Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens

[Anacronian]

And this was a Jedi standing two feet from Count Dooku. Hardly one without a Sith clouding his mind.

Order 66 I guess the Emperor reached out through space and clouded a lot of Jedi's minds allowing non-Jedi to shoot them up right?

[biostem]

I'd really love to see some non-Jedi, non-Sith force users. I always felt that both factions tried to systematize use of the force to meet their own ends. I realize that we are talking about millennia-old institutions here, but I can't imagine that throughout the entire galaxy, no one else has come up with a method of training force users that is effective.

I hope that whatever those imperial forces are, that they aren't just "The Empire 2". It'd be interesting if they were a more sympathetic force - perhaps some regional defense force that adopted the moniker of the empire so as to inspire obedience, but without all the hateful "baggage" that Palpatine's empire carried - maybe they simply continued to use and develop the technology that that had access to, (like TIEs, Star Destroyers, Stormtroopers, etc).

I wonder what could strip a crashed Star Destroyer down to a skeleton like the one shown - perhaps the imperial forces we saw had to salvage whatever they could from said ship, and they are actually the decendants of the survivors of that crash, who cutoff from imperial rescue/reinforcements, staked out a life for themselves as mercenaries or a local for-hire security force. Heck, maybe they just set themselves up as the local government...

I do not get why people are constantly trying to make the Empire appealing. Is it just fascism fetishism? Is it because moral relativism is trendy these days?

It's nothing of the sort. It's my presumption that not every soldier or officer in the Empire is a boot-strapping, mustache-twirling badguy in it "for the evulz". It's my hope to see some growth of these "real people" who worked for the empire, now thrust into a situation where they have to skirt the line between their hard-line regimented and black & white outlook on the universe, and the real dynamic universe they actually live in...

[NecronLord]

And this was a Jedi standing two feet from Count Dooku. Hardly one without a Sith clouding his mind.

Order 66 I guess the Emperor reached out through space and clouded a lot of Jedi's minds allowing non-Jedi to shoot them up right?

Umm... yes.

In that the Jedi repeatedly state their powers have been weakened by the Shroud of the Dark Side. Whether or not the Sith created that is not knowable from the canon evidence.

[NecronLord]

Used child soldiers.

Ok, that is a problem. But that's got nothing on Palpatine deciding to kill every single child in the Jedi Order.

I'll just leave this here.

[biostem]

And this was a Jedi standing two feet from Count Dooku. Hardly one without a Sith clouding his mind.

Order 66 I guess the Emperor reached out through space and clouded a lot of Jedi's minds allowing non-Jedi to shoot them up right?

Well, the Clone troopers felt no malice or anger when they carried out the order, so there wasn't really anything for the Jedi they were accompanying to pick up on. Further, in a few instances the Jedi did appear to catch on, but the attacks were too much and too sudden for them to save themselves...

[bilateralrope]

A thought about the people we see in Stormtrooper armor. What if the galaxy has reached a point where everybody is using some variant on it because it simply is the best armor their budget allows ?

Everyone uses white because it's the cheapest color and the sensors in everyone else's helmet won't be fooled by a different color scheme.

The Death Star was for planetary mining, blow up the planet to get to its gooey caramel center without having to dig to it. Seriously though, its purpose has nothing to do with its coolness factor and besides its a tool, its purpose is whatever is user intends for it. It could blow up planets, knock out planetary shields, or draw dicks into planetary surfaces.

I've seen the planetary mining claim before. I've got one big problem with it: How do they gather the chunks of planet that are flying away in all directions at a good chunk of the speed of light ?
There are other problems, but that's the biggest one.

Also, read this thread. The Senate being dissolved around the time the Death Star was finished was no coincidence. Instead, the Empire needed the Senate to keep systems under control, until it could terrorise them into submission with the Death Star.

And the Republic, the Empire in all but name, is what the Rebellion is fighting for and that is frankly ludicrous.

It's better than the Empire. Especially if the Rebels are likely going for an idealised version of the Republic. Or at least one where they try to stop someone seizing power like Palpatine did.

[Zixinus]

I always thought the "planetary mining" thing was just half-assed propaganda made as a desperate effort to paint the Rebels in bad color.

[Adam Reynolds]

That does not really answer the question. How was the Old Republic corrupt before or during the Clone Wars? Was this ever presented in the films? Being inept was demonstrated (the Senate could not rally an army but had to be handed one by the Jedi), but when was corruption demonstrated?

Corrupt was obviously shown by the fact that the Trade Federation actually had their own Senator. That is downright absurd for something like the American system. And it wasn't like it was the Neimoidian senator who simply worked for the Trade Federation, he was directly addressed as the Trade Federation senator. Palpatine certainly didn't cause that himself.

I didn't actually come here to free slaves" proves what? Qui-Gon really didn't go there to free slaves, he came there to gets parts to fulfill his mission. He was obviously opposed to slavery but at that time and place that wasn't his priority. Allowing yourself to be distracted from your mission on some humanitarian tangent is noble, but risks losing the mission altogether that may take more lives than saved by the tangent. Qui-Gon not dropping everything and abandon his other responsibilities at the first opportunity to fix an injustice is not evidence of some sort of corruption, but merely recognition of situation. It makes him human, someone bound by limitations of himself and his environment, rather than Superman who only follows the law when he finds it suitable.

While this is all true, the point is that the Jedi and Senate showed apathy in the Outer Rim. This is what allowed Dooku to create the Separatist movement, that so few cared about their plight, so when the charismatic fallen Jedi comes before them they listen. It also caused Anakin to have resentment towards the Jedi Council and Senate, that they didn't care about people like him or his mother. And the Jedi Council completely banned him from seeing her despite a vision that told him she would die.

I'm sorry, but are you fucking kidding me? No, it is not. Just because there are many planets with people on them does not mean that all planets suddenly become just mere cities. That is a failure of imagination. They are still planets and Alderaan was habitable world that housed 2 billion people.

So were the deaths in WW2 worse than the Native American genocide because it killed more people (55 vs 20 million, but if the Native American genocide was adjusted for population it would be 92 million)? The Empire was in no way right in using the Death Star, but the larger a population, the less death matters proportionally. It's why we use homicide rates rather than homicide figures.

Yes, which is one of the reasons the US (allegedly) used the bomb in the first place: they wanted a weapon that would finally make the Japanese come to their senses and surrender, rather than waste thousands of lives trying fanatically to salvage their defeat.

And yet it didn't. It wasn't until the Soviets entered the war and ended a possibility of a negotiated settlement that they surrendered.

I admit that I am assuming that the output of the Death Star's beam was adjustable. If it is they could have scaled it up to just enough to overwhelm the planetary shields and make sizable crater. Then orbital bombardment or more regular military action would have done the rest.

We know that the Second Death Star had adjustable output based on the lack of overkill against Rebel capital ships. But this concept depends on just how much power it takes to beat a planetary shield. If it takes enough power that the overkill that destroyed a planet was simply a side effect, than there wasn't any other way to do it. Eclipse class and other smaller superlasers are no longer canon(though the basic tech still is via AOTC clone gunships and artillery).

This assumption of mine is based on the fact that the Death Star's superlaser used as much overkill as it did. If the goal was simply planetary depopulation, much less firepower should have been used. The best explanation for why this was the case was that it was necessary to beat the shield. It might be possible to use repeated lower level bursts, followed by a conventional bombardment that would be decreased as the shield drops. Though unlike Star Trek shields, there is no indication that weapons fire is more effective as shields weaken.

I wonder what a version of the Malvolence ion cannon applied to planetary scale would do. It appears to do no damage to organics, but has the ability to drain shields effectively*.

As for other mechanisms of outright beating the shield, Clone Wars indicates that dedicated shield breaching technology exists in the form of Seperatist boarding ships, but there is no indication those could be used on something the scale of the planet. And the fact that the Rebels at Endor suggested no such alternatives indicates that there probably is no other way to stop planetary level shields. For alternatives to raw firepower, the classical strategies of laying siege and covert attacks also obviously work.

* Though admittedly the crews are protected by their starship hulls in all of the examples we see, we have no idea what that level of firepower would do to completely unprotected humans or to the atmosphere of a planet. It likely wouldn't be good against the magnetic field.

Even if it weren't, then that makes the whole overkill thing even worse: now we have a giant, massive technological project that can only destroy planets. They deliberately chose to have a planet-destroying weapon rather than shield-destroying weapons. It means that any time the Death Star's armament ever would come into function against a planet it would destroy everything.

I'm not trying to say that the Death Star was moral. Obviously it isn't for the same reason that the use of nuclear weapons or carpet bombing aren't moral. But that isn't the same thing as saying that it has no legitimate military use.

The problem with this theory is that you extrapolate a few discussions from Master Yoda to such an extent that it becomes unprovable. Every Jedi death no matter how remote suddenly would have to be a deliberate intention of a far-away Sith, rather than simply exceeding the limitations of the Jedi being killed. It paints out the Jedi as infallible demi-gods rather than just people with powers.

Other things can work in the right circumstances, but the most efficient way of stopping Jedi is Sith. It is no coincidence that Palpatine sent Maul to Naboo in TPM.

Sith may cloud the foresight of the Jedi but there is little clear information on how this works. For all we know this is an accidental effect of Sith gaining power. The future may have been clouded because of the extensive direct influence Palpatine and Dooku gained over events.

I would agree that this is what happened, but it still required Sith in power for it to work. I would also argue that the opposite case happened in ROTJ with Palpatine. As Luke began developing his abilites it in effect created a shroud of the Light Side that hampered Palpatine's abilities. Like the Jedi, he never considered the possibility that he would lose his position of strength and was thus ill-prepared for several wild cards.

It is also simply possible that the Jedi could not see foresee what they needed because of hubris, which the Jedi certainly had. Then the Dark Side's growth (which may be just accidental and related to the braking out of a war) would then just be an excuse.

Hubris was why they were unable to cope properly, not why they were unable to see.

We come back to one point: how did Grievous kill or injure several Jedi at the Battle of Muunilinst? No Sith was there and we have no reason to believe that Dooku or someone else was directly influencing the battle or somehow protecting Griveous. Yet Grievous mopped the fucking floor with Jedi.

The 2003 Clone Wars is no longer canon. In the 2008 series he generally loses against Jedi, even padawan Ashoka is able to get the better of him, though it was a rather tough fight for her. But regardless it was during the Clone Wars after the shroud of the Dark Side had clouded the vision of Jedi to the point that they were unable to see.

The more workable explanation is simply that Jedi foresight is more limited and vague. Sensing danger does not mean you will automatically dodge a nuclear bomb. If Jedi's foresight were that powerful than it would actually destroy dramatic tension: instead of just giving the heroes a chance it would guarantee it with fate.

'
I never argued that it was ever perfect, only that it was least useful in the presence of Sith.

He knew Anakin would win because he was the most powerful Force-sensitive Qui-Gon ever met. He could already tell that Anakin could already use the force in a way that would allow him to win the pod-race. In other words Anakin had a massive advantage over other races. It's like predicting that a child Mozart would play back a song or a trough-bred will a lame-race.

But the point is that he intuitively knew it. That requires extremely accurate foresight. And Anakin's advantages hardly helped him previously, Qui-Gon knew it would help this time when it never had before.

That is possible, but not having conflicting Force users would lead to one side being too powerful.

Please elaborate.

Given my thesis that it requires Sith to oppose Jedi reliably(not that others can't pull it off, but it requires some other massive advantage to be successful), if there are no Dark Side practitioners to oppose those who follow the Light, they would be problematic from a storytelling perspective. It's the same reason that superheroes don't work without supervillains.

And this is the problem with this theory: how do we know that was going on? How do we know that Dooku simply didn't feel threatened and the gunned down Jedi was simply not overwhelmed? We see no move of Dooku doing anything.

Why would he have to do anything visibly? The simple fact that he was standing there would have an impact. And the Jedi was clearly concentrating on Dooku at the time regardless, that alone would have had an impact.

I'll just leave this here.

I really wonder if the SW galaxy treats children differently than Earth. It seems that in general they give much more responsibility to children than we do today.

As a side note, that is beyond stupid to begin training children to serve as stormtroopers. There is no logical reason for such an extended training program, especially considering how useless they are in combat in that series.

A thought about the people we see in Stormtrooper armor. What if the galaxy has reached a point where everybody is using some variant on it because it simply is the best armor their budget allows ?

Everyone uses white because it's the cheapest color and the sensors in everyone else's helmet won't be fooled by a different color scheme.

I doubt the Rebels/New Republic would ever wear that armor, regardless of how economical it is. Even if it cost them more money they would chance the paint scheme, especially given that as ROTS shows, camouflage is effective on stormtrooper armor.

I always thought the "planetary mining" thing was just half-assed propaganda made as a desperate effort to paint the Rebels in bad color.

I always thought it was bullshit one of the extremely naive designers believed to make herself feel better in the old EU.

[NecronLord]

In the Legends continuity, the Tarkin (a light Death Star) was actually used to blast a planet open to get buried crystals out. So it's clearly possible to use it for that purpose.

[Adam Reynolds]

In the Legends continuity, the Tarkin (a light Death Star) was actually used to blast a planet open to get buried crystals out. So it's clearly possible to use it for that purpose.

It might be possible, but it clearly wasn't designed for this purpose.

I was looking at the concept art shown with the Celebration display and it is interesting that Finn appears to have Luke's lightsaber but Rey appears to have Han Solo's blater(or a duplicate). It makes me wonder if he is the Jedi rather than her. The blaster bit does make me think she is Han's daughter. Though it is possible that for some reason in the short term, she doesn't like lightsabers or that she already has one, possibly on her staff.

EDIT:Earlier leaked concept art always showed Rey(then called Kira) with a lightsaber.

[Lord Revan]

In the Legends continuity, the Tarkin (a light Death Star) was actually used to blast a planet open to get buried crystals out. So it's clearly possible to use it for that purpose.

It might be possible, but it clearly wasn't designed for this purpose.

I was looking at the concept art shown with the Celebration display and it is interesting that Finn appears to have Luke's lightsaber but Rey appears to have Han Solo's blater(or a duplicate). It makes me wonder if he is the Jedi rather than her. The blaster bit does make me think she is Han's daughter. Though it is possible that for some reason in the short term, she doesn't like lightsabers or that she already has one, possibly on her staff.

EDIT:Earlier leaked concept art always showed Rey(then called Kira) with a lightsaber.

Tbh Luke used a blaster similar to Han's blaster in Empire Strikes back and kanaan uses a blaster as well so using a blaster doesn't mean someone isn't a jedi (or potential jedi) especially if said person is trying to hide or forget that part of their life.

[bilateralrope]

Rey appears to have Han Solo's blater(or a duplicate).

Was there anything distinct about Han's blaster ?

Or was it a mass produced model ?

[Adam Reynolds]

Tbh Luke used a blaster similar to Han's blaster in Empire Strikes back and kanaan uses a blaster as well so using a blaster doesn't mean someone isn't a jedi (or potential jedi) especially if said person is trying to hide or forget that part of their life.

I am more thinking that it is marketing. Abrams after all denied that Khan was in Star Trek Into Darkness until it aired.
Spoiler

Spoilers indicate that this is the case, that Rey trained under Luke when she was young but it went bad, likely involving Kylo Ren. And she was trying to put that behind her, while Finn was attracted to the idea of becoming a Jedi as he wasn't a very good stormtrooper.

Was there anything distinct about Han's blaster ?

Or was it a mass produced model ?

As Revan pointed out, Luke carried essentially the same model. It simply evokes the image of Han's daughter to me.

[Zixinus]

Corrupt was obviously shown by the fact that the Trade Federation actually had their own Senator.

Now this is a good point, especially if Wookiepeedia is right about them being essentially a large corporation/cartel.

That is downright absurd for something like the American system.

How is that relevant? It's a galaxy far, far away, why would they use the American or even Roman system as opposed to having their own?

It also caused Anakin to have resentment towards the Jedi Council and Senate, that they didn't care about people like him or his mother. And the Jedi Council completely banned him from seeing her despite a vision that told him she would die.

I chalk that up to the whole "no attachments" philosophy that I think was stupid or at least meant to make the Jedi more servile.

And yet it didn't. It wasn't until the Soviets entered the war and ended a possibility of a negotiated settlement that they surrendered.

That is beside my point. The two nuclear bombings had military and strategic goals different to that of the Empire's destruction of Aldaraan.

While this is all true, the point is that the Jedi and Senate showed apathy in the Outer Rim.

And how much of the Outer Rim was Republic territory? If it was, then you have a point. But Tatooine wasn't Republic territory and thus not under the jurisdiction of the Jedi.

My theory is also that by the time of TPM, Jedi were made into part of the Republic's branch, including with all its limitations.

So were the deaths in WW2 worse than the Native American genocide because it killed more people (55 vs 20 million, but if the Native American genocide was adjusted for population it would be 92 million)?

You are missing the point of "an ENTIRE FUCKING PLANET was destroyed".

It isn't just the lack of discrimination, it was the absolutely ridiculous overkill that destroyed not just every citizen (like a biological weapon would), but every lifeform, every artifact, every home, every machine, EVERYTHING! Everything the planet housed, had, could have been, the living space, the intellectual, cultural, scientific, biological treasures on the planet are all lost. The real estate, the arable land, the instrastructure. The Empire could have bombed the native population to shit and filled the planet with Imperial-loyal colonists and/or strip-miners or whatever. Now the only thing there is a large cloud of rubble and maybe a few artifacts that survived vacuum.

WW2 deaths and the Native American genocide are different events and not directly comparable just because of sheer numbers of people dead.
We could discuss which would have featured the more and worse crimes but that's way off topic.

The Empire was in no way right in using the Death Star, but the larger a population, the less death matters proportionally. It's why we use homicide rates rather than homicide figures.

You are still massively misunderstanding the point and depth of tragedy here and even the morality.

Yes, when we need to understand and read statistics, you look at homicide rates from the standpoint of someone trying to understand crime statistics. That does not mean that the larger population you have, the less value one life has.

Two billion people do not become as worth as two people just because there is a trillion people out there. Again, just because there are many inhabited planets does not mean that they start counting as mere small cities (even if there is only one city on the planet). Planets themselves have value, especially habitable planets and even more so for planets that have life, whether it's know or unknown and regardless whether those values are unique. Inhabited planets that have history, culture, knowledge have more value than just the number of lives there, it has the value of what those lives make and do. Destroying everything those lives ever created along with the lives themselves is a worse crime than just destroying the lives themselves (although just destroying everything they did is still less than just ending those lives).

Two billion people killed by overkill super-genocide and planet-destruction (which should be its own genocide-level crime) are still two billion people dead, especially for something that a very low number* of them were responsible for.
*Or so I assume. It is possible that the planet was in semi-open rebellion (which would explain why Empire did an overkill as a political statement) or it could be that Leia was acting mostly on her own. Either way, it does not justifying this level of overkill.

But let's talk numbers and how you compared the destruction of Aldaraan to the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Again, the Empire's destruction of Aldaraan to Japan's conflict would be comparable to the entirety of Japan's destruction with every island bombed, every Japanese citizen killed, every structure and tree and grass turned to ash. Compared to that, two bombing of the two cities were lesser crimes. The Empire could have made the same decision, choosing to level the lasers to overwhelm and destroy only partions of Aldaraan, perhaps the shield generators themselves. Yet instead it chose to use maximum power to destroy the entire planet as a political statement.

I'm not trying to say that the Death Star was moral. Obviously it isn't for the same reason that the use of nuclear weapons or carpet bombing aren't moral. But that isn't the same thing as saying that it has no legitimate military use.

That is precisely one of my points: what purely military use is blowing up an entire planet?

Destroying powerful planetary shields, yes that makes military sense. Having a weapon that can do absolutely terrifying orbital bombardment and even crack open a planet partially to gain the resources within, yes. But that's not what the Empire used it for. The Empire used it to sow sheer terror in a questionable galactic-wide blanket strategy of ruling and relying on fear.

But this concept depends on just how much power it takes to beat a planetary shield. If it takes enough power that the overkill that destroyed a planet was simply a side effect, than there wasn't any other way to do it.

That's an assumption that makes little sense, although to prove it would require a working theory of how shields work in the SW universe.

However, I see no reason if the power of the super-laser was adjusted to why it would require planet-destroying overkill to overcome shields. The energy required to blow up a planet like that is ridiculous. Overshooting the energy so that it causes large craters or even deep holes would make sense. You could destroy the planet by puncturing the mantle that would require less energy.

The film however makes it clear why they blew up Aldaraan: they wanted it to be an example to all potentially rebellious members of the Empire. If you support the Rebellion you will be destroyed wholesale, no mercy and no discrimination and with everyone and everything you own.

Other things can work in the right circumstances, but the most efficient way of stopping Jedi is Sith. It is no coincidence that Palpatine sent Maul to Naboo in TP

Yes, because Lucas wanted a grand show-off with lightsabre battle and a Sith-Jedi clash.

IIRC Maul was originally sent to capture the Queen so she couldn't interfere with them and the Jedi were in the way. Maul was Palpatine's most reliable, capable and loyal agent that was completely secret, any other method would have been riskier to expose him and Maul's surprise appearance would have been enough to overpower the Jedi defending the Queen (or so Palpatine thought). A quick look at the script shows that it isn't clear whether Palpatine even knew that the Queen had a Jedi escort (although I may have that wrong).

"Most efficient" is always arguable, but you are right that another Force-user would be able to counter some or all of the Jedi's own Force-powers. How much is disable the other's foresight and mental battle fits into this is questionable and no mention of mental-battles during duels are made in the films.

However that does not mean that the opponent has to be a Sith, or even a Dark-side user.

It also does not say that only a Force-user would be effective against them. Griveous's Magna-Guards could stand up against Jedi by being designed to fight them. Jango Fett was able to stand up to Obi-Wan. Clearly cybernetics, the right equipment and the right training would allow one to overpower the Jedi.

I would agree that this is what happened, but it still required Sith in power for it to work.

Let me clarify: I wasn't talking about Palpatine and Dooku's Force powers, I am talking about their other kinds of power they wielded as leaders. Their decisions will directly effect what events will occur or not, so they have a greater hold over probilities. Jedi see several futures, so probabilities and choke-points of timelines come into play.

Predicting the future requires to foresee what decisions will people make. Having a Dark Side presence or even a regular Force-presence may mean that you are much harder to predict or even unable. I don't recall Jedi being often able to foresee what other Jedi will do or with clarity. This may be the use of the Force itself hard to predict or just the greater ability of Force-users allowing them a wide spread of possible decisions.

As Luke began developing his abilities it in effect created a shroud of the Light Side that hampered Palpatine's abilities. Like the Jedi, he never considered the possibility that he would lose his position of strength and was thus ill-prepared for several wild cards.

This is where your theory gets weaker: if you could create shrouds like this with the Light Side, why didn't the Jedi do this when they were at the height of their power? Why didn't they do this when they knew that the Sith still existed? By the events of TPM they knew, Yoda knew and so did the Council.

If they didn't know how, then how did Luke learn a completely new ability with his hasty and short training? If Yoda knew, why didn't Yoda use it or teach it?

There is no mention of creating it and if this was part of the intention, they never mention it. Yet if your theory holds, it would have been an important aspect of the fight between Light and Dark. At least as far as I know.

The 2003 Clone Wars is no longer canon.

Irrelevant. The fact that he managed to gather several lightsabers as trophies testifies to him able to kill Jedi.

In the 2008 series he generally loses against Jedi, even padawan Ashoka is able to get the better of him, though it was a rather tough fight for her

I don't recall him losing often, lots of standstills or escapes from him, yes. Sometimes he was surprised too, like with the Gungans, which I recall is his most direct defeat.

But regardless it was during the Clone Wars after the shroud of the Dark Side had clouded the vision of Jedi to the point that they were unable to see.

Then how did Asoka foresee Padmé's assassination? She had ever-clearing foresight visions of Padmé's assassination. An entire episode was devoted to this.

The dialog may only refer to long-term foresight, not short or mid-term. If short-term foresight is necessary to dodge and deflect blaster bolts, than the Jedi were still quite able to do that, often charging head-on into battle, confident that they can deflect blaster fire. The dialog says that their abilities with the Force lessened, not cancelled or blocked.

But the point is that he intuitively knew it. That requires extremely accurate foresight. And Anakin's advantages hardly helped him previously, Qui-Gon knew it would help this time when it never had before.

A quick look at the script (on IMDB, may be a earlier draft) shows that he didn't try with his own podracer yet. There is mention of Watto making him do it but also that Watto doesn't know of Anakin's own podracer. Qui-Gon actually says that it's impressive for a human to even manage one. Also, Qui-Gon's assistance and knowledge about pod-racing may have also given Anakin a greater chance.

It would make sense that Watto gave Anakin an inferior pod-racer. The fact that he managed to just survive it is evidence that Anakin can use the Force the required way and that he is a talented racer. Even child-Mozart would struggle to play properly or at least to his full potential on inferior violins. Give someone who has played bad instrument for all their musical lifetime and then give them a good quality instrument, they'll be amazed how much more they can do.

Qui-Gon also believed that the Force "leads" people into destines. So his intuitive knowledge may be partially blind faith. The fact that his test came back soaringly positive also gave him reason for confidence.

The script makes it clear that Qui-Gon was making a gamble. He didn't sit down, meditate, have a vision and emerge 100% sure that the boy would win. He had reasons to believe that Anakin will win. His foresight may or may not have played part of it, but it wasn't foresight alone that drove his decision. His confidence clearly changed after he tested Anakin.

Given my thesis that it requires Sith to oppose Jedi reliably(not that others can't pull it off, but it requires some other massive advantage to be successful), if there are no Dark Side practitioners to oppose those who follow the Light, they would be problematic from a storytelling perspective. It's the same reason that superheroes don't work without supervillains.

Superman versus Batman was one of the most popular mashups. Superheroes sometimes do fight each other and so do villains. It made it into film (I haven't seen it though).

Comic supers also have greater spread than Jedi do. Comic supers can have a wide range of various levels and kinds of superpowers, much greater and sometimes much more powerful than what any Jedi demonstrated (Magneto's refined ability to manipulate ferromagnetics would put Yoda to shame). Sometimes superheroes win against villains who has a massive advantage against them, sometime villains do too.

That is beside the point however. The Lightside/Darkside is built within Star Wars canon and is what produces the Jedi/Sith dynamic. This dynamic can be expanded upon, explored, more varied shades found between the two.

But at the very least, other Force-using traditions can be made, such as the Night-sisters. Having them be a formidable threat is a requirement but not an impossible or even hard creative challenge (making it fit continuity makes it harder but not that much so).

Why would he have to do anything visibly? The simple fact that he was standing there would have an impact. And the Jedi was clearly concentrating on Dooku at the time regardless, that alone would have had an impact.

He would do anything visibly because it's a movie and if he was doing something like that, it would be shown in some way. He could have done a gesture, made an expression, used the camera to indicate a mind-attack.

Furthermore, this is where the "unproveable" part comes in: your theory requires evidence and there is no evidenece of this in this case. There is also no evidence that the Sith conciously created the Shroud of Darkness of had precise control over it.

The fact that other Jedi die in the battle in the arena reinforces the fact that Jedi can be overwhelmed and killed by conventional means.

Instead the scene is used to establish how badass Jango Fett is to create tension for his battle with Windu. It thus establishes that a non-Force User can clearly overpower a Jedi.

I really wonder if the SW galaxy treats children differently than Earth. It seems that in general they give much more responsibility to children than we do today. As a side note, that is beyond stupid to begin training children to serve as stormtroopers. There is no logical reason for such an extended training program, especially considering how useless they are in combat in that series.

Or the Empire needs loyal stormtroopers and it is best to start at that from the potential soldiers being young. Training them young means that they will be far less exposed to anti-imperial sentiment and there would be control over how they form their political opinions.

The Republic didn't use child-soldiers in that sense. We see Clone cadets being sent to a live military ship as part of their training. They were not pressed or even implied to be sent on combat missions, that would be only after they finished their training.

Note that ideological training does not necessarily mean combat training. Or that all stormtroopers were trained this way.

The stormtroopers were ineffectual because that's how the script wanted them to be. My theory is bad equipment combined with some stormtroopers being just shit. The Empire does have a quantity over quality thing.

I doubt the Rebels/New Republic would ever wear that armor, regardless of how economical it is.

I can, although I can see why they wanted to avoid doing that in the films. Easy visual identification.

But otherwise it would make sense that Rebels would take Stormtrooper armor and paint it into their colors. If nothing else, than it would be logical to loot Imperial supplies, including armor. If its true that the armor is also a sophisticated environment suit as well, than maybe running the armor would also be expensive for the Rebellion. Especially if they have aliens that are or can adept to environments that Stormtroopers would require armor for.

I can also imagine that this would be limited or controlled within the Rebellion in some fashion for political reasons. They wanted to avoid dressing as the enemy.
In the case of Endor, I would also imagine that they deliberately choose less armor in favor of relying on stealth. Being in clumsy, big armor that may give off a notable energy/thermal signature would have been avoided in favour of camouflage and stealth (and for carrying more heavy weapons). They originally planned a hit-and-run strike.

[Adam Reynolds]

How is that relevant? It's a galaxy far, far away, why would they use the American or even Roman system as opposed to having their own?

I should say under any reasonable representative democracy.

And how much of the Outer Rim was Republic territory? If it was, then you have a point. But Tatooine wasn't Republic territory and thus not under the jurisdiction of the Jedi.

My theory is also that by the time of TPM, Jedi were made into part of the Republic's branch, including with all its limitations.

That is true, but the point is that they didn't at all care about those outside their system and based on the existence of the Trade Federation, were content to exploit it in much the same way as the first world today.

You are missing the point of "an ENTIRE FUCKING PLANET was destroyed".

This depends of whether it was the pure intent, or a side effect of going up against planetary shields. As for the numbers arguement. Conceeded. I was largely going with the inversion of the point Steven Pinker made in Better Angels of Our Nature, that looking at strict numbers means that the fact that recent wars are more violent translates to modern humanity is more violent. The point is that as population(and corresponding technology) increases wars kill more people. Though I took it too far.

That is precisely one of my points: what purely military use is blowing up an entire planet?

Destroying powerful planetary shields, yes that makes military sense. Having a weapon that can do absolutely terrifying orbital bombardment and even crack open a planet partially to gain the resources within, yes. But that's not what the Empire used it for. The Empire used it to sow sheer terror in a questionable galactic-wide blanket strategy of ruling and relying on fear.

As I said, that depends on the effectiveness of planetary shielding grids.

That's an assumption that makes little sense, although to prove it would require a working theory of how shields work in the SW universe.

We know that shields in Star Wars have properties similar to modern armor, that only a certain level of firepower has any effect at all. It's the reason that starfighter weapons aren't really used capital ships shields*. It requires a certain level of firepower to even wear down the shields.

*Unless they can get in close and hit shield seams. Or if you believe Brian Young's argument, fly under shields.

However, I see no reason if the power of the super-laser was adjusted to why it would require planet-destroying overkill to overcome shields. The energy required to blow up a planet like that is ridiculous. Overshooting the energy so that it causes large craters or even deep holes would make sense. You could destroy the planet by puncturing the mantle that would require less energy.

If their goal was simply destroying the planet, why would they use a weapon that was six orders of magnitude stronger than it needed to be? This would be akin to using a two megaton bomb against an aircraft carrier. The level of overkill had no value, even as a propaganda weapon. Thus the only reasonable reason to use it was to overcome planetary shields efficiently. It might be possible to do this more slowly, and that would of course be the more moral approach, and that any moral commander would choose, but if one is interested in being brutally efficient it takes the overwhelming resources of a Death Star.

The film however makes it clear why they blew up Aldaraan: they wanted it to be an example to all potentially rebellious members of the Empire. If you support the Rebellion you will be destroyed wholesale, no mercy and no discrimination and with everyone and everything you own.

I agree that this was the strategy that led them there, and that it is clearly an awful one to use. I am arguing from the technical perspective that if we assume the scorched earth strategy, why would they use such an ineffecient way of reaching it.

Yes, because Lucas wanted a grand show-off with lightsabre battle and a Sith-Jedi clash.

Are we arguing in universe or out of universe? Because if it's the latter, two billion people didn't die, a prop did.

IIRC Maul was originally sent to capture the Queen so she couldn't interfere with them and the Jedi were in the way. Maul was Palpatine's most reliable, capable and loyal agent that was completely secret, any other method would have been riskier to expose him and Maul's surprise appearance would have been enough to overpower the Jedi defending the Queen (or so Palpatine thought). A quick look at the script shows that it isn't clear whether Palpatine even knew that the Queen had a Jedi escort (although I may have that wrong).

Palpatine clearly knew the Jedi were escorting the Queen on Tatooine, hence his line "Move against the Jedi first." I was referring to the fact that Palpatine sent Maul to Naboo to oppose the Jedi, knowing that without him, the Trade Federation would fold. He was presumably hoping to effectively start the Clone Wars on Naboo by turning it into a drawn out and increasingly bloodly occupation(especially if Maul were to assassinate Padme in Trade Federation custody after she signed the treaty). This obviously failed and it delayed his plans by a decade.

"Most efficient" is always arguable, but you are right that another Force-user would be able to counter some or all of the Jedi's own Force-powers. How much is disable the other's foresight and mental battle fits into this is questionable and no mention of mental-battles during duels are made in the films.

I thought it was more a question of not even remotely being able to sense their motives, hence being much less able to predict their actions. They would still have their combat precog that allowed them to deflect blows, but it would be greately reduced as the Jedi tired. This was what killed Qui-Gon and why Obi-Wan lost so quickly to Dooku in both encounters after a pitched battle in both cases.

However that does not mean that the opponent has to be a Sith, or even a Dark-side user.

Jedi aren't infallible, but without Sith to oppose them are clearly dominant. Though I agree it might be interesting to see other alternative conflicts among Jedi. Among the more interesting possibilities would be something similar to the upcoming Captain America Civil War film in which two groups of good guys fight over whether Jedi should be directly accountable to the Republic or somewhat more independent. The key conflict would be a schism over the role of Jedi in the galaxy, with some arguing that their primary function should be to combat injustice in any form opposed by those that argue that their function should be to maintain balance in the galaxy. Those type of moral dilemmas would be extremely interesting if they could occasionally be punctuated by clashing blue and green lightsabers. That might even be an interesting color choice for either of the above ideas, one faction chooses blue while the other green.

This could occur as the Jedi are rebuilding and thus not really powerful enough to operate on their own. That might work after the Jedi start seriously rebuilding, presumably after the new movies. It would be especially interesting if we saw both sides led by oposing characters from the films such as Finn or Rey. Not really sure how Luke would fit into this.

It also does not say that only a Force-user would be effective against them. Griveous's Magna-Guards could stand up against Jedi by being designed to fight them. Jango Fett was able to stand up to Obi-Wan. Clearly cybernetics, the right equipment and the right training would allow one to overpower the Jedi.

But my fundamental point was that this only occurred after the power of Jedi were weakened in that they were less able to avoid walking into ambushes. Clearly Grevious was effective against lower level Jedi. But based on what we saw in ROTS, and to a lesser extent Clone Wars, he seemed to win by endurance, using his droids to soften his enemies. The original 2003 Clone Wars depiction in which he fought a half dozen Jedi alone is no longer canon considered his current depictions.

As for Jango, he only escaped with his life after using literally every trick in his toolbox(including fire support from his starship), he never had any serious chance of killing Obi-Wan. And this was when the Jedi was only out to capture him. Mace Windu killed him without too much trouble.

Let me clarify: I wasn't talking about Palpatine and Dooku's Force powers, I am talking about their other kinds of power they wielded as leaders. Their decisions will directly effect what events will occur or not, so they have a greater hold over probilities. Jedi see several futures, so probabilities and choke-points of timelines come into play.

Predicting the future requires to foresee what decisions will people make. Having a Dark Side presence or even a regular Force-presence may mean that you are much harder to predict or even unable. I don't recall Jedi being often able to foresee what other Jedi will do or with clarity. This may be the use of the Force itself hard to predict or just the greater ability of Force-users allowing them a wide spread of possible decisions.

I agree that it is a mostly passive ability, that was only worsened by the violence and hatred of the Clone Wars. Which might be a reason for using clones, that they would constantly surround a Jedi with negative emotions against the CIS, but Order 66 was strictly business and so less likely to be felt by any but the strongest Jedi(hence Yoda being the only one to see it).

That would be the weakness of a Thrawn like character that wasn't Force sensitive. They would never be able to stop a Jedi. There are only two options that come to mind. The first and most effectiveis not planning at all, as used by Lando and Han in ROTJ. Lando came up with a nearly suicidal battle tactic as a means of limiting the effectiveness of the Death Star while Han came up with an on the spot plan involving utlizing a stolen AT-ST. Had either of those been planned, it would have likely failed due to the Emperor forseeing it. The other alternative, which was used in the movie Push,* is to used a plan involving a series of preplanned messages that are given at a specific time so as to avoid an opponent who was a mind reader. The problem with that plan is that it would only work if the one who created the messages was a Force user whose was immune to mind reading.

*Which wasn't very good overall, though this idea was interesting. It did at least amusingly feature a young Captain America as a morally bankrupt not quite superhero.

This is where your theory gets weaker: if you could create shrouds like this with the Light Side, why didn't the Jedi do this when they were at the height of their power? Why didn't they do this when they knew that the Sith still existed? By the events of TPM they knew, Yoda knew and so did the Council.

If they didn't know how, then how did Luke learn a completely new ability with his hasty and short training? If Yoda knew, why didn't Yoda use it or teach it?

There is no mention of creating it and if this was part of the intention, they never mention it. Yet if your theory holds, it would have been an important aspect of the fight between Light and Dark. At least as far as I know.

I mean that this is mostly a passive ability caused by the increase in power of the Light and Dark Sides respectively. As for the Jedi using this ability against the Sith, by the time that it was known it was too late. The Jedi had already been losing their abilities. Hence their failure to realize that the Clone Army was created until they found it by accident(at least from their perspective, obviously Sidious intended for it to be found).

Based on the ROTS novelization, Palpatine apparently had some control given that he lifted it around Obi-Wan and Anakin when they rescued him from the Invisible Hand. Hence Obi-Wan's complete control on the bridge. Though without that there is no evidence it is an active ability.

Then how did Asoka foresee Padmé's assassination? She had ever-clearing foresight visions of Padmé's assassination. An entire episode was devoted to this.

The dialog may only refer to long-term foresight, not short or mid-term. If short-term foresight is necessary to dodge and deflect blaster bolts, than the Jedi were still quite able to do that, often charging head-on into battle, confident that they can deflect blaster fire. The dialog says that their abilities with the Force lessened, not cancelled or blocked.

I don't mean they were completely blind, just that they were blind enough. Just before the darkest moments in ROTS Mace Windu is still able to sense a plot to destroy the Jedi. Short term foresight is probably less affected as when Order 66 hits Ki-Adi Mundi is still able to deflect blaster fire from his clones, despite his confusion as to their betrayal. Yoda is even able to sense Order 66 just before it occurs, being the only Jedi we see who does this successfully.

The script makes it clear that Qui-Gon was making a gamble. He didn't sit down, meditate, have a vision and emerge 100% sure that the boy would win. He had reasons to believe that Anakin will win. His foresight may or may not have played part of it, but it wasn't foresight alone that drove his decision. His confidence clearly changed after he tested Anakin.

Perhaps a better example is his immediate knowledge that there was something wrong over Naboo, or that Padme was in danger despite the Trade Federation apparently only wanting to sign a treaty. Contrast this with AOTC in which Obi-Wan has a harder time reading the emotions of the Kaminioans. He doesn't say that I don't sense any involvement, he says that there appears to be no motive.

Superman versus Batman was one of the most popular mashups. Superheroes sometimes do fight each other and so do villains. It made it into film (I haven't seen it though).

Comic supers also have greater spread than Jedi do. Comic supers can have a wide range of various levels and kinds of superpowers, much greater and sometimes much more powerful than what any Jedi demonstrated (Magneto's refined ability to manipulate ferromagnetics would put Yoda to shame). Sometimes superheroes win against villains who has a massive advantage against them, sometime villains do too.

The key strength of Jedi is versatility. Magneto may have impressive raw power but has no ability to read minds or see into the future. On the opposite side Professor X is stuck in a wheelchair.

That is beside the point however. The Lightside/Darkside is built within Star Wars canon and is what produces the Jedi/Sith dynamic. This dynamic can be expanded upon, explored, more varied shades found between the two.

I agree that we should see more diversity. See my two above weakly defined concepts. My point is more that Jedi need to be opposed by fellow Force users. As well as that the idea of Sith ever truly disappearing is unlikely.

But at the very least, other Force-using traditions can be made, such as the Night-sisters. Having them be a formidable threat is a requirement but not an impossible or even hard creative challenge (making it fit continuity makes it harder but not that much so).

It actually fits my original idea based loosely on the various Force users in the post-ROTJ EU. I had the feeling that after the Sith were destroyed and before the Jedi were fully formed to restore peace, there was a power gap within the Force that strengthened whatever groups had survived the Empire. Thus groups like the Nightsisters or Jensaarai proliferated. I would somewhat like Kylo Ren to have a similar role, not really being a true Sith.

He would do anything visibly because it's a movie and if he was doing something like that, it would be shown in some way. He could have done a gesture, made an expression, used the camera to indicate a mind-attack.

Furthermore, this is where the "unproveable" part comes in: your theory requires evidence and there is no evidenece of this in this case. There is also no evidence that the Sith conciously created the Shroud of Darkness of had precise control over it.

The fact that other Jedi die in the battle in the arena reinforces the fact that Jedi can be overwhelmed and killed by conventional means.

Instead the scene is used to establish how badass Jango Fett is to create tension for his battle with Windu. It thus establishes that a non-Force User can clearly overpower a Jedi.

Whether or not Sith had direct control is irrelevant. The point is that it took them for it to occur. And in that particular case, Dooku didn't have to do anything when the Jedi attacked him. Jango was able to shoot the Jedi because he was focusing his attention on Dooku, not the random bounty hunter.

As for other Jedi dying, obviously it is possible to outright overwhelm Jedi with superior firepower and numbers. But it is often difficult to do so easily given the general habit of Jedi relying on stealth tactics. Geonosis was an anomaly based on a need for a real army that didn't yet exist. I doubt Jedi would ever make the mistake of massing enough numbers that someone is able to deploy that level of firepower to be able to kill them again. Especially if they don't have much in the way of numbers, which I highly doubt will be the case in the new movie.

Or the Empire needs loyal stormtroopers and it is best to start at that from the potential soldiers being young. Training them young means that they will be far less exposed to anti-imperial sentiment and there would be control over how they form their political opinions.

That would make sense. We certainly see that stormtroopers are fanatical to the extreme, literally marching directly into oncoming blaster fire. Loyalty and willingness to resort to brutality is probably seen as more important than combat ability, given the fact that the main job of stormtroopers is oppressing an unhappy populace.

The stormtroopers were ineffectual because that's how the script wanted them to be. My theory is bad equipment combined with some stormtroopers being just shit. The Empire does have a quantity over quality thing.

I've personally always had the opinion that like Clone Wars before it, Rebels shouldn't be considered visually canon in the same sense as the films. So the extremely useless stormtroopers are something of an embellishment. Not that they were necessarily effective, but that they weren't as useless as often portrayed. We see much less stupidity on the part of stormtroopers in the films. And in most cases we have justifications for their mistakes.

The same could be said about battle droids in Clone Wars as opposed to the films.

In the case of Endor, I would also imagine that they deliberately choose less armor in favor of relying on stealth. Being in clumsy, big armor that may give off a notable energy/thermal signature would have been avoided in favour of camouflage and stealth (and for carrying more heavy weapons). They originally planned a hit-and-run strike.

I wonder if it was the case that the backpacks the Rebel units carried also worked as limited sensor jammers? That was always an idea that I've had for some reason.

[Knife]

In regards to the ability to see the future with Jedi and Sith, I agree that it is their most prolific power. I disagree though, that the shroud of the dark side is an actual power with 3 sec cast time and immune to CC. I think Adamskywalker talked about possibilities in the future that Force users can see. For Jedi, it takes more meditation, calmness, and time to see further and further into the future and even then it is cloudy. Yoda in ESB describes it "Difficult to see. Always in motion is the future. "

I really don't think it is different for Palpatine either since he meticulously planed out events based on his foresight, " Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen." But we know that some things slip through. Either Palpatine didn't see the victory for the rebels, or discounted it as a vague possibility.

So the way I view the Jedi losing their 'power' due to the shroud of the darkside is two opposing sides more or less trying to manipulate the same future, which interferes with the opposing side. The Sith are more successful with it due to their low numbers, their prep work prior to screwing with the future events, and the fact that the Jedi were not aware of them for some time as their machinations started to screw with future events.

As an aside, I do also feel the Force as more or less a god like figure in the SW universe, and that the Force itself allowed a lot of what happened to happen, IE the prophecy for balance, and fed Palpatine what he needed for a great upheaval but hid some info from him so Palpatine could be cleared out of the way as well.

[Adam Reynolds]

In regards to the ability to see the future with Jedi and Sith, I agree that it is their most prolific power. I disagree though, that the shroud of the dark side is an actual power with 3 sec cast time and immune to CC. I think Adamskywalker talked about possibilities in the future that Force users can see. For Jedi, it takes more meditation, calmness, and time to see further and further into the future and even then it is cloudy. Yoda in ESB describes it "Difficult to see. Always in motion is the future. "

Zixinus largely made the same point, not me. I was mainly just arguing that without one faction to oppose the other, it doesn't really work as the one faction becomes too powerful. I was also making the point that a chessmaster character(like Thrawn) who was not Force sensitive would never be capable of beating a Jedi.

I really don't think it is different for Palpatine either since he meticulously planed out events based on his foresight, " Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen." But we know that some things slip through. Either Palpatine didn't see the victory for the rebels, or discounted it as a vague possibility.

Or the fact that Luke and Leia were involved kept him from seeing what would happen(effectively a shroud of the lightside), combined with the fact that Lando, Han and Chewie never planned their desperate strategies in the battle and thus were not easily predicted.

And his plans in the prequels hardly went perfectly. Qui-Gon's actions in TPM were something of a thorn in the side of his plans. I seriously doubt he intended for the occupation of Naboo to end so quickly, and he certainly never planned on losing his apprentice.

So the way I view the Jedi losing their 'power' due to the shroud of the darkside is two opposing sides more or less trying to manipulate the same future, which interferes with the opposing side. The Sith are more successful with it due to their low numbers, their prep work prior to screwing with the future events, and the fact that the Jedi were not aware of them for some time as their machinations started to screw with future events.

I mostly agree here with regard to the prequels, but for ROTJ the inverse happened for the opposite reason as I state above.

As an aside, I do also feel the Force as more or less a god like figure in the SW universe, and that the Force itself allowed a lot of what happened to happen, IE the prophecy for balance, and fed Palpatine what he needed for a great upheaval but hid some info from him so Palpatine could be cleared out of the way as well.

I highly doubt this. Jedi and Sith have the ability to create their own destinies. And they are counteracted by each other rather than having a sentient Force that controls them. And I believe we have had this discussion before, but I see a better analogy as a flowing river. It can either control you, or you can use it.

Just out of curiosity, are you religious in reality? I'm wondering if that is what this divide comes down to.

[Knife]

No I'm a staunch atheist, almost militant. But I enjoy mythology and literature and can usually pick out themes easy enough. Most of what I see in the movies shows a divine like plan going on, grand scheme shit. Corrupt Republic needs to be swept aside, let Dark Side dude sweep it aside, build in emergency pressure release in the Skywalker clan to sweep Dark side away. Result, fresh slate and balance.

It's almost Asmovian, is that a word?

Lots of stuff in the movies points towards a 'Living Force' that acts on it's own.

[The Romulan Republic]

That is basically saying that vast numbers of innocent people needed to be murdered and the galaxy needed to be run by Sith as part of a divine plan. While that's not entirely out of line with some fairly mainstream theology, its not something I'm personally comfortable with and honestly seems a little dark for Star Wars. Its basically saying "Genocide was necessary for the greater good."

And the idea that balance meant wiping out the Republic is also, I believe, not what Lucas intended. Hasn't he been quoted outright saying that the Dark Side was the imbalance in the Force, or am I incorrect?

[Adam Reynolds]

No I'm a staunch atheist, almost militant. But I enjoy mythology and literature and can usually pick out themes easy enough. Most of what I see in the movies shows a divine like plan going on, grand scheme shit. Corrupt Republic needs to be swept aside, let Dark Side dude sweep it aside, build in emergency pressure release in the Skywalker clan to sweep Dark side away. Result, fresh slate and balance.

I thought the grand scheme was from successive generations of increasingly powerful Sith Lords, not the cosmic Force itself. The only response of the Force was to create the Skywalkers after the SIth began attempting to dabble with the nature of the Force itself(Plagueis attempting to forestall death).

Lots of stuff in the movies points towards a 'Living Force' that acts on it's own.

But we still see the key moments in the story being based on human choices. If Anakin had chosen differently in Palpatine's office the corruption of the Republic would have stayed mostly intact. Unless we assume that Anakin had no free will, an absurd concept. Though I would agree that the Force itself is amoral, the morality of the thing comes from the one using it. And the Dark Side is addicting given that the Force makes emotions much more raw for everyone. The feeling of power is one that is extremely easy to be addicted to in reality as well(see the issue of video game addiction, which is largely based upon the power fantasy that it creates).

And the idea that balance meant wiping out the Republic is also, I believe, not what Lucas intended. Hasn't he been quoted outright saying that the Dark Side was the imbalance in the Force, or am I incorrect?

In an interview with Bill Moyers, Lucas refereed to it as a cancer that would destroy both the host and itself, while the light side allowed a symbiotic relationship. But that seems contradicted by the Mortis arc in Clone Wars, which Lucas himself apparently had a role in. In that it is stated that Anakin needs to keep both extremes in check.

Though I otherwise agree that it is too dark a theme for Star Wars.

[Adam Reynolds]

Here is an interesting fact. Just like the double bladed lightsaber before it, the crossguard lightsaber also originated in the EU. And as usual, the EU depiction is even worse. It only has a second lightsaber blade going out one side, which seems even less practical.

Interestingly when I was looking at Wookiepedia, the double bladed lightsaber only had two appearances before its film debut in TPM.

[Terralthra]

I really don't think it is different for Palpatine either since he meticulously planed out events based on his foresight, " Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen." But we know that some things slip through. Either Palpatine didn't see the victory for the rebels, or discounted it as a vague possibility.

Or the fact that Luke and Leia were involved kept him from seeing what would happen(effectively a shroud of the lightside), combined with the fact that Lando, Han and Chewie never planned their desperate strategies in the battle and thus were not easily predicted.

My interpretation has always been that Palpatine may have been so focused on the last of the Jedi, Anakin and his children, that he neglected the real threat. Future sight doesn't help if you're scrying the wrong target, so to speak, and no matter what happened in that throne room, the DSII was going to get blown up: Luke has practically zero impact on the space battle. His last tangible effect on the grand conflict was levitating C-3PO.

[The Romulan Republic]

Would the Death Star blowing up have been that big a deal to Palpatine? The Empire survived losing a Death Star before and its doubtful Palpatine himself would have died. The station didn't blow up instantly and the film appears to show Imperial personnel evacuating. Even if Palpatine sensed nothing coming (dubious), might not Palpatine have had time to make it to a shuttle (though it would have been hilarious if after all that he died when his fleeing shuttle was shot down)?

[Terralthra]

Would the Death Star blowing up have been that big a deal to Palpatine? The Empire survived losing a Death Star before and its doubtful Palpatine himself would have died. The station didn't blow up instantly and the film appears to show Imperial personnel evacuating. Even if Palpatine sensed nothing coming (dubious), might not Palpatine have had time to make it to a shuttle (though it would have been hilarious if after all that he died when his fleeing shuttle was shot down)?

It's possible, but far from a sure thing. Luke delayed by dragging Vader to the hangar and having a brief conversation with him as he died, but even so, he was dodging flaming debris on his way out with (presumably) Palpatine's shuttle. I don't remember how the scenes were interleaved, exactly, so I can't tell you if Luke was trying to evacuate the station before the Falcon blew the reactor. Either way, it was a near thing. Palpatine might've made it off, but as you say, his shuttle might've been shot down on the way out by the victorious rebel fleet anyway.

[Zixinus]

I'm not going to dwelve too much into my reply because the last one took too long to write as it is.

Adamskywalker007, the problem with your theory is that it assumes things without which events still make sense. For example, you assume that a fully-trained Jedi is basically a demi-god in power. There is one simple point of counter-evidence to this: General Krell (unless you don't consider him canon).

Krell fell to the Dark Side and thus was not hindered by it. Yet a bunch of clones still managed to get him and he was still surprised by the tentacle-flower-thing. Krell was killed on his knees unable to foresee that Dogma would kill him either.

So the explanation that the Dark Shroud mainly effects long-term foresight is still workable. It explains why Krell was able to foresee the future yet still get beaten by non-Force users. Saying Jango was defeated by one of the best fighters of the entire Order does not dismiss the point. The Jedi Jango killed clearly deflected the first few shots and paid attention to Jango but still lost. Cad Bane also managed to fight Jedi and even win.

You are also making the mistake that you assume that all Jedi would have that powerful foresight. Each Jedi's skills with the Force varied and I think it is safe to assume that the people most hindered by it were the most powerful users of Force-foresight like Yoda. Not everyone is as powerful as him or as skilled at it, foresight was Yoda's specialty.

Diversifying Force-users you are also mixing up terminologies a bit. Not everyone who uses the Dark Side is a Sith, such as the Night-sisters. Being Sith isn't just using the Dark Side but a tradition with its own philosophy, methods, techniques, etc. The same could be true for the Jedi.

There is no evidence that lightsaber colors have significant meaning beyond arbitrary choice by the creators. In-universe it seems entirely random or dependent on the crystal, donnu what's the lore on lightsabers after Disney's canon-reset beyond what I seen in Rebels (I didn't like how Ezra was just given a crystal rather than him finding one). The few unusually colored lightsabers could be from their creators using non-traditional sources for crystals. It would explain the relative consistency.


On the Death-Star thing, the best argument I can say is that maybe they made a planet-destroying laser because some planet's planatery shield are really that powerful (I'd imagine Coruscant's) and in that instance, Vader deliberately chose maximum power rather than just enough.