Can Jedi wear armor?

[Batman]

Kurgan, what's with the all-or-nothing approach?
By your reasoning wearing a helmet is pointless because you can still be shot in the torso.
'Some' armor is better than 'no' armor. Will a chest plate stop a head hit? No, but aren't you a tad overconfident assuming people won't ever go for a torso shot?
One might very well asess a situation and come to the conclusion that while full body armor w/eviro protection is unneccessary, the added protection of blast-resistant garments, or light body armor or whatever is nevertheless welcome.
As for the flight suit why would it need a helmet? Unless it's designed for repeated and/or extended forays into vacuum, the magcon shield prevents asphyxiation, so who cares? Why MUST it be a fully functional space suit?

[Kurgan]

Kurgan, what's with the all-or-nothing approach?
By your reasoning wearing a helmet is pointless because you can still be shot in the torso.

I didn't mean to give the impression that it was an "all or nothing approach."

Having a helmet seems like the most basic bit of armor one can carry, based on modern warfare examples from our own world. Sure, the helmet wasn't always a part of warfare (in the napoleonic era and revolutionary war era we don't really see it much), but going back to pre-Roman times, the middle ages and in modern combat, it's essential. If your head gets hit, you're in big trouble.

Now in the Star Wars universe they don't have the excuse that kevlar hasn't been invented yet, or that NCB protection doesn't exist. We KNOW they have full body suites like the Clone Troopers wear. Where is the evidence that this is a brand new invention in AOTC? Jango Fett was using the armor prior to the Clones being launched, perhaps for decades. The Red Guards are already wearing their trademark "helms."

I see the "they just wear clothes that are blaster proof" thing (while not impossible to imagine) as a retconning excuse, when we should be seeing full armor, or at least partial armor (like in the Clone Wars cartoon).

Rushing into battle without body armor, when you're fighting alongside people who do wear it, and you face the same combat they do, just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Besides, we've established that the Jedi have the Force, and superior reflexes, stamina, strength, etc to "mundanes" like the Clones. And if the Clones can fight well in full armor, surely the Jedi can too.

'Some' armor is better than 'no' armor. Will a chest plate stop a head hit? No, but aren't you a tad overconfident assuming people won't ever go for a torso shot?

See my argument about the helmet above. Sure, you can die from shrapnel in the stomach or the spine, etc etc. It's not good to get hit with that stuff anywhere, but a hit to the head is pretty devestating for a human being, so that should be your first concern to protect that area. And this is the most visible part of a suit of armor. A chestplate could be concealed under clothing somewhat, ditto for other parts. But a helmet there's no mistaking it (unless you wore a big hood over it or something). With no helmet, and with deaths apparently from shrapnel, one wonders if the Jedi have any protection at all, other than padded leather.

Again, it reminds me of the so-called "Federation Ground Troops" or Starfleet officers on away missions. If their choice of garmet is labelled "stupidity" why do the Jedi get off the hook? That's all I'm saying.

I can buy that they're arrogant, perhaps even underfunded and not used to all out war, so they come ill-equipped in AOTC. But now they have no excuse, so I hope the Clone Wars example is followed in the new film.

One might very well asess a situation and come to the conclusion that while full body armor w/eviro protection is unneccessary, the added protection of blast-resistant garments, or light body armor or whatever is nevertheless welcome.

Sure. I suppose we could even compare this to the US troops in "Blackhawk Down" who left their protective gear behind, thinking they "wouldn't need it."

Again, I can buy that the Jedi didn't realize the problem in AOTC, but in Episode III, as full soldiers, they should know better, and so I hope we see that.

As for the flight suit why would it need a helmet? Unless it's designed for repeated and/or extended forays into vacuum, the magcon shield prevents asphyxiation, so who cares? Why MUST it be a fully functional space suit?

So why don't TIE fighter pilots have magcon shields instead of space suites? I always read that the TIE fighter was designed with the Empire's desire to save money (I guess all those TIE fighters would cut into the Death Star budget?). No shields, no hyperdrive, no life support system, etc.

I thought the magcon shields were very short lived. This reminds me of the Federation philosophy of protecting vital systems with active systems like force fields, which are subject to power drain, anomalies, system failures, etc. I'd much rather have a suit that at least would protect me until help could arrive, rather than a little force field that is only good for making repairs outside my ship (when R2 can't manage that is).

It doesn't have to be a full space suit, but a full space suit does make a good bit of sense. It just seems like a natural precaution.

[Batman]

Kurgan, what's with the all-or-nothing approach?
By your reasoning wearing a helmet is pointless because you can still be shot in the torso.

I didn't mean to give the impression that it was an "all or nothing approach."
Having a helmet seems like the most basic bit of armor one can carry, based on modern warfare examples from our own world.
but going back to pre-Roman times, the middle ages and in modern combat, it's essential. If your head gets hit, you're in big trouble.

All of which were dedicated soldiers. Jedi AREN't.

Now in the Star Wars universe they don't have the excuse that kevlar hasn't been invented yet, or that NCB protection doesn't exist. We KNOW they have full body suites like the Clone Troopers wear. Where is the evidence that this is a brand new invention in AOTC?

??? Whoever SAID it was?

I see the "they just wear clothes that are blaster proof" thing (while not impossible to imagine) as a retconning excuse, when we should be seeing full armor, or at least partial armor (like in the Clone Wars cartoon).

In an actual combat situation they knew they would end up in beforehand, yes. How does that pertain to diplomatic missions, factfinding ones, you know all the stuff Jedi USUALLY do?

Besides, we've established that the Jedi have the Force, and superior reflexes, stamina, strength, etc to "mundanes" like the Clones. And if the Clones can fight well in full armor, surely the Jedi can too.

Who says they can't? What irked me was that you basically seemed to be claiming they always ought to.

'Some' armor is better than 'no' armor. Will a chest plate stop a head hit? No, but aren't you a tad overconfident assuming people won't ever go for a torso shot?

See my argument about the helmet above. Sure, you can die from shrapnel in the stomach or the spine, etc etc. It's not good to get hit with that stuff anywhere, but a hit to the head is pretty devestating for a human being, so that should be your first concern to protect that area.
And this is the most visible part of a suit of armor.

Which might be the entire problem. Has it ever occured to you that there might be reasons for NOT wearing helmets while still wanting some protection? By your argument everybody who ever wore a bulletproof vest but NO helmet was being utterly stupid...

A chestplate could be concealed under clothing somewhat, ditto for other parts. But a helmet there's no mistaking it (unless you wore a big hood over it or something).

My sentiments exactly. So if you're trying to be inconspicious, a helmet is not exactly a smart thing to wear. This is a point in favor of partial or light armor, you know.

With no helmet, and with deaths apparently from shrapnel, one wonders if the Jedi have any protection at all, other than padded leather.

Sorry. They obviously didn't wear military-style combat armor, but just because you call blaster-resistent fabric and concealed armor 'ret-cons' doesn't mean they don't exist.
And that's ignoring there may be legal considerations. How about there being restrictions on who is allowed to wear mlitary armor?

Again, it reminds me of the so-called "Federation Ground Troops" or Starfleet officers on away missions. If their choice of garmet is labelled "stupidity" why do the Jedi get off the hook? That's all I'm saying.

1. The Starfleet jumpsuits have NO protective features whatsoever (with the possible exception of making your enemy lough so hard his aim goes astray). The Jedi garments could have, wether you like their nature or not.
2. Wars armor is of limited utility against threats other than shrapnel and NBC (more like a modern NBc suit/whole-body helmet than actual armor).
A Jedi may very well prefer the lower encumbrance of even more limited protection and trust in the Force.
3. Even when heading into clear-cut full-scale battles, feds were pajamas. At least General Kenobi at least once wore armor. ALL of them may wear blaster-proof clothing/light armor.

One might very well asess a situation and come to the conclusion that while full body armor w/eviro protection is unneccessary, the added protection of blast-resistant garments, or light body armor or whatever is nevertheless welcome.

Sure. I suppose we could even compare this to the US troops in "Blackhawk Down" who left their protective gear behind, thinking they "wouldn't need it."

Improper anology. The US troops were soldiers, and as such were trained to and could very much expect to end up in a potential combat situation.
A much better example would be an ambassador or a member of a trade delegation electing to wear a bullet-proof vest just in case, or a cop.

As for the flight suit why would it need a helmet? Unless it's designed for repeated and/or extended forays into vacuum, the magcon shield prevents asphyxiation, so who cares? Why MUST it be a fully functional space suit?

So why don't TIE fighter pilots have magcon shields instead of space suites? I always read that the TIE fighter was designed with the Empire's desire to save money (I guess all those TIE fighters would cut into the Death Star budget?). No shields, no hyperdrive, no life support system, etc.

See the bolded. WITHOUT a life support system, the TIE pilot NEEDS a space suit to survive...

I thought the magcon shields were very short lived. This reminds me of the Federation philosophy of protecting vital systems with active systems like force fields, which are subject to power drain, anomalies, system failures, etc.

Fed systems that fail on a semi-regilar basis. There's nothing inherently wrong with a sufficiently reliable active system. The Warsies seem to trust the technology enough to have their hangar bays open to space 24/7...

I'd much rather have a suit that at least would protect me until help could arrive, rather than a little force field that is only good for making repairs outside my ship (when R2 can't manage that is).

Depends on the drawbacks. You already have a 'ship' that will protect you until help can arrive, so why bother with a secondary life-support system?

It doesn't have to be a full space suit, but a full space suit does make a good bit of sense. It just seems like a natural precaution.

Not when 25,000 years of spacefaring history say you won't need it.

[Kurgan]

All of which were dedicated soldiers. Jedi AREN't.

But they are "now." (Geonosis onward)

??? Whoever SAID it was?

I'm just countering the suggestion that they must forego helmets in favor of protective fibers in their robes. Also explaining the difference between the historical instances of armor in warfare vs. the star wars "reality."

In an actual combat situation they knew they would end up in beforehand, yes. How does that pertain to diplomatic missions, factfinding ones, you know all the stuff Jedi USUALLY do?

Yeah. Though the Jedi went to Geonosis completely unprepared, even though they knew they'd be fighting at least a few thousand Geonosian warriors, not to mention leading Clonetroopers into battle against the droid armies of the Seperatists. They had time to mobilize the Clones, but didn't have time to bring in a few extra flak vests and helmets?

This strikes me as stupidity on the part of the Jedi (or Lucas). So hopefully this will be "remedied" in the next movie. That's the whole point of my posting here, I'm expressing my hope that Ep 3 will show the Jedi have learned something.

Who says they can't? What irked me was that you basically seemed to be claiming they always ought to.

They always ought to when entering combat on the scale of Geonosis.

Which might be the entire problem. Has it ever occured to you that there might be reasons for NOT wearing helmets while still wanting some protection? By your argument everybody who ever wore a bulletproof vest but NO helmet was being utterly stupid...

What reasons might those be? Making it harder to see? Nope. Officially Stormtrooper type helmets have HUDs with enhanced visual modes. Plus Jedi have the Force. Luke could "see" the remote even with "the blast shield down" on his helmet (once he started taking Ben's advice anyway).

I'm not saying wearing a bulletproof vest but not a helmet is stupid. But in war, as Mike would say, a soldier without his helmet "is not ready for battle."

Still, the helmets we've seen in Star Wars are far superior in terms of protection and comfort than any earth-based helmet yet in existence.

Think of it this way, if I was sending the LAPD (for some insane reason) to Afgahnistan to engage Al Qaeda in combat, I would issue them military grade gear (including appropriate helmets and body armor). I wouldn't rely on their standard issue police gear to get the job done.

My sentiments exactly. So if you're trying to be inconspicious, a helmet is not exactly a smart thing to wear. This is a point in favor of partial or light armor, you know.

Of course this falls flat in terms of Geonosis, where they were obviously there to fight large scale battles, not sneak through crowds unnoticed (besides, they have the Force for that).

In fact, Jedi stand out just about everywhere except on Tatooine (where every native tends to wear robes or drab earth-tone colors). Plus they carry lightsabers.

Anyway, as the Jedi are charging into battle on the flats of Geonosis, the element of surprise is gone. The droids know you are attacking, and they are going to start shooting. So not wearing armor isn't going to make them stop attacking.

Sorry. They obviously didn't wear military-style combat armor, but just because you call blaster-resistent fabric and concealed armor 'ret-cons' doesn't mean they don't exist.

Sure. But even if we accept it uncritically it just lessens the Jedi's unpreparedness slightly. They still didn't wear armor that was adequate for the battle they were engaged in.

And that's ignoring there may be legal considerations. How about there being restrictions on who is allowed to wear mlitary armor?

Considering the Jedi are part of the military, I would think there would be no legal restrictions to them suiting up in military grade armor. They're commanding troops, leading squads and fighting on the front lines themselves. Even if we ignore the Clone Wars cartoon, this couldn't be more obvious. These aren't civilian desk jockey's sending memos to the Clone commanders about what to do.

1. The Starfleet jumpsuits have NO protective features whatsoever (with the possible exception of making your enemy lough so hard his aim goes astray).

Except for the padded leather vests that were seen on TNG and DS9, which Mike speculated were for helping protect against bladed weapons. Not much help, but against Klingon/Jem Hadar stupidity, it helps a little.

Federation troops sucked, but then so did their enemies. Jedi on the other hand, are awesome, but we saw how many died in AOTC. Perhaps had they been better prepared they would have fared better.

The Jedi garments could have, wether you like their nature or not.
2. Wars armor is of limited utility against threats other than shrapnel and NBC (more like a modern NBc suit/whole-body helmet than actual armor).

Both of which they faced on Geonosis, so it would have been appropriate. It would have been better to go with them than without. If it was good enough for non-Force sensitive Clone troopers, why not Jedi?

A Jedi may very well prefer the lower encumbrance of even more limited protection and trust in the Force.

Like the US soldiers in "Blackhawk Down" who threw away their protective gear before their mission. ; P

3. Even when heading into clear-cut full-scale battles, feds were pajamas. At least General Kenobi at least once wore armor. ALL of them may wear blaster-proof clothing/light armor.

Right, but George chose to show no armor usage by Jedi in the movie (though maybe they all had on blaster proof robes, which still wouldn't stop shrapnel or NCB). Hopefully Lucas will follow the lead of the Clone Wars cartoon. Hopefully...

Speaking of which in the Trek animated series there was an episode where a landing party wore personal force fields. Too bad it's not canon and this idea was never used in any of the shows (by Starfleet).

One might very well asess a situation and come to the conclusion that while full body armor w/eviro protection is unneccessary, the added protection of blast-resistant garments, or light body armor or whatever is nevertheless welcome.

But why do Jedi, who are stronger, faster, smarter, and overall more powerful than Clonetroopers need to shun armor, except out of a foolish sense of pride? It's like Klingon honor (stupidity): drop your guns so you can use your "honorable" blades in combat.

The Jedi had no reason not to adopt armor except some misguided philosophy, arrogance in their own beliefs or sheer stupidity.

Improper anology. The US troops were soldiers, and as such were trained to and could very much expect to end up in a potential combat situation.
A much better example would be an ambassador or a member of a trade delegation electing to wear a bullet-proof vest just in case, or a cop.

Jedi are trained from birth to fight. They have superhuman abilities. They routinely are thrown into situations where combat will occur. They carry lethal weapons with them everywhere. This leaves them no valid excuse as I see it...

See the bolded. WITHOUT a life support system, the TIE pilot NEEDS a space suit to survive...

Right, but just in terms of a solution to a problem, a space suit seems so much simpler, cheaper and easier than having to have a personal force field (subject to all the problems inherent) for the good guys, the ones supposedly the most concerned with keeping their pilots alive, regardless of cost.

Fed systems that fail on a semi-regilar basis. There's nothing inherently wrong with a sufficiently reliable active system.

Right, but aren't the mag shields short lived? Again, why not use a space suit? Is it just that Rebel pilots don't like to wear space suites because they are uncomfortable?

The Warsies seem to trust the technology enough to have their hangar bays open to space 24/7...

But they do have bay doors to close if the system were to fail, right?

If they were really thinking, they'd use the mag shield with a space suit, for double redundancy and safety.

Then again, the Rebels are supposedly strapped for cash, but the Empire has an unlimited budget. Yet the Imps use the cheap but effective solution in this situation, whereas the Rebels use a needlessly extravagent system.

I smell another retcon here... (I'm not blaming you).

Depends on the drawbacks. You already have a 'ship' that will protect you until help can arrive, so why bother with a secondary life-support system?

If you need to eject, from your exploding ship.

Not when 25,000 years of spacefaring history say you won't need it.

So why do the TIE Pilots have space suites then if they are 25,000 years obsolete? There's nothing stopping them from having mag-sealed units either. They could wear them constantly while flying if they are so reliable and good.

'Sides, for all we know mag sealed "eject suites" are a new technology, rather than something they've had perfected for millennia. Though the point isn't dependant on that.

[Patrick Ogaard]

The Jedi force deployed at Geonosis was, as far as I can tell, pretty much any Jedi available that Yoda could draft into action at short notice. Given that, it's hardly surprising that they weren't fully prepared for the situation presented by a full-scale battle.

Wearing armor, especially armor covering the entire body, at all effectively takes practice. Considering that many of the Jedi at Geonosis, possibly the majority, had to be Padawans, the Jedi may not have universally had the necessary training. Remember, even Han Solo ditched his perfectly good stormtrooper armor as soon as he could, and Solo had at least a basic military background that would have made him familiar with the wearing of spacesuits and the armored versions of them.

That, coupled with the fact that the Jedi probably had little more than a scholarly knowledge of the history of warfare, as opposed to first hand experience, obviously led to unfortunate choices that produced more Jedi casualties than necessary at Geonosis. Add to that the fact that many of the Jedi are non-human, or humans/humanoids of slight build, and just borrowing a few hundred suits of clonetrooper armor becomes a non-option for the majority. Given the physical uniformity of the clonetroopers, it's unlikely that their armor allowed for unnecessary size adjustments.

Also, the Jedi did apparently infiltrate the arena crowd. Dozens of civilian-garbed Jedi passing themselves off as gawking Separatists looking to see the local sights before blasting off is remotely plausible if Force techniques are liberally applied. Dozens of Jedi wearing full clonetrooper armor or armored spacesuits, even with robes draped over them, might not pass muster, especially since mind-affecting Force techniques aren't going to work all that well against possible guard droids (and the TradeFed battle droids and other designs were presumably known to be in the area). As for NBC worries, at least the B and C portions are of secondary concern to a Jedi. Nerve gas did not do much to Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan, for instance, and Jedi are apparently capable of dealing with many diseases through the use of Force techniques.

Basically, we've got a horde of Shaolin-style warrior-philosophers whose main activities are conflict arbitration, political hobnobbing, meditating real hard, being humble, and occasionally kicking some butt on a small scale. None of those activities is one that requires environmentally sealed assault armor, and most times that armor would be completely inappropriate, while a fashionable and blaster-resistant cape might go over well. These folks are thrust into a situation vaguely comparable to Operation Overlord, and not everything goes the way it should.

On the other hand, one bloody nose should be enough, and lessons learned should logically -- I hope logic will prevail -- lead to Jedi going into combat wearing at least basic protection in the final movie.

As for the MagCon thing, apparently most Rebel pilots just prefer the less restricting version of the flight suit, and during the Rebellion a Rebel pilot who punched out could only reasonably expect to be 'rescued' by Imperial forces and spend his remaining hours of life having electricity and interrogation drugs run through his body. Better to go out fast than slow. Fighters also tend to go up like Roman candles, giving pilots few opportunities to test the relative merits of MagCon systems and sealed suits.

[Batman]

All of which were dedicated soldiers. Jedi AREN't.

But they are "now." (Geonosis onward)

Which means they should wear armor in Ep 3, which remains to be seen.
That they were stupid there shouldb obvious for a number of reasons, which I don't argue.

In an actual combat situation they knew they would end up in beforehand, yes. How does that pertain to diplomatic missions, factfinding ones, you know all the stuff Jedi USUALLY do?

Yeah. Though the Jedi went to Geonosis completely unprepared, even though they knew they'd be fighting at least a few thousand Geonosian warriors, not to mention leading Clonetroopers into battle against the droid armies of the Seperatists. They had time to mobilize the Clones, but didn't have time to bring in a few extra flak vests and helmets?

Assuming they HAD those (not a given thanks to your own 'underfunded' argument), and what exactly are you going for? I AGREED they should have armoured up given the opportunity. How does that invalidate the other situations I talked about?

Who says they can't? What irked me was that you basically seemed to be claiming they always ought to.

They always ought to when entering combat on the scale of Geonosis.

HOW ABOUT THOSE MISSIONS WHERE THEY DON'T EXPECT TO ENTER FULL-SCALE COMBAT?

Which might be the entire problem. Has it ever occured to you that there might be reasons for NOT wearing helmets while still wanting some protection? By your argument everybody who ever wore a bulletproof vest but NO helmet was being utterly stupid...

What reasons might those be? Making it harder to see? Nope. Officially Stormtrooper type helmets have HUDs with enhanced visual modes. Plus Jedi have the Force. Luke could "see" the remote even with "the blast shield down" on his helmet (once he started taking Ben's advice anyway).
I'm not saying wearing a bulletproof vest but not a helmet is stupid. But in war, as Mike would say, a soldier without his helmet "is not ready for battle."

Assuming Jedi ALWAYS act like soldiers, which is canonically untrue.

Still, the helmets we've seen in Star Wars are far superior in terms of protection and comfort than any earth-based helmet yet in existence.

Which makes them inconspicious how?

Think of it this way, if I was sending the LAPD (for some insane reason) to Afgahnistan to engage Al Qaeda in combat, I would issue them military grade gear (including appropriate helmets and body armor). I wouldn't rely on their standard issue police gear to get the job done.

Because you expect them to wind up in some serious firefights. That's not equivalent to some Jedi sent to talk a local governor out of keeping slaving legal or some such, leave alone a mission where they are to find out wether he does on the first place.

My sentiments exactly. So if you're trying to be inconspicious, a helmet is not exactly a smart thing to wear. This is a point in favor of partial or light armor, you know.

Of course this falls flat in terms of Geonosis, where they were obviously there to fight large scale battles, not sneak through crowds unnoticed (besides, they have the Force for that).

SO FUCKING WHAT? Since Jedi DON'T usually wind up in large-scale battles before that, BUT wind up in numerous situations where a helmet WOULD draw comment, your point is what?

In fact, Jedi stand out just about everywhere except on Tatooine (where every native tends to wear robes or drab earth-tone colors). Plus they carry lightsabers.

People wearing Starfleet jumpsuits stand out in the real world, too. Are you claiming they draw the same kind of attention a guy in full military armor would?

Anyway, as the Jedi are charging into battle on the flats of Geonosis, the element of surprise is gone. The droids know you are attacking, and they are going to start shooting. So not wearing armor isn't going to make them stop attacking.

Sorry. They obviously didn't wear military-style combat armor, but just because you call blaster-resistent fabric and concealed armor 'ret-cons' doesn't mean they don't exist.

Sure. But even if we accept it uncritically it just lessens the Jedi's unpreparedness slightly. They still didn't wear armor that was adequate for the battle they were engaged in.

AT GEONOSIS. Your point being?

And that's ignoring there may be legal considerations. How about there being restrictions on who is allowed to wear mlitary armor?

Considering the Jedi are part of the military,

Proof please. As of AOtC, the're mediators, diplomats, policemanen, amnassadors, and occasionally bodyguards. By all means show me how they were officially part of the Republic Armed Forces...

I would think there would be no legal restrictions to them suiting up in military grade armor. They're commanding troops, leading squads and fighting on the front lines themselves.

From the moment the Clone Army arrives at the scene. Please show that, even assuming their military status was assigned retroactively, they had available equipment that UP TO THAT POINT they weren't legally entitled to use.

1. The Starfleet jumpsuits have NO protective features whatsoever (with the possible exception of making your enemy lough so hard his aim goes astray).

A Jedi may very well prefer the lower encumbrance of even more limited protection and trust in the Force.

Like the US soldiers in "Blackhawk Down" who threw away their protective gear before their mission. ; P

I'm impressed. I was not aware thar american forces could tell the future, move faster than the human eye can see, block heavy calibre rifle fire with a melee weapon...

One might very well asess a situation and come to the conclusion that while full body armor w/eviro protection is unneccessary, the added protection of blast-resistant garments, or light body armor or whatever is nevertheless welcome.

But why do Jedi, who are stronger, faster, smarter, and overall more powerful than Clonetroopers need to shun armor, except out of a foolish sense of pride? It's like Klingon honor (stupidity): drop your guns so you can use your "honorable" blades in combat.

How about it would be conspicious as hell? Unlike YOU, not everybody else is talking about Geonosis all the time...

Improper anology. The US troops were soldiers, and as such were trained to and could very much expect to end up in a potential combat situation.
A much better example would be an ambassador or a member of a trade delegation electing to wear a bullet-proof vest just in case, or a cop.

Jedi are trained from birth to fight. They have superhuman abilities. They routinely are thrown into situations where combat will occur. They carry lethal weapons with them everywhere. This leaves them no valid excuse as I see it...

This makes no sense whatsoever.

See the bolded. WITHOUT a life support system, the TIE pilot NEEDS a space suit to survive...

Right, but just in terms of a solution to a problem, a space suit seems so much simpler, cheaper and easier than having to have a personal force field (subject to all the problems inherent) for the good guys, the ones supposedly the most concerned with keeping their pilots alive

WHICH IS WHY THEY HAVE SHIPBOARD LIFE-SUPPORT SYSTEMS AND SHIELDS!!!

, regardless of cost.

Which is why they have the more expensive system, unlike the Empire which goes with the (presumably cheaper) space suit.

Fed systems that fail on a semi-regilar basis. There's nothing inherently wrong with a sufficiently reliable active system.

Right, but aren't the mag shields short lived?

Assuming they are, so what? In a system expected from experience not to be NEEDED to stand up to vacuum for a long time that is a disadvantage because of?

Again, why not use a space suit? Is it just that Rebel pilots don't like to wear space suites because they are uncomfortable?

Again, WHY a space suit if you don't expect to have to tolerate vacuum for ay length of time?

The Warsies seem to trust the technology enough to have their hangar bays open to space 24/7...

But they do have bay doors to close if the system were to fail, right?

No clue. Do they? And even if they do SO WHAT? The magcon is ALREADY a secondary system. After the cockpit, you know.

If they were really thinking, they'd use the mag shield with a space suit, for double redundancy and safety.

Why? If the systems they have are reliable enough, there's no reason to go for more. Same reasons autoloaders are used even though revolvers are technically more reliable.

Then again, the Rebels are supposedly strapped for cash, but the Empire has an unlimited budget. Yet the Imps use the cheap but effective solution in this situation, whereas the Rebels use a needlessly extravagent system

.
I take it the fact that X-Wings and their ilk supposedly have vastly higher survivability rates than Ties completely escaped you.
How about the Rebel system being the more economic one in the long run?
And that's ignoring the Rebels had to hoard their pilots while the Imps had a basically unlimited manpower base.

Depends on the drawbacks. You already have a 'ship' that will protect you until help can arrive, so why bother with a secondary life-support system?

If you need to eject, from your exploding ship.

If that occurs regularly enough to warrant a space suit on top of the standard onboard life support you don't need a space suit, you need a better ship.

Not when 25,000 years of spacefaring history say you won't need it.

So why do the TIE Pilots have space suites then if they are 25,000 years obsolete? There's nothing stopping them from having mag-sealed units either.

The Alliance would certainly have appreciated it, what with the Imp pilots asphyxiating and all. Where, exactly, was it stated that the Alliance suits provide any oxygen supply worth mentioning?
WITHOUT A COCKPIT LIFE-SUPPORT SYSTEM a pilot WITHOUT a proper spacesuit DIES.
And when, pray tell, have I claimed spacesuits are obsolete? I said that spacesuits are a useless burden in applications where you don't expect the wearer to face vacuum with any serious propability.

[Kurgan]

Full reply later, but tell me why the Jedi aren't part of the military if they are:

1) Leading troops into battle.

2) Commanding troops (the army is under their direct control).

3) They are fighting alongside troops on the frontlines (Ie: doing actual fighting themselves).


Are they like the CIA "advisors" in Vietnam? Or are they generals and soldiers themselves? This isn't like Bill Clinton or George W. Bush as the "commander in chief," because you won't see those guys fighting on the front lines like the Jedi do.

Sure, the Jedi need not wear full body armor to Republic society dinners, but when they are out on patrol? Yes. Since the war they are fighting is galactic in scale, that would seem only prudent.

I would guess with the Military Creation Act (this is a transition to the massive military buildup and budget of the Empire I'm guessing), the Republic has the money to outfit at least a small portion of the 10,000 Jedi with basic body armor. After all, the Clones seem to have had their armor and weapons BEFORE the act was created, so that new money would necessarily have been just to pay for the clones.

The Jedi need not always act like soldiers, but then even real soldiers don't "always" act like soldiers. When they are at home on leave, maybe they'll wear civilian clothes and go bowling with their family. Maybe they won't carry their M-16 while they are at the swimming pool with their little cousin. But you know what I mean. When we see the Jedi in battle, they ought to be dressed as soldiers, not as diplomats attending the latest society function.

I can only guess what Lucas will decide to do. I'm just saying what I think would be logical to do and what I hope he does. But it's really out of my hands, obviously. ; )

The argument about the pilots is that if the mag-con shield is so great, why don't the TIE Pilots use those instead of space suits, since there's nothing stopping them from using them (not a "good guy only" toy, right?).

[Slartibartfast]

Why exactly should they not be able to wear armor?

In KOTOR some Force powere impossible to use with armor (apart of Jedi Robes)

A-ha!! You violated your own original-post restriction!

[Slartibartfast]

Anyway, here's my opinion on why don't Jedi wear armor:

This isn't Dungeons & Dragons. Real people only wear armor when they go to war or when they're on guard duty (in fact, in modern Earth, real people don't wear full-body armor, unless they're the bomb squad).

Han Solo didn't wear armor either (unless he was undercover in a place full of armored guys). Neither did Leia, Chewie, or Lando. Heck, a crapload of rebels didn't wear armor either (only funny helmets).

In the movies, the only people that wore armor were those whose only purpose for the rest of their lives was to get shot, like cloned troopers (and a certain bounty hunter who just loved to get shot at).

[Stravo]

About Vader and his armor, I always suspected that the reason we never see Vader use Force lightning is because of the armor and his cybernetic implants. We saw how deavastting the lightinng was against Vader in ROTJ and what it did to his life support system, perhaps he could not use lightining for fear of it shorting out his own systems. It would help explain why we never see him use it and could explain another drawback to his armor.

[Lord Revan]

Why exactly should they not be able to wear armor?

In KOTOR some Force powere impossible to use with armor (apart of Jedi Robes)

A-ha!! You violated your own original-post restriction!

I did not because that no argument but the for the thread in first place.

[Batman]

Full reply later, but tell me why the Jedi aren't part of the military if they are:
1) Leading troops into battle.
2) Commanding troops (the army is under their direct control).
3) They are fighting alongside troops on the frontlines (Ie: doing actual fighting themselves).

Which makes them a part of the military, de facto if not on paper, during the Clone Wars. Not before.

Sure, the Jedi need not wear full body armor to Republic society dinners, but when they are out on patrol? Yes. Since the war they are fighting is galactic in scale, that would seem only prudent.

There was no war until AFTER the events in AotC. Until then, 'society dinners' is a lot closer to actual Jedi duties than all-out battles.

The Jedi need not always act like soldiers, but then even real soldiers don't "always" act like soldiers.

When on duty yes they do. At least that is the idea.

When we see the Jedi in battle, they ought to be dressed as soldiers, not as diplomats attending the latest society function.

Ignoring that we see Jedi in battle exactly ONCE, namely the Geonosis arena fiasco, which offers a plethora of possibilities for them NOT being armored, how does that affect Jedi 'attending the latest society function'?

The argument about the pilots is that if the mag-con shield is so great, why don't the TIE Pilots use those instead of space suits, since there's nothing stopping them from using them (not a "good guy only" toy, right?).

The fact that TIEs, at least according to you, have no life support systems except for the suit?
And that's assuming that the ability to survive in a vacuum for a limited time as opposed to a severly limited time is worth the effort in the first place...
Or how about the Empire, what with operating TIEs by the gazillions, is simply more concerned with their pilots surviving maintenance failures?

[YT300000]

Heck, a crapload of rebels didn't wear armor either (only funny helmets).

Actually, the Rebel guards were wearing armour. They had a few hard pieces (knee pads and the like) but they also had soft flak jackets, which protected somewhat against blaster bolts, but were designed to stop shrapnel. Basically light gear, like you'd expect to find on Secret Service agents- it's not much, but since they have to be ready all the time they wear it all the time.

[Slartibartfast]

Heck, a crapload of rebels didn't wear armor either (only funny helmets).

Actually, the Rebel guards were wearing armour. They had a few hard pieces (knee pads and the like) but they also had soft flak jackets, which protected somewhat against blaster bolts, but were designed to stop shrapnel. Basically light gear, like you'd expect to find on Secret Service agents- it's not much, but since they have to be ready all the time they wear it all the time.

I said "a crapload didn't wear armor either" not "no rebels ever wore armor".

[YT300000]

Heck, a crapload of rebels didn't wear armor either (only funny helmets).

Actually, the Rebel guards were wearing armour. They had a few hard pieces (knee pads and the like) but they also had soft flak jackets, which protected somewhat against blaster bolts, but were designed to stop shrapnel. Basically light gear, like you'd expect to find on Secret Service agents- it's not much, but since they have to be ready all the time they wear it all the time.

I said "a crapload didn't wear armor either" not "no rebels ever wore armor".

I know. Weren't you referring to the troopers on the Tantive IV?

[Slartibartfast]

I said "a crapload didn't wear armor either" not "no rebels ever wore armor".

I know. Weren't you referring to the troopers on the Tantive IV?[/quote]

I was talking about the Rebels in Endor's Moon, but now that I think about it I think it applies to those in Hoth too.

Even with the Tantive ones aren't wearing full body armour, which I thought was what this thread was about. In any case it would be trivial for Jedi to hide such small pieces of armour under robes anyway.

[YT300000]

I was talking about the Rebels in Endor's Moon, but now that I think about it I think it applies to those in Hoth too.

Ah. Well, the Hoth troopers might have been wearing some armour under the thick thermal stuff. The commandos on Endor didn't have any for mobility purposes.

In any case it would be trivial for Jedi to hide such small pieces of armour under robes anyway.

True. But for non-Jedi, a single small piece of armour over the heart and under their shirt might be a good idea.