need to locate the source of Sith power, the Jedi have never actually captured a Sith to my knowledge, since they almost always fight to the death. It is my view that Yoda would not stop at the chance to erase the threat of the Sith, or at least drastically reduce their power, even if it tranished the reputation of the Jedi, perhaps forever. Lack of the Order is better than rule by the Sith.

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2005-12-30 09:58pm

I would kill Hitler, you don't have to ask that question I think anybody would.

It's kind of a false analogy though. The memory of the Sith is thousands of years old, older than Yoda. Yoda has never fought a Sith other than Dooku. Israelis have living memory of the holocaust. Besides, Yoda surrendering to be arrested--live to fight another day he might be thinking, kill Palpatine away from the cameras and hordes of civilians screaming for Yoda's blood.

Noble Ire wrote:Lack of the Order is better than rule by the Sith.

See, but it is a gamble. If Obi-Wan loses, Vader will have the sympathy of the galaxy. Yoda can't be sure Obi-Wan beats Vader so if he kills Palpatine he could enrage the galaxy and cement Vader's rule.

Brian

Post by **Surlethe** » 2005-12-30 10:04pm

brianeyci wrote:
Surlethe wrote:The plot change you're suggesting occurs after Yoda speaks that line; there's really no reason to throw out the entire movie before your plot change.
No there is no reason to throw out the entire movie, but including this version of events will require a lot of foreshadowing. Palpatine turning the people against the Jedi. Anti-Jedi speeches, maybe Mace's plan to unseat Palpatine becoming common knowledge.

All of that had occurred by the time Yoda attacked Palpatine.

As for the "more powerful than you can imagine" it is not necessarily based on becoming a ghost but become a martyr. Civilians across the galaxy would see Yoda killing an unarmed helpless elected leader of a civilization. The Jedi would be gone, forever.
No, it was based directly upon Obi-Wan becoming a ghost so he could aid Luke in becoming a Jedi. Note Obi-Wan couldn't have told Luke to "use the Force" if he hadn't become a ghost.
In SW it was Obi-Wan becoming a ghost. In ROTS it could have been irony and a billion cameras trained on Palpatine watching whether the old helpless defenseless leader of the free galaxy would be killed by Yoda.

I had misunderstood your thrust there.

Yoda didn't know whether Obi-Wan could have killed Anakin. This is what Palpatine could hinge on.
This has nothing to do with my reply to your point.
Yes it does, you're saying that in order for my scenario to work Obi-Wan defeating Vader has to be changed. It does not, Yoda only needs to know that there is another, a second to take Palpatine's place, and that if Obi-Wan loses Vader will have the galaxy's sympathy.

However, Obi-Wan wins independently of the result of the Yoda-Palpatine fight: thus, there is no number two to take Palpatine's place. In any case, Yoda trusts Obi-Wan to destroy Anakin, and, regardless of whether or not Palpatine will be succeeded, it is his duty to destroy Palpatine.

Not when he's too dangerous to live. Mace Windu was right; Palpatine would have manipulated the courts and the senate, and gotten a pardon for himself, and then started working back into power years later. Yoda recognizes this, which is why he determines the Sith must be destroyed; surely you don't think Yoda's adherence to the code is so strict he would sacrifice it to adhere to it?
Yes, I think Yoda's adherence to the code is so strict that he would not sacrifice it to destroy the Sith. Yoda filled the Jedi Council with yes men, and the Jedi are Yoda. He's been training people in his code for 900 years, the code is him. If it says don't kill unarmed people, or even if it is tradition (confirmed by Anakin when he is surprised he killed Dooku), Yoda would follow it to the letter.

That's not what I said: if Yoda follows the Code, then the Code will cease to exist. Because Yoda is the Code, he must make some allowances; and Mace, who embodies the Code as much as Yoda, understands this fact.

Yes Mace Windu was right, but Mace Windu was part-dark side, Yoda need not share in that.

And you think the Vaapad is responsible for his insistence Palpatine die? The point of mastering the Vaapad is that Mace Windu does not succumb to the Dark Side while using negative emotions.

If Anakin hadn't chopped off Mace's hand, there would have been a chance for redemption. Since he was directly responsible for killing the second highest member of the Jedi Order, there was no chance.
What does this have to do with Anakin actually turning because of Palpatine, not because of Mace?
Anakin would not have pleged himself to Palpatine's loyalty right away. He could take Palpatine into custody, then try interrogating him and wait til Yoda comes back to force it out of him. But since he chopped off Mace's hand, he can't go back to Yoda. Anakin turned because Mace chose to try and kill Palpatine rather than take him into custody, elsewise he still had other options.

And this had nothing to do with Mace's Vaapad style, and everything to do with the fact Mace has had the code ground into him.

When a Jedi is faced with destruction himself, or destruction of an unarmed opponent, he kills the opponent. This is not hard to fathom; Yoda's sense of duty is great enough he would destroy the Sith, which is what he was prepared to do. Besides, what makes you think Palpatine would risk Yoda actually going through with it?
In my scenario there would be hundreds or thousands of people surrounding Palpatine and the cameras of the galaxy poised to record the treachery of the Jedi. Also there would be kids, adults, ordinary people booing Yoda and willing to throw themselves on him and try and prevent the slaying. Yes they are insignificant and Yoda could kill as many of them as he wanted, but ordinary citizenery is what the Jedi are supposed to protect.

So, Yoda runs up, and chops Palpatine's head off. Then, he turns to the world and announces Palpatine was a sith lord; he produces Palpatine's lightsabre as evidence; does some massive Force persuasion. Yoda has been known and respected for 900 years; that doesn't die lightly, especially once Palpatine is gone and exposed.

Also Palpatine exposed himself in ROTJ to Luke. It's not hard to see him doing the same thing except with Yoda. Yes he was trying to turn Luke, but instead in this scenario he is trying to turn everybody in the galaxy against the Jedi. Palpatine is very good at playing the old harmless man.

He exposed himself to Luke because he knew Vader would protect him. In this scenario, there's nothing to protect Palpatine from Yoda beside a perceived fear of public exposure. Besides, if public opinion is so negative, Yoda can exile himself and Obi-Wan; there's no more Jedi besides them for the Republic to hunt down.

You are proposing to change the Palpatine-Yoda fight, not anything leading up to it.
Very much of the movie would have to be changed, especially the groundwork leading up to Palpatine becoming popular with the people. The anti-Jedi rhetoric would have to be part of the plot.

It is part of the plot already; Palpatine is indulging in it heavily during his speech to the Senate establishing an Empire, and had probably spread rumors regarding the supposed "Jedi plot" well in advance of his revalation to Anakin.

I understand that; however, you are indulging in several errors, which I am endeavoring to correct.
What you see as errors I see as technicalities. I never expected opposition to my idea that the Jedi do not kill unarmed prisoners.

See, in general, Jedi do not kill unarmed prisoners. However, Palpatine is an exception to this rule, as evidenced by Mace Windu.

Can you present an example of a Jedi trying to kill an unarmed prisoner outside of ROTS and Mace? If you can I'll concede that this is a stupid idea.

Brian

Luke and Jabba's barge. Also, if Jedi don't kill unarmed prisoners, then why didn't Yoda just unarm the clone troopers sent to kill him?

Noble Ire · Post by **Noble Ire** » 2005-12-30 10:09pm

I would kill Hitler, you don't have to ask that question I think anybody would.

You might be correct. Of course, not all of those people would support the death penalty. Its the same thing; the degree of atrocities the Sith are known to commit well exceeds the threat of a simple criminal, even a murder.

It's kind of a false analogy though. The memory of the Sith is thousands of years old, older than Yoda. Yoda has never fought a Sith other than Dooku. Israelis have living memory of the holocaust.

Who knows how the people of the SW galaxy, especially the Jedi think of the Sith. Most probably consider them simply as an extinct race of monsters and boogeymen of legend (of course, that raises a new question; would you be in favor of terminating a mythical beast if it were to be unleashed upon the land, like, say, Medusa?) However, to the Jedi, the resurgence of the Sith would bring forward very bad and very tangible feelings, even if they never faced a real one in combat. They have tales of what the Sith once did, and they have seen the destructive power of the Dark Side.

Besides, Yoda surrendering to be arrested--live to fight another day he might be thinking, kill Palpatine away from the cameras and hordes of civilians screaming for Yoda's blood.

He had this same option the way the events actually went.

See, but it is a gamble. If Obi-Wan loses, Vader will have the sympathy of the galaxy. Yoda can't be sure Obi-Wan beats Vader so if he kills Palpatine he could enrage the galaxy and cement Vader's rule.

Perhaps, but its better than allowing Palpatine to remain alive. It is unlikely that Vader would be a more tyranical leader than Palpy, and even if he was, Palpatine's skill would no longer be around to help perpetuate Sith existance in the event of uprising.