StarDestroyer.Net BBS

One thing I noticed in Star Wars: Rebels is Ezra's Lightsaber and I can't help but think "that's a good idea"...

...First of all it has a guard to it (a basic but useful safety feature) and second it has a built in stun blaster built in which is a good secondary function for a Jedi as it give's him more options to sort out threats and preferably doing so in a non lethal matter.

Zor

I know, right? Seeing as how often Jedi and Sith lock their sabers together at close range so they can talk shit to one another, I can see how this blaster would be especially useful in such a duel.

While it would help against "normal" melee weapons, Lightsabers cut thru pretty much everything but a handful of exotic materials (aka something the Ghost's crew wouldn't have just laying around) with minimal effort so in lightsaber dueling a guard made of physical material wouldn't help much if any.

As for the stun blaster, while no longer canon, the Medstar dualogy explained that Jedi being limited to just their Lightsabers is in fact intentional to limit their options to end a situation violently. Basically since a Jedi is limited to his/her saber and force powers they'll be less likely to just blast everyone and call it a day or at least that's how the Order thinks and yes a stun blaster is a violent option even if it's designed to be a non leathal one (though not harmless).

Lord Revan wrote:As for the stun blaster, while no longer canon,

What? There is still settings in A New Hope.

Zor

He means the medstar duology not the stun blaster.

Also welcome to last year with the virtues of Ezra's lightsaber.

Indeed I mean the books not the stun capability in SW weapons.

Lord Revan wrote:While it would help against "normal" melee weapons, Lightsabers cut thru pretty much everything but a handful of exotic materials (aka something the Ghost's crew wouldn't have just laying around) with minimal effort so in lightsaber dueling a guard made of physical material wouldn't help much if any.

As for the stun blaster, while no longer canon, the Medstar dualogy explained that Jedi being limited to just their Lightsabers is in fact intentional to limit their options to end a situation violently. Basically since a Jedi is limited to his/her saber and force powers they'll be less likely to just blast everyone and call it a day or at least that's how the Order thinks and yes a stun blaster is a violent option even if it's designed to be a non leathal one (though not harmless).

So a blade that cuts through almost anything is somehow not a violent option ?

Exactly. I don't think the Jedi are supposed to be non-violent though. They're simply not supposed to use the Force to directly inflict harm.

bilateralrope wrote:

Lord Revan wrote:While it would help against "normal" melee weapons, Lightsabers cut thru pretty much everything but a handful of exotic materials (aka something the Ghost's crew wouldn't have just laying around) with minimal effort so in lightsaber dueling a guard made of physical material wouldn't help much if any.

As for the stun blaster, while no longer canon, the Medstar dualogy explained that Jedi being limited to just their Lightsabers is in fact intentional to limit their options to end a situation violently. Basically since a Jedi is limited to his/her saber and force powers they'll be less likely to just blast everyone and call it a day or at least that's how the Order thinks and yes a stun blaster is a violent option even if it's designed to be a non leathal one (though not harmless).

So a blade that cuts through almost anything is somehow not a violent option ?

of course it's a violent option but it's also a really limited one.

In the book it was said that since a jedi is limited to his/her saber (with all the range limits that come with it) they would be less likely to try end a situation violently due to how limited their options to do so were, with the underlaying thought being that if a jedi carried a blaster (even just a stun one) they might more likely to "just shoot the guy" and call it solved. While the Jedi Order might not be correct about this it is the reason why classic jedi carry only their sabers and nothing else (and those sabers have little to no built in special features).

Galvatron wrote:Exactly. I don't think the Jedi are supposed to be non-violent though. They're simply not supposed to use the Force to directly inflict harm.

I wouldn't say that... I think it is more about your mental state; If you kill out of anger, fear, or some other "negative" emotion, then it's bad. If you use the force to kill, but are maintaining a calm focus, then it's ok.

Lord Revan wrote:while no longer canon, the Medstar dualogy explained that Jedi being limited to just their Lightsabers is in fact intentional to limit their options to end a situation violently. Basically since a Jedi is limited to his/her saber and force powers they'll be less likely to just blast everyone and call it a day or at least that's how the Order thinks and yes a stun blaster is a violent option even if it's designed to be a non leathal one (though not harmless).

Makes sense to some degree. Think about tasers. Non-lethal? Well, they're not designed to be, but they can kill people.

Getting hit by a stun bolt doesn't mean you'll survive. There could be unexpected interactions with prosthetic devices, or you could just end up taking a lethal injury as a result of the fall.

If you have a weapon you know is lethal or will likely do permanent, serious damage, how likely are you to use it for trivial reasons? You know you'll have a good chance of killing him, so it's better to look for an alternative.

On the other hand, if you have a weapon that is supposed to be safe, how likely are you to use it? "Enh, he'll probably be fine."

Doesn't make it right, of course. The with all their supposed discipline, you'd think that they would know to use restraint even with a "safe" weapon, but also having the option open for cases where a non-violent won't work but a less dangerous one could still potentially resolve the situation . But nobody is arguing that the Jedi Order always makes the best decisions.

Then again, if everyone knew the Jedi preferred to use stun weapons, they might be more likely to interfere, thinking themselves to be safe if things go wrong. Knowing that the Jedi only use lethal weapons would be a deterrent.

It could also be a matter of Ezra's streetwise and less structured approach to things, vs the more rigid and indoctrinated upbringing of someone raised and trained as a Jedi form a very young age...

biostem wrote:

Galvatron wrote:Exactly. I don't think the Jedi are supposed to be non-violent though. They're simply not supposed to use the Force to directly inflict harm.

I wouldn't say that... I think it is more about your mental state; If you kill out of anger, fear, or some other "negative" emotion, then it's bad. If you use the force to kill, but are maintaining a calm focus, then it's ok.

Wow, okay. So if a Jedi happens to be a sociopath and can be calm and peaceful while Force-choking a bitch, that's fine.

I thought Yoda made it clear that Jedi were supposed to limit their use of the Force for knowledge and defense, but whatever.

Galvatron wrote:

biostem wrote:

Galvatron wrote:Exactly. I don't think the Jedi are supposed to be non-violent though. They're simply not supposed to use the Force to directly inflict harm.

I wouldn't say that... I think it is more about your mental state; If you kill out of anger, fear, or some other "negative" emotion, then it's bad. If you use the force to kill, but are maintaining a calm focus, then it's ok.

Wow, okay. So if a Jedi happens to be a sociopath and can be calm and peaceful while Force-choking a bitch, that's fine.

I thought Yoda made it clear that Jedi were supposed to limit their use of the Force for knowledge and defense, but whatever.

He also happily taughts the Clones having pushed on their offensive during the invasion of Geonosis. Obviously, given the role of the Jedi in the Clone Wars, they do NOT strictly use the force for *just* "knowledge and events". It also seems that certain force abilities, namely force choke and lightning, can only come from anger/hatred/etc, since we never witness someone using said abilities otherwise.

He also happily taughts the Clones having pushed on their offensive during the invasion of Geonosis. Obviously, given the role of the Jedi in the Clone Wars, they do NOT strictly use the force for *just* "knowledge and events". It also seems that certain force abilities, namely force choke and lightning, can only come from anger/hatred/etc, since we never witness someone using said abilities otherwise.

It's "knowledge and defense", but it's true: the Jedi never sat in only defense during the Clone Wars, but they were misled into believing their efforts (including offensives) would restore peace to the Republic as quickly as possible.
The Jedi used the Force for knowledge to advantage, but never attacked with the Force, as the Sith did (Force Lightning and Choking). Even in his showdown with Palpatine, Yoda didn't make lightning, he only controlled what had been thrown at him (as Windu had done, with his lightsaber).

Khaat wrote:

He also happily taughts the Clones having pushed on their offensive during the invasion of Geonosis. Obviously, given the role of the Jedi in the Clone Wars, they do NOT strictly use the force for *just* "knowledge and events". It also seems that certain force abilities, namely force choke and lightning, can only come from anger/hatred/etc, since we never witness someone using said abilities otherwise.

It's "knowledge and defense", but it's true: the Jedi never sat in only defense during the Clone Wars, but they were misled into believing their efforts (including offensives) would restore peace to the Republic as quickly as possible.
The Jedi used the Force for knowledge to advantage, but never attacked with the Force, as the Sith did (Force Lightning and Choking). Even in his showdown with Palpatine, Yoda didn't make lightning, he only controlled what had been thrown at him (as Windu had done, with his lightsaber).

Yoda Force-K.O.'d Palpatine's guards, without warning. What he told Luke was probably condensed, specialized training in preparation for fighting Vader. He may have felt he couldn't risk going into grey areas given the timetable.

Speaking of Luke, didn't he use choke on a couple of Jabba's guards in ROTJ? What would you call that?

Enhanced Persuasion?

Tribble wrote:Speaking of Luke, didn't he use choke on a couple of Jabba's guards in ROTJ? What would you call that?

Well, IIRC, there was a novel that covered his partial fall to the dark side, which is supposed to explain that, and be reflected in him wearing black for much of Jedi.

Whether that's still canon is another story...

Hmmm, well I suppose you could argue that Luke was never really a Jedi, in the sense that he was never indoctrinated by the Jedi Code. It's pretty clear that Yoda never approved of Luke, and would not have trained him at all if Obi-Wan hadn't intervened. Even then Luke at most spent a couple of weeks with Yoda and had just learned the basics before he went off to fight Vader. Also unlike Vader's uses of force choke, Luke's was more pragmatic - the guard wouldn't let him pass, if he tried to the guard would attack and/or summon reinforcements, and getting into a regular fight would have caused too much noise. IMO it would make that Luke would have felt that the use of Force choke was justifiable since the alternatives were likely worse, he's always been a bit of a combat pragmatist. The question is whether or not he actually had to use the Dark Side to do it.

You could probably argue that it wasn't a use of the Dark Side due to intent; he did not use the powers to hurt for the sake of it, but to incapacitate an obstacle in a (presumably) non-lethal way.

This would fit with what one of his later Jedi, Kyle Katarn, says to his students (in Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy) about Force powers not being inherently good or evil, it's how you use them (choke and Force lightning I can understand that POV, but the two other Dark Side powers in that case are harder to justify).

Galvatron wrote:I know, right? Seeing as how often Jedi and Sith lock their sabers together at close range so they can talk shit to one another, I can see how this blaster would be especially useful in such a duel.

I think you have to turn off the blade to use the stun bolt? I'd have to re-watch "A Fire Across the Galaxy" to be sure, though.

If that is the case, though, turning off your blade when you're in that close already seems like a terrible idea.

The guard, as others noted, is questionable because we don't have any reason to believe a blade just won't cut trough it. However consider that it also makes the weapon look like a blaster and not a lightsabre. For Ezra, in a world where advertising you have a lightsabre is a bad idea, that's more important. For a Jedi it might actually be bad for a purely-wielding standpoint as it limits how the weapon can be held.

The stun feature is more interesting. The reason for its existence is that you can't have a 14-year oldish kid obviously killing people on the Disney channel, even when he is (like when he's deflecting blaster bolts back at storm-troopers). The most interesting thing you can do with it, and we have seen them doing it, is switching to it in a duel for an enemy. I don't recall knocking an opponent down with it but it has suppressed them.

We can theorize why the Jedi order never used anything like it. My personal explanation is that of force-powers: most Jedi had much more training in the Force and could have been taught how to non-lethally take down an opponent. Maybe there even was a Force Stun power for this specific purpose. Also consider that you can chop off someone's arm clean off and the wound would be cauterized.

Another element is simply that the Jedi did not want to carry more weapons with them. They had to carry their light-sabres, yes, as that is pretty much a badge of office. The Order may have at large decided that's enough weapons for most Jedi and carrying more, even stun weapons, would have undercut the idea that a Jedi should be a diplomat first.

Additionally, in a world where blasters are easy to access, a lightsabre is, in fact, a very defensive weapon. It's deliberately and intentionally bringing a sword to a gunfight, and only the Force allows Jedi to get away with it. A blaster is only an offensive weapon: you can't parry blaster bolts with it, nor can you easily disable other people's weapons. A blaster is moderately useful as a tool for breaking things, where a lightsabre blade can get you through locked doors. A blaster pretty much always looks like a gun, where a lightsabre might be fairly easily disguised (as, say, an umbrella handle or a wrench, among other things).

Worth noting that as shown on the show so far, the stun blaster on Ezra's weapon is mutually exclusive with the sabre blade. It's a stunner or a sabre, not both at once.