StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I was reading the Stele Chronicles novella that came with STAR WARS: TIE Fighter when I came across this quote:

Long ago, when the Clone Wars ended, the galaxy was divided up by a group of beings who called themselves senators. These senators formed a government designed to make them more powerful and rich. They were the elite, and all other beings were their unwitting accomplices in the systematic pillage of a thousand thousand worlds.

Hardly something that needs confirmation, but eh.

It's already in the ANH novelization. I wish I still had my copy of the Stele Chronicles, though. I had a copy of it once but I lost it.

So the Clone Wars pre-date the Senate?

It is sufficiently vague that technically, you could take it to be speaking of the formation of the Empire.

Darth Wong wrote:It's already in the ANH novelization. I wish I still had my copy of the Stele Chronicles, though. I had a copy of it once but I lost it.

Fortunately, it is a video game manual. Since the game is the primary product and not the manual, most companies do not view getting a copy of it as pirating, but instead allow free reproduction of them. Including LFL. So it is up on replacement docs.

Galvatron wrote:So the Clone Wars pre-date the Senate?

This was published in 1994, when the Clone Wars were still just a vague conflict from a long time ago. And the person speaking is quoting Imperial propaganda. Still, if you need to rationalize it, you could call it an argument for Palpatine's dissolution of the Imperial Senate in ANH.

Ender wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:It's already in the ANH novelization. I wish I still had my copy of the Stele Chronicles, though. I had a copy of it once but I lost it.

Fortunately, it is a video game manual. Since the game is the primary product and not the manual, most companies do not view getting a copy of it as pirating, but instead allow free reproduction of them. Including LFL. So it is up on replacement docs.

What a manual. It reminds me of the days when they would put more into the manual than the lazy up means up, down means down bs

Ender wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:It's already in the ANH novelization. I wish I still had my copy of the Stele Chronicles, though. I had a copy of it once but I lost it.

Fortunately, it is a video game manual. Since the game is the primary product and not the manual, most companies do not view getting a copy of it as pirating, but instead allow free reproduction of them. Including LFL. So it is up on replacement docs.

Awesome, thanks for the link, I've been lookin' for this one for a while.

Heh, I rather like this quote:

A blistering beam of energy hit the outside door just as Maarek followed his mother into the room to investigate. The door glowed for a second, the metal core began to melt, then the whole thing vaporized. Behind it, partially obscured among the fumes and smoke, was a man dressed all in black. In his hand, the heavy blaster glowed.

Given the room they were living in (airtight, rather secure, windows covered) and the security arrangements/necessities they evidently need, I'm guessing it was a shielded door/blast door of some kind (which means its designed to try to absorb/dissipate the energy of the blaster bolt. We know from the ICSes and other sources that SW armor trries to absorb and disperse/reradiate armor away over a larger surface area, and thats what we see here.)

Melting or vaporizing even a part of that door would require multi-MJ outputs (for a heavy blaster, not even the "most powerful they could have.). Higher outputs might be double/triple digit MJ depending on how one defines the door's durability - a heavy blaster probably on the maximum setting.

Feil wrote:
This was published in 1994, when the Clone Wars were still just a vague conflict from a long time ago. And the person speaking is quoting Imperial propaganda. Still, if you need to rationalize it, you could call it an argument for Palpatine's dissolution of the Imperial Senate in ANH.

that wasn't why palpatine dissolved it though, he claimed the rebellion was a sufficient threat for the people to accept it. Also IIRC the novelization states it's temperoary, and doesn't Marvel Star Wars say the Senate was called back in session?

that stuff is probably mostly irrelvant anyhow. Some of what we're told in the STele Chornicles can arguably be taken with a grain of salt given the rather heavy "Imperial" bias to it (Hey, we can excuse things with a Rebel bias legitimately, why not an Imperial one too?)

I did find it interesting they implied TIE Fighters shoot out the ion exhaust at near-c velocities and that they evidently rely on some rather efficient "matter ot energy conversion" (and use a "solar ionization reactor" at that, so apaprently solar ionization reactors never were fusion reactors.)

Feil wrote:

Galvatron wrote:So the Clone Wars pre-date the Senate?

This was published in 1994, when the Clone Wars were still just a vague conflict from a long time ago. And the person speaking is quoting Imperial propaganda. Still, if you need to rationalize it, you could call it an argument for Palpatine's dissolution of the Imperial Senate in ANH.

Actually, it is best rationalized by simply saying that the officer misspoke. I don't know why people are so loathe to use that explanation when they read literature; people have verbal fuckups in real-life all the time, even intelligent people. Obama once said that "Israel is a great friend of Israel"; if the typical sci-fi fan "analyzed" that statement, he would come to the idiotic conclusion that there must be two separate nations, both called "Israel". What the fuck is wrong with simply saying "He misspoke?"

The fact is that even in 1977, this statement would have obviously been wrong. The introduction to the ANH novelization says that the Republic is unfathomably ancient, and later in ANH we learn that Obi-Wan personally fought in the Clone Wars. Obviously, the Republic predates the Clone Wars by a long, long time. And this is all from the original movie, thus predating and overruling any and all EU literature. The officer simply misspoke.

I think its rather deliberate historical revisionism - the entire spiel that Stele and th eothers are given sounds almost entirely like propoganda. I'm not saying all of what is said is wrong neccearily, but its clearly designed to spin the Empire (and Palpatine) into the best light possible, so the things that clash with what we know could probably be taken as hyperbole or outright fabrications.

Connor MacLeod wrote:I think its rather deliberate historical revisionism - the entire spiel that Stele and th eothers are given sounds almost entirely like propoganda. I'm not saying all of what is said is wrong neccearily, but its clearly designed to spin the Empire (and Palpatine) into the best light possible, so the things that clash with what we know could probably be taken as hyperbole or outright fabrications.

No way. It would be virtually impossible to convince people that a war which occurred within living memory actually happened thousands of years ago, or alternatively, that the Republic didn't begin until 20 years ago.

Connor Macleod wrote:hat stuff is probably mostly irrelvant anyhow. Some of what we're told in the STele Chornicles can arguably be taken with a grain of salt given the rather heavy "Imperial" bias to it (Hey, we can excuse things with a Rebel bias legitimately, why not an Imperial one too?)

oh, k.

Darth Wong wrote:No way. It would be virtually impossible to convince people that a war which occurred within living memory actually happened thousands of years ago, or alternatively, that the Republic didn't begin until 20 years ago.

not attempting a challenge or anything, but weren't the imperials able to convince the majority of the galaxy that the jedi that they all witnessed fighting in the Clone Wars, and even those who fought alongside themwere the bad guys? I'm just wondering.

Saxtonite wrote:not attempting a challenge or anything, but weren't the imperials able to convince the majority of the galaxy that the jedi that they all witnessed fighting in the Clone Wars, and even those who fought alongside themwere the bad guys? I'm just wondering.

So? How the hell is that even remotely comparable?

Darth Wong wrote:

Connor MacLeod wrote:I think its rather deliberate historical revisionism - the entire spiel that Stele and th eothers are given sounds almost entirely like propoganda. I'm not saying all of what is said is wrong neccearily, but its clearly designed to spin the Empire (and Palpatine) into the best light possible, so the things that clash with what we know could probably be taken as hyperbole or outright fabrications.

No way. It would be virtually impossible to convince people that a war which occurred within living memory actually happened thousands of years ago, or alternatively, that the Republic didn't begin until 20 years ago.

Wait a second, where did we get onto "thoudsands of years ago" or that "the republic began twenty years ago?" Nothing in the Stele Chronicles even remotely says that.

Connor MacLeod wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:

Connor MacLeod wrote:I think its rather deliberate historical revisionism - the entire spiel that Stele and th eothers are given sounds almost entirely like propoganda. I'm not saying all of what is said is wrong neccearily, but its clearly designed to spin the Empire (and Palpatine) into the best light possible, so the things that clash with what we know could probably be taken as hyperbole or outright fabrications.

No way. It would be virtually impossible to convince people that a war which occurred within living memory actually happened thousands of years ago, or alternatively, that the Republic didn't begin until 20 years ago.

Wait a second, where did we get onto "thoudsands of years ago" or that "the republic began twenty years ago?" Nothing in the Stele Chronicles even remotely says that.

In the Stele Chronicles, it says that the Senate (and the entire Republic system of government) was formed after the Clone Wars ended. Or to be more specific, Admiral Mordon says that.

Saxtonite wrote:not attempting a challenge or anything, but weren't the imperials able to convince the majority of the galaxy that the jedi that they all witnessed fighting in the Clone Wars, and even those who fought alongside themwere the bad guys? I'm just wondering.

Did you watch Ep. III?

Darth Wong wrote:In the Stele Chronicles, it says that the Senate (and the entire Republic system of government) was formed after the Clone Wars ended. Or to be more specific, Admiral Mordon says that.

That? I read that as the formation of a new administration, not an entirely new government. As I recall, not everyone in the world tends to think of "Government" in the same way we Americans do

Connor MacLeod wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:In the Stele Chronicles, it says that the Senate (and the entire Republic system of government) was formed after the Clone Wars ended. Or to be more specific, Admiral Mordon says that.

That? I read that as the formation of a new administration, not an entirely new government. As I recall, not everyone in the world tends to think of "Government" in the same way we Americans do

The statement clearly referred to the formation of the entire system of government in the Republic.

Darth Wong wrote:

That? I read that as the formation of a new administration, not an entirely new government. As I recall, not everyone in the world tends to think of "Government" in the same way we Americans do

The statement clearly referred to the formation of the entire system of government in the Republic.

I'm not sure I agree with that interpretation, especially considering he says "yearS" just before he gives that little spiel above, ,but I dont see how to resolve this short of getting into an argument about semantics. So, rather than argue, I'll just concede the issue.

Edit: Besides which, I suppose you can make an argument that the ambiguity of the statements the Admiral can fall under the "he misspoke" argument - he didn't phrase himself adequately or clearly enough (Ie imprecise language.) I just don't see the guy actually meaning thousands of years when you (correctly) point out that noone would buy it (the same logic would apply to himself, wouldn't it?)

Connor MacLeod wrote:Edit: Besides which, I suppose you can make an argument that the ambiguity of the statements the Admiral can fall under the "he misspoke" argument - he didn't phrase himself adequately or clearly enough (Ie imprecise language.) I just don't see the guy actually meaning thousands of years when you (correctly) point out that noone would buy it (the same logic would apply to himself, wouldn't it?)

That's the nice thing about a misstatement: there is no limit on how wrong it can be.