Strength of Star Wars Cloth...

[Darth Yoshi]

Energy Dissipation/Absorption isn't limited to the Force. Corran Horn uses the skill absorb heat from a hot spring and channel it into telekinesis.

EDIT: anyway, about Grievous' cloak, the cloak could have been the SW version of kevlar.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

And as I mentioned before, you can even use it against things like sunburns or fire, if I recall.

[Mad]

The video cap further up in this thread shows he uses both hands. I have no idea what you were trying to do here. The only thing I can think of, is try and discredit my posts somehow.

The novel says he only used one hand. "A gauntlet-protected hand," not "gauntlet-protected hands."

Obviously, you'll say that the novel is superceded by the movie on this point. Problem: the hand he raised was his right hand. The description of that hand is still wrong.

And you still evaded the point about the point-of-view... you can't expect someone with no knowledge of the Force to think that it was the Force that actually accomplished the task.

Post hoc, proctor hoc. The passage doesn't say anything about what deflected the bolts. It just says that they were deflected. You are claiming that because the hand was mentioned before the deflection, that the gauntlet was responsible for the deflection. That is the post hoc fallacy.

One line of fire scattered a crowd on a balcony. Another swept across a foot bridge, chasing a man who foolishly thought himself faster than a laser bolt.

Now, the question: are you going to use Erisi's passage to mean that the man actually thought he could outrun Erisi's weapons fire? The book says it, right there. Plain as day. But that was Erisi's point-of-view, and what she figured he may be thinking. But, according to your logic, that is precisely what he was thinking.

Oh, and a quote from Saxton's site is:

But the man who may have been the fastest draw in the galaxy was not fast enough to surprise Vader. But before he could discharge another laser blast, something--something unseen yet incredibly strong--yanked the weapon from his hand and sent it flying into Vader's grip.

I don't see any mention the Force actually doing the yanking there. Does that mean the Force didn't do it?

Luckily I use canon facts, and you tried using some off comment EU write in.

The EU is canon.

[Kurgan]

The claim that the book describes the point of view of somebody with "no knowledge of the Force" I don't see being supported.

The narrator is omniscient, right? (he can be everywhere and read characters' thoughts)

If you want to be hyper-literal about it, it comes from the "Journal of the Whills" (even though this description appears only in the ANH Novelisation Star Wars: From the Adventures of Luke Skywalker). These are supposed to be some all-knowing beings who chronicle galactic history, according to Lucas's notes (IIRC).

Either way, the novel and the movie are both G-Level canon. But, is the movie the highest level? Seems to be.

The movies are not told from the point of view of Han Solo or somebody "with no knowledge of the Force." Technically they were created by Lucas and his team (even though the directing in ESB's case was mostly done by Kreshner of course) who invented the Force in the first place, so they'd know. The point of view is limited in that we don't hear character's thoughts, but still. It's not one character's viewpoint.

The video clip above makes it look like Vader didn't "absorb" but rather "dissipated" (into sparks and smoke) the blaster shots. There is still the stray "bolt" (?) that appears to fly from his hand and strike the wall though, which I think people are using as the "he absorbed and redirected it" thing, right?

The novelisation makes it sound like Vader just raised his hand and deflected the bolts (bounced them off) his hand, like another Jedi would have with a lightsaber. If we took the ESB book alone, we might speculate that Vader's suit has a magseal field projector built into it or something. But the movie shows it differently, so there's our debate.


Anyway, if Jedi are able to just grab energy with the Force and redirect it, then that would make for some nifty heat throwing abilities. Just step outside and start shooting UV rays at people. Absorb it for awhile and start shooting flames out of your hands. Cool.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

The video clip above makes it look like Vader didn't "absorb" but rather "dissipated" (into sparks and smoke) the blaster shots. There is still the stray "bolt" (?) that appears to fly from his hand and strike the wall though, which I think people are using as the "he absorbed and redirected it" thing, right?

If such an interpretation was deduced by the name of the skill, then I apologise for such error.

The phrase "Absorb/Dissipate Energy" refers to the skill being used for either/or. Vader used the Force power to deflect the bolts away from himself and into the wall.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Attention: the sky is blue, and Kurgan is still a bitchy purist who likes to warp or ignore the canon policy.

What isn't there in the higher canon never contradicts what is there in the lower canon. That would be an appeal to ignorance.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

An unknowledgable purist to be exact.

And ramble on for several paragraphs without actually saying anything remotely resembling a position or conclusion.

[Connor MacLeod]

<snip meaningless, ignorant, whiny fanwhore bullshit>

Okay listen very closely ou fucking imbecile, I'm going to explain this yet again even though the odds of actual logic penetrating that dense skull of yours is about as likely as having a neutrino stopped by kleenex...

1.) You have deliberately employed a false cause fallacy in order to bolster your argument (You assume that because the novel refers to a "gauntlet-protected hand", it must have been his gauntlet that protected him from the bolts, but without any sort of evidence to link the two together (other than your interpretation of the wording, which is mere semantics whoring.) Yet not only do you use a fallacious claim, but you also fail to provide a mechanism by which a leather gauntlet could possibly absorb and/or redirect the sorts of energies known to be associated with a blaster bolt. You do realize that we've NEVER seen any sort of soft, flexible material like that gauntlet that displays blaster-resistant properties that you insist, don't you? (Particularily since we have canon proof for the power of blaster weapons.) Therefore you still fail by Occam's Razor since your theory requires the assumption of an unknown and nonexistent mechanism that the "Force deflection" does not.

And there is STILL the second bolt "redirection" - which is *demonstrably* inconsistent with other examples of bolt absorption and/or redirection we have (IE there isn't a noticable delay like there is here and the bolt doesn't disappear without any side effects.) (And this is still granting you the existence of your "magical blaster-resisting leather gauntlet" assumption. You might as well say Space Angels deflected the bolts for all the logic you're employing.)

By contrast, the "absorbed by the Force" IS a known canon and official mechanism (meaning no assumptions are required.)

And on top of this, you STILL haven't addressed the points anyone else has brought up very well (such as Mad). Yet more strikes against your "It was the Gauntlet" theory.

2.) The scene in question is quite distinctly inconsistent with what one would expect from simple absorption or redirection. Aside from the obvious fact that the bolt "disappears" for at least one frame before effects show up (what was it during for that fraction of a second pray tell? Its fucking LEATHER!, Which brings up another good point - how can you explains sparks flying from leather?) Moreover,. you cannot and do not explain just where the hell the energy goes, since it cannot just disappear into thin air (typical of your simpleminded logic.)

3.) And if that is quite simply not enough, you yet AGAIN fail to account for the fact that in ROTJ, Vader gets cremated IN HIS FUCKING SUIT! Not only do we see the "hard" pieces of the suit burning and emitting smoke, but if the armor were as durable as you claim, then why the fuck did Luke leave him in there? The intensity (energy over a given surface area, ie square centimeters) is not even going to be close to what a blaster bolt would generate (in effect, the suit would protect his corpse from being cremated.. making the fire fucking pointless.)

Based on any ONE of those points alone, your theory completely, and utterly, ,falls apart.

In other words, cretin...

CONCESSION FUCKING ACCEPTED YOU STUPID PRICK

[Meest]

if you watch closely, as I said above, the blaster goes THROUGH his gauntlet. therefore, it cannot be the gauntlet doing this.

Screenshots are too tall so I think thumbnails not generating but the links should work.

Not sure where you see it go through, but here's 3 frames in order of the missing frame shot.


In this one you can see a glowing line following above his thumb, the thing is the shot and cloud of smoke hit alot lower down, and he has moved his hand up from the original area.


I think he either puts enough force out to remove any danger to himself while be lazy or just sadistic enough to let some burn in or at least drops the force shield fast enough that the residue heat absorbs abit. There's no appreciable recoil or anything, and those sparks can't be burning that much material off his gloves, there's barely a mark on them. He has to assist the blockage in some way, or if he was blaster immune or durable why not let them bounce off his chest? That would be a bigger show.

EDIT, looks like I pasted the wrong links.

[Cal Wright]

Dumb shit that ain't worth reading

I skimmed your stupid shit, and found it fucking backwards and boring. Let's try this one more time. I'll speak slowly, and make this as plain as possible.

My argument is that Vader's glove absorbed and/or directed the bolts fired from Solo's blaster. Everyone else's argument is he used the Force.

The Evidence.

ESB film footage.
Shots are fired, Vader raises hands, shots are blocked/deflected, and there are explosions at his hand. No spoken explanation.

ESB novelisation.
First paragraph describes him as raising a gauntlet PROTECTED hand. Notice, that it SAYS that the hand is PROTECTED. That's a key word.

Next paragraph describes Vader as using the Force to pull the gun from Solo's hand to his.

Let's see. My argument is supported by on screen and written facts. I say his glove blocked and/or deflected the shots. We see this happening in the film, no spoken dialog to support. Next step, we take the novelisation. Novelisation states he raised a GAUNTLET PROTECTED hand.

Why do I not think the Force was used. Because there is no mention of the Force being used in the paragraph describing the bolts being blocked, however in the NEXT paragraph it describes him using the Force to pull the gun out of his hand. If he was using the Force all along, why didn't it go like this:

"Solo may have been the quickest draw in the galaxy, but he was not fast enough to take Vader. The Sith Lord raised his hand, using the Force he deflected the shots and pulled the gun to him."

That would be a simple Force use right there. However, this is not how the passage occured. The passage states he raised GAUNTLET-PROTECTED hand to deflect the shots. Then in the next paragraph, not the same one mind you, it describes him using the Force to pull the gun to him.

So, if you guys want to continue in speculation, go right ahead. Unless you have solid canon evidence that this was not the case, then it's a concession accepted.

[Ghost Rider]

Cal...so what proof do you have other then your assertion of Protected.

By what...cloth?

Do you even begin to see that you are refuted by literally moutains of information that does not once contradict the novel or movie, but contradict the thought it was the cloth alone.

For fuck's sake...The shots show he redirected the energy...but where you evidence CLOTH does this...ever?!

That is what they are asking you and you've not shown once. You've constantly pounding in this assertion that protected must mean the cloth, when that is bullshit nitpickery at it's fucking highest. You have one piece of subjective evidence that you presumed and unless you can show cloth ever doing this again, you are just being a fucking idiot.

[Steven Snyder]

Except that at least a portion of that is overridden by the events of the film, in which such an aspect of Leia and Vader's exchange didn't occur.

Not saying that you're entirely wrong though.

As I understand the various levels of Canon, just because Leia didn't spit on Vader in the movie it does not mean that it didn't happen.

Further I can find nothing in this debate that contradicts the ANH novelization that states that Vader's armor is resistant to blaster fire. If Vader's armor is resistant to blaster fire, then why would he bother to use the force?

[Spice Runner]

The point that Connor MacLeod brought up that in ROTJ we see Luke cremating Vader with the suit on, really struck me as strong argument against the suit having any blaster blocking properties.

If it is correct that the films overrides the novelizations.

However if it was true that Vader had bionic arms. Do all you people arguing that Vader used Force to absorb/redirect the blaster bolt also arguing that he used his bionic arms to absorb/redirect said bolt?

Or is the force property such that it can be used deflect energy within a certain area surronunding the force user.

[Lord Revan]

While there is armor that look and behaves like cloth (or is cloth) for example Dookus cloak/cape, Jedi "uniforms" and Naboo security force combat armor, all these examples belong to the (Ultra) Light Armor category (meaning they can take glancing hit and perhaps a direct hit from a low power blaster, but that pretty much it (but not several direct hits from heavy blaster)) and they absorb not deflect the energy. Any armor that can a DL-44 has solid plates, is Force enhanced or both.

so it was the Force not the glove that deflected the shots.

[The Original Nex]

It's fucking easy to see the blast is absorbed by Vader, it DISAPPEARS, then REAPPEARS across the room (as a non-blaster bolt-looking, ball of energy) and strikes the wall next to Han & Co.

[Steven Snyder]

The point that Connor MacLeod brought up that in ROTJ we see Luke cremating Vader with the suit on, really struck me as strong argument against the suit having any blaster blocking properties.

If it is correct that the films overrides the novelizations.

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see the armor melting away during the fire. The wood burned, the flesh burned, but I didn't see the armor melt.

[Ghost Rider]

The point that Connor MacLeod brought up that in ROTJ we see Luke cremating Vader with the suit on, really struck me as strong argument against the suit having any blaster blocking properties.

If it is correct that the films overrides the novelizations.

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see the armor melting away during the fire. The wood burned, the flesh burned, but I didn't see the armor melt.

Didn't need to melt but having the fact the shoulders and the helmet were being burned and smoking shows that is nowhere near the energy of the blaster.

Also if his cloth had that level of power, he would be boiling, not cremating.

[Steven Snyder]

Didn't need to melt but having the fact the shoulders and the helmet were being burned and smoking shows that is nowhere near the energy of the blaster.

Could the smoke be explained by something else, perhaps something nearby or perhaps the paint on the armor was flammable?

[Civil War Man]

Didn't need to melt but having the fact the shoulders and the helmet were being burned and smoking shows that is nowhere near the energy of the blaster.

Could the smoke be explained by something else, perhaps something nearby or perhaps the paint on the armor was flammable?

Ghost Rider's point is that if the armor is capable of blocking the energy output of a DL-44 blaster on its own, then trying to cremate Vader in his armor is completely pointless. Only reasons the armor would be left on would be either a) the armor isn't that resistant to energy, or b) with all the mechanical parts and life support systems, it's impossible to take most of the armor off.

The answer is that if it was option a, then Vader used the Force to block the bolts. If it was option b, and the armor is capable of blocking blasters, it still doesn't explain why he was cremated since it would be an exercise in futility. Might as well have buried the corpse in that case.

[Spice Runner]

Regardless of option A or B, the fact that Vader was cremated in his suit in ROTJ is proof that his suit cannot even resist fire and therefore obviously cannot block blaster bolts. Luke was not stupid, if Vader's suit could not be taken off and it was blaster/fire proof he would have thrown him into a star or something.

[Cal Wright]

Cal...so what proof do you have other then your assertion of Protected.

By what...cloth?

Do you even begin to see that you are refuted by literally moutains of information that does not once contradict the novel or movie, but contradict the thought it was the cloth alone.

For fuck's sake...The shots show he redirected the energy...but where you evidence CLOTH does this...ever?!

That is what they are asking you and you've not shown once. You've constantly pounding in this assertion that protected must mean the cloth, when that is bullshit nitpickery at it's fucking highest. You have one piece of subjective evidence that you presumed and unless you can show cloth ever doing this again, you are just being a fucking idiot.

Show me your evidence it was 'cloth'

[Cal Wright]

The point that Connor MacLeod brought up that in ROTJ we see Luke cremating Vader with the suit on, really struck me as strong argument against the suit having any blaster blocking properties.

If it is correct that the films overrides the novelizations.

However if it was true that Vader had bionic arms. Do all you people arguing that Vader used Force to absorb/redirect the blaster bolt also arguing that he used his bionic arms to absorb/redirect said bolt?

Or is the force property such that it can be used deflect energy within a certain area surronunding the force user.

In regards to your pyre statment, don't forget that if the entire suit was completely burned, then that means that a lightsabre isn't as effective as fire since the shoulder pads helped deflect Luke's hit.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Show me your evidence it was 'cloth'

Show that it wasn't, but this time without using that novelisation quote.

[Steven Snyder]

Show me your evidence it was 'cloth'

Show that it wasn't, but this time without using that novelisation quote.

You can't prove a negative. All you can do is prove what it is.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Well at least you've gotten out of devil's advocate mode.