Was Leia hit in the arm?

[Srelex]

]I'm not sure I follow. The only evidence for this I can think of off the top of my head is "well, they weren't using a very high power setting," which would make this argument a circle...

Note that immediately afterwards the stormtroopers approach them and tell them to raise their hands and give in. If they didn't want to capture the two, they would have just shot them on sight.

[Simon_Jester]

...Questionable. It depends heavily on the stormtroopers' rules of engagement.

If their orders were "kill any enemy who approaches the bunker and leave no survivors," then yes, they'd shoot Leia and Han out of hand.

But imagine a similar situation in real life: soldiers defending an important installation. There's a distraction, the soldiers are drawn away, they come back to find a small group of commandos trying to sneak into the building.

It would be quite reasonable for this to go down as follows:
-Soldiers shoot at commandos with real bullets, fully intending to kill their targets.
-One commando is wounded.
-Other commandos stop shooting and rush to see to their wounded man.
-Soldiers approach commandos and demand their surrender.

The fact that the stormtroopers took Han and Leia prisoner does not prove that they were not trying to kill them earlier. The fact that they fired lethal blaster shots at all, rather than setting their weapons to stun, indicates that they were willing to kill their targets. That the goal was to neutralize Han and Leia, and that taking them prisoner was a secondary objective, as it usually is in real life warfare.

It's easy to imagine the stormies' orders being "Kill or capture any enemy who approaches the bunker," and them taking the opportunity to "capture" once the enemy stops shooting back.
__________

Note that a "stun" setting is sort of a precedent for the idea of variable power settings, but could also easily be a secondary weapon attached to a single-setting primary, sort of like a grenade launcher attached to a rifle.

[Ghost Rider]

Except we have orders from Vader indicating he wanted capture of Luke's friends. The Emperor makes only a note that a legion and they are walking into a trap. Neither makes any note of killing any or all of the Rebels and have made a direct note of capture of specific notables.

[Simon_Jester]

Except we have orders from Vader indicating he wanted capture of Luke's friends. The Emperor makes only a note that a legion and they are walking into a trap. Neither makes any note of killing any or all of the Rebels and have made a direct note of capture of specific notables.

[Consults script]

OK, yeah. Though that being the case, I still have to wonder why they're firing live lethal ammunition at people Vader wants alive.

I can still easily imagine the stormies being armed with low-power antipersonnel weapons, even ones built on the E-11 platform so that they look similar, but I'm not saying that must automatically be true.

[Havok]

Except we have orders from Vader indicating he wanted capture of Luke's friends. The Emperor makes only a note that a legion and they are walking into a trap. Neither makes any note of killing any or all of the Rebels and have made a direct note of capture of specific notables.

Emperor Palpatine: "Your fleet is lost, and your friends on the Endor moon will not survive."

And the idea that a military unit is going to try to capture a rebel group that is active firing on and killing them with an overwhelming force is pretty fucking stupid.

Not to mention that the consequences of them failing (which they did by the way, twice) is a rebel victory and the detruction of the Death Star. The "bring his companions to me" and anything else went right out the window when they escaped the first time.

P.S. If they were trying to take them alive, why weren't any of the troopers using the stun setting?

I'll get to Vymple's pretty pictures when I get home.

[Srelex]

OK, yeah. Though that being the case, I still have to wonder why they're firing live lethal ammunition at people Vader wants alive.

Shit happens in the heat of battle. That, or the bolts are the type to stun or critically wound without killing.

[Havok]

OK, yeah. Though that being the case, I still have to wonder why they're firing live lethal ammunition at people Vader wants alive.

Shit happens in the heat of battle. That, or the bolts are the type to stun or critically wound without killing.

Dude. we know what the stun setting looks like. they were not using it.

[Ghost Rider]

Except we have orders from Vader indicating he wanted capture of Luke's friends. The Emperor makes only a note that a legion and they are walking into a trap. Neither makes any note of killing any or all of the Rebels and have made a direct note of capture of specific notables.

Emperor Palpatine: "Your fleet is lost, and your friends on the Endor moon will not survive."

And the idea that a military unit is going to try to capture a rebel group that is active firing on and killing them with an overwhelming force is pretty fucking stupid.

Not to mention that the consequences of them failing (which they did by the way, twice) is a rebel victory and the detruction of the Death Star. The "bring his companions to me" and anything else went right out the window when they escaped the first time.

P.S. If they were trying to take them alive, why weren't any of the troopers using the stun setting?

I'll get to Vymple's pretty pictures when I get home.

But you have to weigh in the amount of times in said battle, they had ample time to kill them. After the capture is easily the best time, as well as given the lack of cover, they should have killed both Han and Leia easily.

Also failure does not immediately me the destruction of said shield and the Death Star, given that the only way the Alliance members gained access was the capture of a vehicle that wouldn't have happened if not for one lucky pair of ewoks and another member, as well as Han conning the officer in charge. To leap that failure of capture to that...is silly given that implies Vader placed everything at immense risk and catastrophic failure...because he wanted to dick over his son. While the Emperor fits that role, given he gave the information away and knew the Alliance had it and still waved his dick around, we saw nothing of that nature from Vader.

Thus it stands to reason, they were ordered capture first. And why no stun setting? They weren't ordered to capture anyone else other then a few specific members.

[Havok]

You sure are getting a lot of specific information out of "conduct your search and bring his companions to me".

But yeah, they were ordered to capture them and they did. After that it is everyman for himself, especially like I said, it is hope you capture them again or they blow up the shield generator.

"but Lord Vader, you said to capture them!!"
"You idiot." CHOKE

[Ghost Rider]

You sure are getting a lot of specific information out of "conduct your search and bring his companions to me".

But yeah, they were ordered to capture them and they did. After that it is everyman for himself, especially like I said, it is hope you capture them again or they blow up the shield generator.

"but Lord Vader, you said to capture them!!"
"You idiot." CHOKE

While it sounds specific, saying otherwise...has no evidence whatsoever.

We know what Vader said, in the novel we have Palpatine ordering the destruction of Endor to the Death Star Commander but said nothing to said ground commander whatsoever.

And we saw that the second time they tried to enter the shield bunker was an abject failure. As I said, the only reason they actually got in, was because of an overzealous commander who didn't verify anything. So if anything the orders to capture had nothing to do with the destruction of the shield generator, but the fact a moron believed an AT-ST commander without asking for any ID because he simply could not believe otherwise.

The fact Stormies went up to point blank range for capture instead of blow them away stands that said capture orders superceded everything. And again, make note, Luke Skywalker and friends are noted rebels and their faces are known. So it is only their capture and the fact that the Stormie missed a clear shot at Leia AND Han states even closer that they were only after them and everyone else was fair game.

[Vympel]

Going through my imageshack account, theres a whole bunch of older pictures I had in there that simply come up blank. Goddamnit.

[Simon_Jester]

The fact Stormies went up to point blank range for capture instead of blow them away stands that said capture orders superceded everything. And again, make note, Luke Skywalker and friends are noted rebels and their faces are known. So it is only their capture and the fact that the Stormie missed a clear shot at Leia AND Han states even closer that they were only after them and everyone else was fair game.

This is questionable. Again, it's not unusual for rules of engagement to be "capture if practical, kill if not." In this case it was practical to capture them because they stopped shooting back when Leia was hit.

You can't deduce that they were trying to capture over all else from the fact that they didn't finish Han and Leia off after they stopped shooting. Not when they were using lethal ammunition earlier in the battle when we know stormtroopers have access to stun weapons.

I mean, imagine if a scene like this happened in a normal war movie, set in, say, modern day Iraq. Sure, the fact that the soldiers don't blow the wounded guerilla's brains out after he stops shooting back proves that their orders aren't "leave no survivors." But it doesn't prove that earlier they was deliberately nerfing their own weapon fire in an attempt to keep from actually killing the guerilla.

If the stormtroopers were trying to be nonlethal they'd use stunners. They fired lethal ammo, so I see no reason to assume they wouldn't have used a more powerful lethal setting if they'd had one available. Unless, of course, you posit that they were deliberately "shooting to wound..." which seems kind of odd to me.

[Batman]

Do we know wether or not the stun setting has the same RANGE as the usual kill/maim/hurt etc settings? The one time we see it used in the movies (and if I'm not mistaken the few times we see it used in the EU too) stun was used at really close range. The rebels WERE initially shooting back and perhaps at the ranges involved stun would essentially have resulted in 'Ooh-that tickles.'
And yes, if there's EU information that makes this a completely ridiculous preposition you are perfectly welcome to ridicule me.

[Havok]

Let me preface this by saying that I am arguing from a purely movie position. Which is where my original comment stems from.

Or Star Wars fans have totally overpowered blaster fire.

That's bullshit.

This:

Sandcrawler 1

Sandcrawler 2

is more impressive than burning Leia's arm. This was done by Stormtroopers, armed with E-11s, DLT-19s, and T-21s.

That is great. So the most destructive damage that we ever see hand held blasters do, we don't actually see them do. We just have Obi-Wan talking about precise hits, which really has nothing to do with weapon power, but just knowing where to shoot, something he is pointing out to contrast the way Tuskens would do it.

Let's quote the ANH novel:

Kenobi turned his attention to the sandcrawler. He pointed out where single weapons' bursts had blasted away portals, treads, and support beams.

And this doesn't say anything about what weapons were used. Based on the movie, we know that the Stormtroopers had air support. So it is far more reasonable to think that it is that support that caused the damage and not blasters we never see cause this type of damage again in any of the 6 movies.

Moving on.

This:

Greedo, Pre-Death

Greedo, hit

Greedo, dead

Is more impressive than burning Leia's arm. Note that Greedo's smoking corpse can be heard to be sizzling in the movie

So? That proves what? That blasters bolts are hot and cook things? Yeah we know that. (See Grevious and Owen and Beru and every blaster hit that smolders and smokes) The whole in Greedo is not any more impressive than what a large caliber hand gun could do, or if that isn't sufficient, an shotgun. Nothing remotely impressive there. If blasters are as powerful as people want them to be i.e. single blasts from a E-11 blowing tons of metal around, Greedo would have been in hundreds of little pieces.

This:

Chest-burn

and

Chest-burn 2

Killed the troops in question. The weapon is the E-11.

So you have shown that the E-11 does the same amount of damage as a... gun. And so what that they were killed. They are just wearing clothes and no armor. Again, aside from the heat aspect (which quickly dissipates), they do the same damage as a rifle or a large caliber hand gun.

This:

Grate

Grate-2

Is more impressive than burning Leia's arm. The weapon is, again, an E-11.

This, at least shows some damage that can't be produced by a gun powder weapon.
The thing with this though, is that the damage, as your pictures show, is inconsistent with blaster bolts. A single bolt normally, makes and impact hole about the size of one or two fists. So I would say that this damage represents the upper limit of what the E-11 can do. Not your insane assertion that the E-11 can blow hundreds of pounds of steel meters away.

This:

Bolt incoming

Impact

Impact-2

Scar

Is more impressive than burning Leia's arm. The weapon is Boba Fett's EE-3.

This:

Hole

Is more impressive than burning Leia's arm. The weapon is, again, an E-11.

These show what? That blasters can penetrate a few centimeters into concrete? Again, nothing that a regular old bullet can't do. The impact is visually impressive, but that is it as it does nothing to add to the damage.

This:

Pre-Impact

Impact-1

Impact-2

Impact-3

Impact-4

Is more impressive than burning Leia's arm. It's an E-11.

So is this:

Pre-Impact

Impact-1

Impact-2

And this:

Hole-in-armor

Hole-2

And this:

Impact-1

And this:

Link

And this:

Impact-2

Impact-2

Thanks for posting these. First lets look at who is shooting at who... Leia, Chewie and Lando are fighting for their lives, so there is absolutely zero reason to think that they have the blasters set at any reduced level. So what we have is fully powered blasters making fist sized entrance wounds, with no visible exit wounds, and while they do make impressive visual hits, it does nothing to add to the damage. We aren't even sure if any of the hits we see are lethal.

So a fully powered blaster can kill humans only wearing regular clothes, but not set them on fire with a single hit. (See the Death Star detention center)
Blasters can penetrate into, what amounts as space plaster, a whole few centimeters (see the Bespin hallway battles)
Full powered blaster shots can penetrate, but not exit, Stormtrooper armor (see the Bespin hallway battles)
The upper limit of damage that we actually SEE a hand held blaster do is blow a whole about a meter across in a steel(?) grate (See the Death Star detention center)

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and stand by my assertion that Star Wars fans have totally overpowered blasters.

[Havok]

Ooooooo look at all the damage the Falcon's retractable blaster does to... ice.

But yeah, that could totally dismantle a Sand Crawler.

[Bakustra]

You are seriously misrepresenting the images. Saying "ooh it penetrates a few centimeters into SPACE PLASTER!!" is not good mockery if anybody can see that it's blowing head-diameter craters out of the wall. Well, I suppose that every crusade must misrepresent its enemies, particularly half-witted ones.

Using bullets as a comparison to blasters is pretty ignorant. They do damage by different methods. A bullet impacts and penetrates, dealing its damage via momentum, force and pressure. A blaster primarily does its damage by heating the target. With me so far? Good. Now, one interesting aspect of this is that if a blaster bolt contains enough energy, and its target has a low enough thermal conductivity, this damage will manifest in the bolt vaporizing (or melting, with low enough energy) s small portion of the target, and the hot gas spraying out from this, leaving a heated crater behind. Hmm... let's take a look at the damage presented by Vympel. People hit by a blaster end up with a smoking hole in their body, and a cloud forms. The same happens with stormtrooper armor. That seems remarkably consistent with the damage method I just presented above, in case you don't believe me.

Now, how do we know it's vaporization, then? Well, let's take a look at gunfights in SW. Aboard the Death Star, on Bespin, anywhere there is a confined space, and also on Endor and Hoth, although not to the same extent, clouds rise from anything that's hit, including metallic walls that shouldn't burn, in case you want to dismiss it as smoke (of course, since it is an article of faith that everybody in the SW galaxy is severely brain-damaged amongst many people like yourself, no doubt you could claim that they make their walls out of aluminum or other metals that burn. But that's circular logic).

When it comes to these examples, most of them are against unknown materials like stormtrooper armor, or wall material. Claiming that blasters are pathetic because they only blow small holes in stormtrooper armor is much like claiming that, say, guns are pathetic because a Saturday Night Special is stopped by a policeman's bulletproof vest. Now, of course, we come to another article of faith: "stormtroopers sux lol their armor is so wimpy even pathetic blasters can get through it imagine if they went up against a real army with real guns fap fap fap" which is still also circular logic, albeit of a more disturbing kind. Similarly, even clothing is a bit of an unknown, and in the case of Leia, the bolt only burns a small part of her sleeve before dying out.

Meanwhile, your pretty little ice picture is useless without a before and after shot of the ice to see how much of it is melted away by the shots. You also reveal that you don't really understand how the methodology works, since you have decided that if there is a contradiction between two instances, we should discard the one indicating higher power rather than reconciling the two. And you accuse people analyzing SW of wankery. Fascinating indeed. Understandable, though, since you believe blasters and bullets are identical in their means of damage.

[Vympel]

You know, I was trying to figure out just what the hell you were arguing against as I scrolled through your post in absolute disbelief as to what I was reading, but then I came to this and it all became clear:-

Not your insane assertion that the E-11 can blow hundreds of pounds of steel meters away.

Which appears where in this thread, exactly? You're arguing against an idiotic strawman you pulled directly out of your ass. The point, as should have been obvious - was that using Leia's arm as a benchmark for blaster firepower is idiotic, because we've seen blasters do more. No more, no less. If you care to point out where anyone claimed anything equivalent to your bullshit idiot strawman quoted above, you're free to do so.

That said, your post is full of stupid assertions anyway:-

That is great. So the most destructive damage that we ever see hand held blasters do, we don't actually see them do. We just have Obi-Wan talking about precise hits, which really has nothing to do with weapon power, but just knowing where to shoot, something he is pointing out to contrast the way Tuskens would do it.

It's showing the damage to the sandcrawler. Why this is significant will become clear shortly.

And this doesn't say anything about what weapons were used. Based on the movie, we know that the Stormtroopers had air support. So it is far more reasonable to think that it is that support that caused the damage and not blasters we never see cause this type of damage again in any of the 6 movies.

Uh huh, and I suppose you forgot that this was meant to look like a Sandpeople attack? Did it occur to you that the average observer might think it a little fishy if the damage to the Sandcrawler was only consistent with the Sandpeople possessing aircraft? What you think is reasonable is actually retarded- Obi-Wan is obviously pointing out damage caused by infantry weapons, which is why he's talking about Imperial Stormtroopers when discussing those same blast points referred to in the book. Jeezus, use your fucking brain, even if they did use an aircraft during the attack (which remains absurd), that still can't be what this quote is referring to.

So? That proves what? That blasters bolts are hot and cook things? Yeah we know that. (See Grevious and Owen and Beru and every blaster hit that smolders and smokes) The whole in Greedo is not any more impressive than what a large caliber hand gun could do, or if that isn't sufficient, an shotgun.

How the fuck can a large caliber handgun or shotgun cause a humanoid's body to become a sizzling, crispy husk?

Nothing remotely impressive there. If blasters are as powerful as people want them to be i.e. single blasts from a E-11 blowing tons of metal around, Greedo would have been in hundreds of little pieces.

Right, I suppose this comment sorta makes sense if your stupid "tons of metal" strawman was the standard, as opposed to pointing out that wounding Leia's arm isn't an upper limit, as was the original point.

So you have shown that the E-11 does the same amount of damage as a... gun. And so what that they were killed. They are just wearing clothes and no armor. Again, aside from the heat aspect (which quickly dissipates), they do the same damage as a rifle or a large caliber hand gun.

As above.

This, at least shows some damage that can't be produced by a gun powder weapon.
The thing with this though, is that the damage, as your pictures show, is inconsistent with blaster bolts. A single bolt normally, makes and impact hole about the size of one or two fists. So I would say that this damage represents the upper limit of what the E-11 can do. Not your insane assertion that the E-11 can blow hundreds of pounds of steel meters away.

Dealt with this strawman already.

These show what? That blasters can penetrate a few centimeters into concrete? Again, nothing that a regular old bullet can't do. The impact is visually impressive, but that is it as it does nothing to add to the damage.

LOL what? So let me get this straight - a blaster bolt tears a chunk out of a wall with explosive force, and you think this is equivalent to a bullet merely lodging itself in same wall? Did you stop to consider the effect this would have had if it hit a fucking person? You don't think it'd be anymore lethal?

This is like saying a 25mm shell hitting a wall is no more lethal than a 12.7mm bullet doing the same thing - after all, they both end up in the wall, right?

What the fuck are you smoking, and where can I get some? This is literally the stupidest fucking thing I've ever read you type.

Thanks for posting these. First lets look at who is shooting at who... Leia, Chewie and Lando are fighting for their lives, so there is absolutely zero reason to think that they have the blasters set at any reduced level. So what we have is fully powered blasters making fist sized entrance wounds, with no visible exit wounds, and while they do make impressive visual hits, it does nothing to add to the damage. We aren't even sure if any of the hits we see are lethal.

Again, one has to marvel at this "sure it looks impressive, but it adds nothing to the damage" reasoning of yours. Its completely nonsensical:- sure, that 12.7mm round blowing a massive entry wound into your chest looks impressive - but it adds nothing to the damage!

So a fully powered blaster can kill humans only wearing regular clothes, but not set them on fire with a single hit. (See the Death Star detention center)
Blasters can penetrate into, what amounts as space plaster, a whole few centimeters (see the Bespin hallway battles)
Full powered blaster shots can penetrate, but not exit, Stormtrooper armor (see the Bespin hallway battles)
The upper limit of damage that we actually SEE a hand held blaster do is blow a whole about a meter across in a steel(?) grate (See the Death Star detention center)

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and stand by my assertion that Star Wars fans have totally overpowered blasters.

Since your assertion is made up on a standard of firepower you pulled directly out of your ass, this doesn't mean much at all.

Then there's the Hoth's autoblaster vs ice - love the reasoning power you employ there - hold up an unimpressive example as an upper limit, because you really need the firepower to take out a vehicle when the target is infantry. I guess you forgot Han's blaster tearing chunks out of Docking Bay 94's walls. Or is his pistol more mighty than the weapons of his ship?

[Ghost Rider]

The fact Stormies went up to point blank range for capture instead of blow them away stands that said capture orders superceded everything. And again, make note, Luke Skywalker and friends are noted rebels and their faces are known. So it is only their capture and the fact that the Stormie missed a clear shot at Leia AND Han states even closer that they were only after them and everyone else was fair game.

This is questionable. Again, it's not unusual for rules of engagement to be "capture if practical, kill if not." In this case it was practical to capture them because they stopped shooting back when Leia was hit.

You can't deduce that they were trying to capture over all else from the fact that they didn't finish Han and Leia off after they stopped shooting. Not when they were using lethal ammunition earlier in the battle when we know stormtroopers have access to stun weapons.

I mean, imagine if a scene like this happened in a normal war movie, set in, say, modern day Iraq. Sure, the fact that the soldiers don't blow the wounded guerilla's brains out after he stops shooting back proves that their orders aren't "leave no survivors." But it doesn't prove that earlier they was deliberately nerfing their own weapon fire in an attempt to keep from actually killing the guerilla.

If the stormtroopers were trying to be nonlethal they'd use stunners. They fired lethal ammo, so I see no reason to assume they wouldn't have used a more powerful lethal setting if they'd had one available. Unless, of course, you posit that they were deliberately "shooting to wound..." which seems kind of odd to me.

So...you're saying the possiblty of capture but kill if need be. Which means you are waffling a position because you do not want to commit.

We have evidence that Vader gave an order. Vader is considered second only to one man, and that said man did not contradict said order. His order was not "Capture if you can.". His orders were to capture Luke's friends who are high ranking Alliance officers and their faces were noted to be known by the Empire's miltary at large, given from the novel and his direct line in the movie.

So are you going to present evidence for your assertion or are we going to have a speculation debate on what may possibly be what Vader might have implied versus objective evidence of what he said.

[Simon_Jester]

So...you're saying the possiblty of capture but kill if need be. Which means you are waffling a position because you do not want to commit.

No, it means that I'm seeing stormtroopers shooting live ammunition. Which I do not think they would do if they were trying to capture Han and Leia at all costs. Maybe they didn't get the order from Vader. Maybe Vader countermanded the order later. I don't know, and I don't care. All I know is that when we know stormtroopers have stun weapons and we see them not using them, it's a pretty fair bet that they wouldn't mind killing whatever it is they're shooting at.

But of course, they must have been firing on a low power setting, because they were trying to capture these people by spraying lethal (but low-powered) ammunition into the alcove they were crouching in with no cover. And, I assume, praying that one of their shots wouldn't catch Han or Leia in the throat, because then Vader would really be pissed. Lucky their first hit was in one of the Heroic Survivable Injury spots, huh?

So are you going to present evidence for your assertion or are we going to have a speculation debate on what may possibly be what Vader might have implied versus objective evidence of what he said.

Evidence of my assertion...

OK. My assertion is that it is plausible that the stormtroopers on Endor were issued with relatively low-powered antipersonnel blasters that were not designed to blow big holes in walls and armored battledroids. Even if other blasters that can do this exist, the stormtroopers on Endor weren't necessarily carrying those.

Evidence of this assertion:
1) The stormtroopers were a rear area security detail whose main concern was cannibal teddy bears with rocks; heavy blaster rifles would have been unnecessary.
2) The stormtroopers were liberally supplied with vehicle-mounted heavy weapons up to and including AT-AT main guns, making heavy weapons even less necessary.
3) While the blasters the stormtroopers carry are superficially similar to the very damaging blaster rifles we see elsewhere in the movies, we cannot tell what the guts of the weapon look like. There are cases in real life where two weapons that look alike do not have the same performance. Consider the semiautomatic AR-15 and the fully automatic M-16, which look quite similar.
4) Leia is, as far as I can tell, hit directly, but did not suffer massive trauma of the sort we'd expect from a blaster rifle that blows large holes in stone or metal. Clearly, we are looking at either variable power settings or multiple models of stormtrooper rifle that aren't all equally destructive.

Finally, I submit that multiple models are at least as plausible as variable power settings- though the two aren't mutually exclusive, as the difference between the M-16 and AR-15 illustrates. This is the limit of my assertion.

[Batman]

Given that variable power settings are already CANON FACT why bother issuing low power rifles (visually identical ones to begin with) at all? Everything you can do with a low power E-11 clone you can with a genuine E-11 set for low power.
And that STILL leaves the possibility that maybe they weren't using the stun setting because it simply didn't work at the ranges involved.

[Ghost Rider]

So...you're saying the possiblty of capture but kill if need be. Which means you are waffling a position because you do not want to commit.

No, it means that I'm seeing stormtroopers shooting live ammunition. Which I do not think they would do if they were trying to capture Han and Leia at all costs. Maybe they didn't get the order from Vader. Maybe Vader countermanded the order later. I don't know, and I don't care. All I know is that when we know stormtroopers have stun weapons and we see them not using them, it's a pretty fair bet that they wouldn't mind killing whatever it is they're shooting at.

But of course, they must have been firing on a low power setting, because they were trying to capture these people by spraying lethal (but low-powered) ammunition into the alcove they were crouching in with no cover. And, I assume, praying that one of their shots wouldn't catch Han or Leia in the throat, because then Vader would really be pissed. Lucky their first hit was in one of the Heroic Survivable Injury spots, huh?

So more blithering until we get to part 2!

So are you going to present evidence for your assertion or are we going to have a speculation debate on what may possibly be what Vader might have implied versus objective evidence of what he said.

Evidence of my assertion...

OK. My assertion is that it is plausible that the stormtroopers on Endor were issued with relatively low-powered antipersonnel blasters that were not designed to blow big holes in walls and armored battledroids. Even if other blasters that can do this exist, the stormtroopers on Endor weren't necessarily carrying those.

Evidence of this assertion:
1) The stormtroopers were a rear area security detail whose main concern was cannibal teddy bears with rocks; heavy blaster rifles would have been unnecessary.

Given what we saw a fucking AT-STs stationed there, you are going with that thought?

So essentially they are arming men without the gear needed because only teddy bears, but don't mind the anti personnel vehicle?

And add to that we saw what an E-11 does to unarmored people, does it fucking matter if Han/Leia get hit with either?

2) The stormtroopers were liberally supplied with vehicle-mounted heavy weapons up to and including AT-AT main guns, making heavy weapons even less necessary.

Why?

No really, think of this inane logic. We know the AT-AT will have problems with cover, but men wouldn't. So we are to presume they said "Fuck it guys, we got the artillery units...why do we need heavy guns if we have those things for heavy firepower in a dense forest and our foes could take cover and avoid standing in plain sight?!"

3) While the blasters the stormtroopers carry are superficially similar to the very damaging blaster rifles we see elsewhere in the movies, we cannot tell what the guts of the weapon look like. There are cases in real life where two weapons that look alike do not have the same performance. Consider the semiautomatic AR-15 and the fully automatic M-16, which look quite similar.

So you have nothing but your supposition. No, dumbass it doesn't work that way. Demonstrate data that you can come up with a conclusion, not come up with a conclusion and come up with supposition to fit your conclusion.

4) Leia is, as far as I can tell, hit directly, but did not suffer massive trauma of the sort we'd expect from a blaster rifle that blows large holes in stone or metal. Clearly, we are looking at either variable power settings or multiple models of stormtrooper rifle that aren't all equally destructive.

Cool, the evidence it hit her directly. I'd like to see this given we can stop frame and see it hit the fucking wall.

But I can wait.

Finally, I submit that multiple models are at least as plausible as variable power settings- though the two aren't mutually exclusive, as the difference between the M-16 and AR-15 illustrates. This is the limit of my assertion.

Which means you can up with a conclusion, used your supposition as data to back up your conclusion and pressed submit.

[General Brock]

I'm debating some moron at ST.com on a vs thread and one of the topics is the bunker scene in ROTJ where Leia is shot at by a stormtrooper (regarding blaster firepower), I'm attempting to establish whether the blaster bolt hit her arm or the frame of the door, as there doesn't seem to be any damage to the boor frame. Is there something I'm missing here?

It looks like a deliberately aimed low-power shot intended to disable Leia (as she was shooting to kill) and facilitate the capture of both Leia and Han (who was busy with the door controls).

The shot hit the outside of her upper arm, enough to cause temporary disability but not threaten major bone or soft tissue damage. It did not hit the frame, and was of low enough power that the energy dissipated at the point of impact without causing any other collateral damage. You even see the stormtrooper lining up the shot, then two of them close in when Han is distracted.

Its proof of stormtrooper capacity for accuracy and variable blaster power settings, if nothing else, but the choice of left arm over right was dubious. The position of the shooter probably precluded a safe right-arm shot.

[Kurgan]

It might be worth mentioning that after Han raises his arms later (after tending her wound) he appears to have blood on his fingers.

[PainRack]

But you have to weigh in the amount of times in said battle, they had ample time to kill them. After the capture is easily the best time, as well as given the lack of cover, they should have killed both Han and Leia easily.

This point is really very dubious. How would the stormtroopers have known who else were on the planet? Luke claims he was alone, the local commander believed otherwise. Ditto to whether it was Han and Leia.

To make matters worse, between the two, Leia is the more recognisable and valuable of the two, and she was the one who got shot.

Why is anyone ignoring the possibility of a lucky shot disabling Leia and then the stormtroopers recognising the chance to capture them?

[Simon_Jester]

Because it isn't compatible with the stormtroopers taking great pains to take them alive.

If they weren't taking great pains to take them alive, then that raises a fairly obvious question: why didn't they just hose the alcove down with higher-power shots?

So you need an expert stormtrooper marksman deliberately shooting to wound (heh) with a low power blaster shot, along with other expert stormtrooper marksmen deliberately shooting to miss (or am I mistaken about the other stormtroopers shooting back?).