StarDestroyer.Net BBS

If Sith are the only people to use lightning, then that has implications, since Jedi don't use it even for "good" purposes. There would be nothing particularly morally reprehensible about a Jedi using lightning against a Sith, for example. By comparison, having a red lightsaber crystal would presumably not be of similar potential utility, video game mechanics notwithstanding.

Arawn Fenn wrote:

Havok wrote:he doesn't show "dark side powers" he shows powers that all Jedi and Sith have and use equally. Only lightning is unique.

Don't forget Force ghosting. ( Not to mention the fact that the Jedi apparently can't Save People From Death ).

On the first point, we have only GL's word that you have to be a good guy to become a Force ghost (I don't know what our Word of Lucas policy is), and Ajunta Pall in KOTOR1 probably contradicts it. (I say "probably" because he's visibly regretting his actions by the time the player character finds his ghost, but doesn't think he's redeemable.)

Metahive wrote:Ah, but when Vader throws shit at Luke on Bespin he does so without waving his hands around

Also, Luke levitates Threepio while unable to move his hands around.

He does close his eyes and start meditating, though we might put that down to him not yet being completely confident in his powers yet.

StarSword wrote:On the first point, we have only GL's word that you have to be a good guy to become a Force ghost (I don't know what our Word of Lucas policy is)

I guess I would phrase it as ghosting being a (strongly) light side skill, but you also have to learn the technique. The idea that Sith can't do it was supposed to come out in Qui-Gon's ROTS dialogue, but it was cut. However, it's visually represented in the films by simply never showing a Sith ghost while using the appearance of Anakin Skywalker's ghost as evidence of his "redemption" ( return to the light side ).

StarSword wrote:and Ajunta Pall in KOTOR1 probably contradicts it. (I say "probably" because he's visibly regretting his actions by the time the player character finds his ghost, but doesn't think he's redeemable.)

I'm not 100% sure what KOTOR's Pall is supposed to be; he could be a so-called "Sith spirit" as seen in earlier EU, which ( though somewhat similar ) is supposed to be something distinct from Jedi Force ghosting.

Batman wrote:

Well what are the "evil" powers that Palpatine would use? Outside of lightning, which I have always maintained is not anymore "evil" than TK, what else is there?

I got nothing. Heck I can't even tell you why lightning would be automatically Dark Side besides the fact that far as I can tell only Dark Siders use it.

On the Light Side, it is called Electric Judgement where the lightning is either yellow or green.[/s]

Forget it, it has already been mentioned. Derp...

Arawn Fenn wrote:

Havok wrote:he doesn't show "dark side powers" he shows powers that all Jedi and Sith have and use equally. Only lightning is unique.

Don't forget Force ghosting. ( Not to mention the fact that the Jedi apparently can't Save People From Death ).

Don't confuse can't with won't. Everything about the Jedi says don't fear death. The entire point of the Sith is to amass power, which you can't keep when you are dead.

Havok wrote:And all that says to me is Sith power, not "Dark Side" power.

Same thing: the reason Jedi don't use such powers is because they are created by the dark side.

Not the same thing. The Sith is just a philosophy on how to use the Force. They'v e spent eons learning how to use the Force in line with that philosophy. Lightning is a technique they created. It's not a naturally occurring power that is in the "dark side" pool of powers. Geezuz fucking Christ, stop thinking of the Force as a video game mechanic.

Havok wrote:It's just silly to think the Force has two separate power sets

It's not silly to think the Force has two sides.

Yes it is. It's actually idiotic.

Havok wrote:Don't confuse can't with won't.

In this case, "can't" really means "can't while remaining a true Jedi", because a Jedi could always, in theory, just say "fuck it, I'm just gonna use the dark side whenever I want". But that's a dark Jedi. The Jedi won't deliberately channel the dark side in the way that is required to use a dark side power; that's the whole point.

Havok wrote:The Sith is just a philosophy on how to use the Force.

The Sith are an organization, and their philosophy involves using the dark side in a way that the Jedi do not.

Havok wrote:It's not a naturally occurring power

What is that even supposed to mean? Any Force power that you can think of was developed as a "technique" by someone at some point.

Havok wrote:Geezuz fucking Christ, stop thinking of the Force as a video game mechanic.

I'm not. It has nothing to do with video games. Remember, in the video games you can use dark side powers all day long and there's no risk to the player's alignment. The existence of dark side powers is expressed in various sources including the novelizations and Lucas' own words, for those who missed the strong implication of side-specific powers in the films themselves. When you have distinct sides of the Force, you can have side-specific powers; it's that simple.

Havok wrote:Yes it is. It's actually idiotic.

No. A make-believe Force with two sides is actually no more "idiotic" than a make-believe Force with one side. This mystical energy field is Lucas' fictional creation, so it has as many sides as he says it does.

Tiriol wrote: The Order SHOULD have done something about Anakin's mother, yes. But then again the Order had a whole galaxy going mad in their hands and someone who had a relatively easy life (Watto didn't seem like an abusive master) probably didn't figure in the Order's plans that much, especially when they already had troubles with Anakin forming strong attachements. Encouraging it wouldn't fit their own philosophy and outlook.

About Shmi, I wouldn't be surprised if they did send someone to check on her... and, when their investigator found out that she'd been sold to a farmer who seemed like a good guy and wanted to make her a free woman and marry her, decided that she was set up and they didn't have to do anything further. Which, although somewhat callous, fits the Order's attitudes at the time.

Would the Jedi be willingly to spare any manpower for such a task? If they do this, then pretty much everyone else will want the Jedi order to send someone to check on their birth family. Sending someone to check on Shimi only sets a very bad precedence for an order that has already been overstretched.

Thematically, the Force Ghost being a 'Jedi Power' makes sense. The Sith are after immortality, but the type of immortality where they remain 'themselves' forever. Power. They never achieve it (yeah yeah EU) in the movies. The Jedi preach to release yourself, to give your self over, and lo and behold, they can achieve immortality in the Force.

So to back Havok up a bit, it is not really 'light side power/dark side powers' other than philosophy and really the users point of view. Granted, I'm a Light side/Dark side person but not as a game mechanic type thing.

ray245 wrote:Would the Jedi be willingly to spare any manpower for such a task? If they do this, then pretty much everyone else will want the Jedi order to send someone to check on their birth family. Sending someone to check on Shmi only sets a very bad precedence for an order that has already been overstretched.

It would take, at most, a day. Hell, send a mature Padawan to take care of it if there truly are no knights or masters available. And it's not like they have to announce it to the entire Jedi order; there are secret missions and all that. I mean, we are dealing with "the Chosen one" here, this is somewhat important.

Heck it's not like they'd need to send any of their own personnel. Just hire a Private Eye (possibly even one already on site) to find out. They're stretched thin for the stuff only Jedi can do, there's no indication they're hurting for funds.

Batman wrote:Heck it's not like they'd need to send any of their own personnel. Just hire a Private Eye (possibly even one already on site) to find out. They're stretched thin for the stuff only Jedi can do, there's no indication they're hurting for funds.

Indications otherwise, in fact, considering they can afford to blow a million credits' worth of precious metals on a custom-built ship as part of Anakin and Obi-wan's cover story (Rogue Planet).

Knife wrote:it is not really 'light side power/dark side powers' other than philosophy and really the users point of view.

Even if we were to treat Force ghosting as a neutral power, there's always things like Wall of Light or Force Harmony.

I realize this is just over two years beyond acceptable posting guidelines, but I might as well give my two cents for the topic as a whole:

By itself, the no attachments bit would not have been that bad, as there have been religious orders (especially Catholicism) and even secular elements (ie, the military) that forbids forming close bonds with your fellow brethren, and many times the reasons why make quite a bit of sense, as there shouldn't be any divisions of loyalty to your duty or any clouding of judgment.

However... the Jedi Order's practices of that no attachments policy when Anakin was a padawan, specifically HOW they practiced it, was definitely VERY bad. It's one thing to not marry when within a religious order, that makes sense. However, to be forbidden to even grieve for anyone you considered family or even a loved one, or even CARE if they have died (as Yoda put it in his "advice" to Anakin, "Mourn for her do not, Miss her do not"), that's just disgusting and downright callous. In fact, since Anakin was trying to actually HELP his wife from potentially dying, which, you know, the entire POINT of being a Jedi is to help people, taken logically, Yoda's inference that those things would lead to possession and jealousy and thus be the shadow of Greed, that means the Jedi themselves merely by helping people would automatically qualify in that department.

What's worse is that, when you get right down to it and really think it over, it really makes them absolutely no different from the Sith they were supposed to be fighting against, in particular Palpatine. Just look at Palpatine's actions overall, and you'd realize that, taken logically, his actions actually matched up with the no attachments rule exactly, since Palpatine did not care in any way if someone close to him died, and many times, he betrayed and murdered those that placed their loyalty and trust in him, and he explicitly considered everyone to be expendable pawns. That even included his own family, his foster father in the form of Darth Plagueis, his various Sith apprentices, most notably Dooku and Vader (and Vader's even worse since, thanks to the Grand Experiment, Vader's probably the closest Palpatine has to an actual son, and he backstabbed him twice, first with Marek, then with Luke). Heck, for a guy so hell-bent on ruling the Galaxy for all eternity that he was willing to not only clone himself and possess said clones in the event that he met a premature end, but was even willing to possess a baby just to ensure he survived, he also was shown to have a surprising amount of downright disregard for his own life, perfectly willing to gamble his own life and likely even forfeit it just for the prospect of turning a person to the Dark Side of the Force by inciting them into murdering him (in that way, he's actually pretty similar to the Joker), and one time when this failed due to outside interference, he actually attacked the guy responsible for interfering, Rahm Kota, specifically BECAUSE he essentially prevented Marek from killing Palpatine, so we can't even say he even has attachment to his own life all that much. Did I mention that Palpatine also was well within the shadow of greed without even BEING or likely even HAVING jealousy or possessiveness at all, being so cold hearted that even Hoth is downright tropical compared to this? That alone basically destroys Yoda's claim about that, and by extension Lucas's claims since that was based on Lucas's shoddy script writing and storytelling.

In fact, forget Palpatine, heck, even forgetting the Sith as a whole (whose entire doctrine of Rule of Two makes VERY clear that they literally place no attachments to anyone, certainly not to each other, willing to kill each other at a mere whim), I can cite plenty of villains in other series who display a clear disregard for any attachments to the extent that they have absolutely no qualms with betraying and murdering even those who place a significant amount of trust in them. Namely, Albert Wesker from Resident Evil (backstabbed S.T.A.R.S., Umbrella, their rival, Excella Gionne, etc., etc. Probably the only person he HASN'T backstabbed and was actually loyal to was Alex Wesker if the Japanese version of Revelations 2 is to be believed. Well, her and William Birkin, probably being the only other person Wesker seemed to actually value as a friend and tried to go out of his way to make sure he was saved. Probably the only one who's even worse of a backstabber would have been the owner of Umbrella, Oswell E. Spencer, who's essentially Palpatine if he ran a medical company, and in fact, it's implied Wesker picked up on his backstabbing and no attachments actions directly from the master, so to speak), Galenth Dysley/Barthandelus from Final Fantasy XIII (no description necessary, this video would more than suffice in demonstrating EXACTLY how Dysley/Barthandelus lacked any attachment to anyone and anything, himself included: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3UT8g3jQG0), Kefka Palazzo from Final Fantasy VI and Dissidia (basically, destroys anything in his path, doesn't even care if some of his war crimes actually result in Imperial casualties, proceeded to blow up the world AFTER backstabbing the Emperor he served under, and even indicated that life and creation were ultimately meaningless and strongly implied that it was such he was even willing to include himself among the destruction both due to nihilism and due to his being a massive sadistic psychopath to Joker levels, and Dissidia highlights this by even going so far as to make him downright suicidal in his last moments). If we were to apply the no attachments rule right down to what they'd imply in the most exact manner, those guys, some of whom are such monsters they make Palpatine seem like a total saint by comparison (at least Palpatine actually did think he was doing the right thing regarding making a Sith-based government to bring order to the galaxy. The likes of Dysley and Kefka, if they ever decided to run the Empire, would probably just blow it up out of a fit of nihilism and not even bother trying to do any order at all, being far more concerned with killing people in the most horrific manner even, in Kefka's case), would be Jedi knights. Do you see just how much of a disaster that would spell? That wouldn't breed peace in the Galaxy, that would breed mass murder just for fun.

That's actually my main problem with the way the no attachments thing was handled in the Prequels. It essentially gave the implication that the Jedi were a bunch of psychopaths who didn't care about anyone or anything. And Yoda's advice to Anakin certainly didn't help matters either. I don't have a problem with no attachments in itself, since let's face it, plenty of religious and even secular organizations have done it, but even those at least were far more reasonable than what the Jedi did (ie, while the Catholic priesthood may not allow its members to marry, they at least don't tell them to be so cold hearted as to not even mourn for anyone they cared for who died at all, or to not miss them at all, and they certainly don't imply that if you try to help someone from death, you're basically going into the shadow of greed when that inherently conflicts with the mere ideal of actually helping people.). In fact, I'd argue that the Jedi, while not selfISH, aren't even selfLESS, either. If anything, their ideal is probably far closer to nihilism, which is basically selfishness to the exteme that you aren't even willing to spare the self part (hence why it isn't really "selfish", since selfishness at least tries to make sure that the self isn't harmed in any way when hurting others). In other words, you go out of your way to harm as many people as you can, yourself included.

Sorry for the rant, but the non attachments policy as dictated in the prequel trilogy really doesn't work at all, and I really can't blame Anakin for feeling that way. If Lucas wanted us to feel sorry for the Jedi, that no attachments thing as it was handled if anything killed any sympathy for their plight as they had it coming.

Weedle McHairybug wrote:I realize this is just over two years beyond acceptable posting guidelines,

Don't do it again.

I am not even going to read the rest of your post in full.