StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Okay, somebody is probably going to jump down my throat because I didn't read X resource that explains all this in painstaking detail, blah blah blah, but bear with me just the same...

The Visual Dictionaries (which I had to return to the library awhile back so I may have misquoted this) talks about blade length adjust knobs on all the (at least prequel era) sabers. We never see them actually used onscreen (we assume to make the blade shorter than normal). I kind of remember Bob Brown's old site talking about a "slide lever" that was supposed to be the blade adjust and explained why sometimes a blade was ignited quickly on screen and other times it came up more slowly.

One wonders why this was necessary at all (why not an instant activation button?) but oh well. Maybe the Jedi use their sabers for surgical procedures sometimes (though those utility belts seem to have as many tools as Batman, so it probably would only be makeshift for emergenices anyway).

Then there's the question of the so-called "Youngling weak sabers."

For awhile I sort of guessed that "Youngling" was actually a rank in the Jedi ranks, but then after rewatching AOTC again recently I realize that Yoda calls a Youngling a "Padawan." In the same movie we learn that a Padawan is "not a Jedi yet." So we have Padawans and Jedi Knights (and apparently Masters too, from the ROTS trailer). So perhaps like the term "master" being an honorific more than an actual rank, the term "Youngling" may just be a cute name for early trainees under Yoda.

Anyway... the Younglings (not mentioned in the movie of coures) are supposed to have weak sabers that only "burn" or hurt when you swing, not cut through bone and metal like a hot knife through butter.

So this begs the question, could sabers be set to "stun" so to speak? And if so, why don't the Jedi, who supposedly use violence as a last resort.. well, maybe they don't, but at least that's Yoda's philosophy spouted to him a half century after the Clone War(s)... set their sabers to "stun" when needed instead of hacking off limbs or outright killing?

Or are the "weak sabers" just a badly concocted EU explanation for why the Jedi would so recklessly let little kids use something as dangerous as a lightsaber (in close proximety to other kids too!). You talk about running with scissors... well, a lightsaber can do a heck of a lot more damage than a pair of scissors in the hands of a kid!

The "weak sabers" (variable damage settings for the blade) might be a funny way to explain how in the video games they don't always kill in one shot though.

The Visual Dictionaries (which I had to return to the library awhile back so I may have misquoted this) talks about blade length adjust knobs on all the (at least prequel era) sabers. We never see them actually used onscreen (we assume to make the blade shorter than normal).

ILM had to make Anakin's lightsabre longer for the scene where he was protecting Padme from those poisonous worms in AotC. He couldn't get them all in the swipe he did otherwise.

Vympel wrote:

The Visual Dictionaries (which I had to return to the library awhile back so I may have misquoted this) talks about blade length adjust knobs on all the (at least prequel era) sabers. We never see them actually used onscreen (we assume to make the blade shorter than normal).

ILM had to make Anakin's lightsabre longer for the scene where he was protecting Padme from those poisonous worms in AotC. He couldn't get them all in the swipe he did otherwise.

Right, I know that. The VD's couldn't have concocted that to explain a behind-the-scenes SFX fudge though, since the "blade length adjust" existed in the TPM VD long before AOTC.

I wouldn't take the AOTC scene as hard evidence that you can do blade adjusts in isolation, otherwise we could just as easily guess that lightsabers can change color, or that they have metal rods in the center sometimes.

So this thing I'm basing on the issue of the EU saying that you can change the blade length AND damage the blade deals. Do other sources agree? Would this be practical and realistic with what else we've seen in the movies and elsewhere?

I've never heard of a none-training Saber that can be set to "stun." I think perhaps the ideology is that if can Lightsabers become less dangerous, a Jedi may become careless. A well trained knight sould be able to disable or disarm when necissary even with a full power blade. Or perhaps the crystals just cant be modulated like that.

As for the Padawan sabers, I never had a problem with them, although I think just giving them sparing rods would have been better (although those cant acturately simulate a saber, as is sometimes needed IE tournament sequence in Dark Rendevous.)

Sort of like giving sword trainees a blunted blade (or flat out wooden sword) for practice eh?

Learning to be careful is fine, but that's akin to giving live ammunition on the first day of bootcamp... doesn't sound like a good idea.

Most swords do actually have a built-in "stun" setting. It's called the pommel.

I don't see the value really in having a lightsaber whose power level can be adjusted so that instead of slicing through solid objects, it just burns them a little on contact. As a training implement this doesn't make much sense, as a simple wooden sword or solid plastic sword would be a much more economical way of accomplishing just this.

Of course it is entirely possible that Jedi can spar one another in this manner without risk of actually hurting one another, but that, I find just absurd. For one, you are betting your life on a system that could say...fall out of calibration or fail. I mean, do you point a firearm at somebody and rely solely on the safety or the fact that it "is not loaded." No.

Of course, what's another feature?

Well, a club or a wooden sword still has weight. A saber blade does not. So it's not exactly a perfect training tool, and since Jedi are so elite and few, getting toned-down practice sabers doesn't seem like such a big deal.

Nephtys wrote:Well, a club or a wooden sword still has weight. A saber blade does not. So it's not exactly a perfect training tool, and since Jedi are so elite and few, getting toned-down practice sabers doesn't seem like such a big deal.

Historically, armies have trained with swords that were much heavier than the ones they wielded in combat to develop the upper body strength necessary to land fatal blows even when physically exhausted. This may not be such a big deal anymore with the lightsaber, but there is still the issue of your opponent's strength to contend with, as in a lightsaber battle, and also the fact that cutting through a droid army or some such is still a very physically demanding task. If nothing else, it's great exercise. Force powers and bulging deltoids are but two of many ways to pick up chicks at the beach

Also historically, swords can't cut through armored people like a knife through air. I really don't think teaching students to overextend with such a dangerous weapon as a lightsaber is a good idea, especially with the constant danger of accidental injury.

As for the 'stun' setting, I swear Luke's sabre in RotJ is set to 'baseball bat'. Maybe they're one and the same setting. Normally, it slices things like a red-hot knife through butter. set to 'bat', it's like those neat Futurama lightsabres.

Slicing through people is the last thing that Jedi Knights in the time of the Old Republic did with their lightsabers.

Before wondering about hacking off limbs versus stunning, would a low powered lightsaber be able to cut through blast doors, deflect blaster bolts and intimidate the subjects of aggressive negotiations?