StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Knife wrote: You don't understand the power of the dark humor. You must laugh at funny shit.

Gangsta-speak ain't no dark humor, homes! Dark humor goin' a lil mo like this:


A guy and a kid walk into a cemetary at night.

"This is scary," the kid says.

The guy says, "you think you're scared? I'm the one that's got to walk out of here alone!"

It would be funny to see ANH translated into gangsta-speak, methinks...Mayhaps I'll work on that.

Eh, I think it would get old after a while.

Gangsta-speak ain't no dark humor, homes! Dark humor goin' a lil mo like this:

Meh, first distortion of a SW quote that came to my head. Besides, I'm so white, I still think of Scareface when someone say's 'gangster'.

Chardoks interpertation was still funny.

Knife wrote:

Gangsta-speak ain't no dark humor, homes! Dark humor goin' a lil mo like this:

Meh, first distortion of a SW quote that came to my head. Besides, I'm so white, I still think of Scareface when someone say's 'gangster'.

Chardoks interpertation was still funny.

You don't need to be white for that just from Chicago will suffice for that name to pop up when someone says "Gangster." Remember tis is the guy who got away with the Valentine's Day Massacre

Kuja wrote:Eh, I think it would get old after a while.

Writing all of it Gangsta speak is a one-shot joke. Writing just one character's dialogue in ebonics--that's comedy.

His Imperial Majesty, Emperor Palpatine I, of the Galactic Empire and reigning Master and Lord Darth Sidious of the Sith Order.



After that, Jedi Master and Supreme Commander of the Imperial Armed Forces, Luke Skywalker, during Operation SHADOWHAND.

1# Emperor/Senator Palpatine
2# Darth Vader
3# Boba & Jango Fett
4# Tarkin
5# Jabba the Hutt

Pablo Sanchez wrote:

Kuja wrote:Eh, I think it would get old after a while.

Writing all of it Gangsta speak is a one-shot joke. Writing just one character's dialogue in ebonics--that's comedy.

What'sup homie.
*does strange clickie thng with hand*
How are things down on the dark-side of the hood.
*strange hand sign*

Also:

"We got Death Star!"

C3po- did you hear that? They shot down the main reactor! We'll be destroyed for sure! This is madness!
R2- bleep bloop bleep squirt....
C3P0- What? R2 What kind of language is that?! I am not a "Homey"
R2- Bleep bloop bloop
C3P0- You...What is a "Fuck you"?
R2- Bleep bloop bloop raspberry
C3P0- You're the bitch.
R2- Bleep bloop
C3P0- No YOU are....
*Storm troopers storm in screaming ghetto slang*

UUH!! UUH! YEEAH! YEAAH! NIGGA GET SOME! UGGH! BITCH! YEEAH I POPPED DAT ASS! MUTHAFUCKA! Sheeit.

Darth Vader walks in to inspect the Scene, Colt 45 in hand.
"Yo, what up, Homies. Daaaaaamn, i'm Fuuuuuuuuuucked up...y'all niggas gotta try some o' this shit I gto from Jabbas the othah day. It's da shiznit!"
*Takes a swig from the 40*
"Yo, bring me dat ho leia! Ain't no bitch gettin outta MY hood without paying me my muthfuckin money."

Stop.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:His Imperial Majesty, Emperor Palpatine I, of the Galactic Empire

Doesn't there have to be a Emperor Palpatine II for the use of the numeral "I"?

After that, Jedi Master and Supreme Commander of the Imperial Armed Forces, Luke Skywalker, during Operation SHADOWHAND.

*watches as Luke crashes all the World Devastators, annihilating the Imperial army on Mon Calamari* Forget a little something?

Darth Garden Gnome wrote:

Illuminatus Primus wrote:His Imperial Majesty, Emperor Palpatine I, of the Galactic Empire

Doesn't there have to be a Emperor Palpatine II for the use of the numeral "I"?

Silence it looks more majestic.

EDIT: And the Mandell ISD blueprints referred to him as Palpatine I.

Darth Garden Gnome wrote:

Illuminatus Primus wrote:After that, Jedi Master and Supreme Commander of the Imperial Armed Forces, Luke Skywalker, during Operation SHADOWHAND.

*watches as Luke crashes all the World Devastators, annihilating the Imperial army on Mon Calamari* Forget a little something?

Yeah, but when Leia and Han first arrive on Byss, Luke just looked and was truly cool. Badass.

Piett & Veers. The quint essential officers of their wings kicking your ass without pompous arrogance(redundant you ask? Not in Tarkin's or Palpy's case). Their destructive might is awe inspiring and oh so efficient.

I have been expecting this thread. It, like your father, is now... MINE.

The most devious, malicious, evil, cool bad guy in Sci-fi. Definately my role-model.

Last time I checked, Palpatine wasn't an ass-kissing poser...

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Last time I checked, Palpatine wasn't an ass-kissing poser...

Sure, the first part is true, but I don't think of myself as a poser. I say things as they are, and say what I believe in.

At any rate, any opportunity to post Palpy pics is a good one. I use the Emperor skin in Jedi Outcast (not that I play often). I have a [crappy] replica of his cane. I quote him all the time. My av... well, you can see that for yourself. He's just my favorite character in all sci-fi, all fiction for that matter.

Chardok wrote:C3po- did you hear that? They shot down the main reactor! We'll be destroyed for sure! This is madness!
R2- bleep bloop bleep squirt....
C3P0- What? R2 What kind of language is that?! I am not a "Homey"
R2- Bleep bloop bloop
C3P0- You...What is a "Fuck you"?
R2- Bleep bloop bloop raspberry
C3P0- You're the bitch.
R2- Bleep bloop
C3P0- No YOU are....
*Storm troopers storm in screaming ghetto slang*

UUH!! UUH! YEEAH! YEAAH! NIGGA GET SOME! UGGH! BITCH! YEEAH I POPPED DAT ASS! MUTHAFUCKA! Sheeit.

Darth Vader walks in to inspect the Scene, Colt 45 in hand.
"Yo, what up, Homies. Daaaaaamn, i'm Fuuuuuuuuuucked up...y'all niggas gotta try some o' this shit I gto from Jabbas the othah day. It's da shiznit!"
*Takes a swig from the 40*
"Yo, bring me dat ho leia! Ain't no bitch gettin outta MY hood without paying me my muthfuckin money."

I find this to be comical.

Trytostaydead wrote:

The_Lumberjack wrote:It's either Thrawn or the Emperor. The Emperor has the whole evil classically trained British bad guy thing going, and is sufficiently evil to merit a place in the Blofeld hall of fame, being in a similar vein. Thrawn because he is the only EU character from the books I have read (consisting of Jedi Academy lot, Thrawn trilogy, Darksaber, Shadows of the Empire and New Rebellion), who actually had some depth to him.

But then again, Tarkin, standing awaiting the destruction of the Rebellion, stiff upper lipped and arrogant to the last... hmmm...

See.. I don't know whether or not Thrawn was actually a villain per se. He was most definately a conqueror.. warlord, what have you.. but he never did anything evil or bad for the enjoyment of it. I mean, would we consider Julius Casear or Alexander a villain?

Did you forget that Thrawn enslaved an entire planet of aliens and kept them in servitude to the Empire under the guise of helping them? How about his rather elegant execution of one of his crew for gross incompetence?

If you couldn't tell that Thrawn was the villian, then you must either have mental problems or are such a military freak that things like setting and plot just go over your head...

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:If you couldn't tell that Thrawn was the villian, then you must either have mental problems or are such a military freak that things like setting and plot just go over your head...

I do enjoy the occasional bloodletting, yes. But in all seriousness.. what's the difference between Thrawn and someone like Caesar?

The Kernel pointed out slaves and executions. Hey, the Roman Empire was all about them slaves man. And they made people fight to the death for their own personal amusement.

As for execution for gross incompetence? I forget which legion or what this particular punishment is called.. but during the whole Spartacus incident when one particular legion didn't perform well against the slave army.. boy oh boy. Something like one in every ten legionnaire (I think.. maybe less or more) was called out and the non-selected comrades BEAT them to DEATH as a disciplinary warning.

Trytostaydead wrote:As for execution for gross incompetence? I forget which legion or what this particular punishment is called.. but during the whole Spartacus incident when one particular legion didn't perform well against the slave army.. boy oh boy. Something like one in every ten legionnaire (I think.. maybe less or more) was called out and the non-selected comrades BEAT them to DEATH as a disciplinary warning.

Its called decimation which in latin means death of one in Ten. What made even worse was that those who didn't draw the short straws were the ones that had to cxarry out the exicutions and if they refused they would join the dead. It was a nasty punishment intended to ensure that no Roman Soldier ever broke ranks and run from battle. As a result Roman Legions would fight to the death because that was preferable to decimation.

Trytostaydead wrote:

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:If you couldn't tell that Thrawn was the villian, then you must either have mental problems or are such a military freak that things like setting and plot just go over your head...

I do enjoy the occasional bloodletting, yes. But in all seriousness.. what's the difference between Thrawn and someone like Caesar?

The Kernel pointed out slaves and executions. Hey, the Roman Empire was all about them slaves man. And they made people fight to the death for their own personal amusement.

As for execution for gross incompetence? I forget which legion or what this particular punishment is called.. but during the whole Spartacus incident when one particular legion didn't perform well against the slave army.. boy oh boy. Something like one in every ten legionnaire (I think.. maybe less or more) was called out and the non-selected comrades BEAT them to DEATH as a disciplinary warning.

First off, exactly which Caesar are you referring to? The word means "king", it isn't a name.

Anyways, saying that the Empire isn't evil because they are like the Romans, who also had slaves and were not evil, is not a valid argument. The reason we don't see the Romans as evil is because of the passage of time. There is nothing that happened in Nazi Germany that didn't happen in ancient Rome, yet we think of the Nazi's as far more evil. This is just a perception, not a true value judgement.

You know who the biggest mass murderer of all time was? Ghengis Khan. Khan's armies swept through Asia and murdered over half the population in China and as far as historians can tell, he also butchered almost every last person in Persia. He killed more people than Hitler, Stalin and Black Death put together, yet does history remember him as the most evil man ever to walk the Earth?

Going back to the subject at hand, Thrawn was ruthless, methodical and efficient, but he wasn't wasteful. He didn't slaughter the populations of entire worlds for fun, nor did he torcher people for amusment. Thrawn loved order and it was his mission to bring it to the galaxy by any means necessary. That said, he was very much the villian of the story as he was the primary antagonist that the "good guys" were fighting against. His personal morals don't factor into the equation.

Darth Garden Gnome wrote:Doesn't there have to be a Emperor Palpatine II for the use of the numeral "I"?

Actually, no. When the Elected Roman Emperor Franz II crowned himself Austrian Emperor in 1804, he chose the regnal name "Franz I" for himself, despite the fact that there was no Franz II at the time. Likewise, when the D. Juan Carlos de Borbón became King of Spain in 1975, he chose the regnal name "Juan Carlos I" (as he is still reigning, there is obviously no Juan Carlos II).

On a somewhat related note, the name "Ioannes PP. XXIII" (i.e., Pope John XXIII) rather implies 22 preceding popes by that name, but there are in fact only 21 other Pope Johns before him; there is no Pope John XX.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:As for execution for gross incompetence? I forget which legion or what this particular punishment is called.. but during the whole Spartacus incident when one particular legion didn't perform well against the slave army.. boy oh boy. Something like one in every ten legionnaire (I think.. maybe less or more) was called out and the non-selected comrades BEAT them to DEATH as a disciplinary warning.

The dux you are thinking of is Marcus Licinius Crassus, the richest man in Rome, who late became a member of the secret First Triumvirate with Caius Iulius Cæsar and Cnaeus Pompeius Magnus. Although it was his generalship that defeated Spartacus, the pompous Pompeius Magnus claimed credit for the victory. Consul with Pompeius Magnus in AC 55, Licinius Crassus subsequently attacked the Parthians, but he was annihilated at the Battle of Carrhæ in AC 53.

This punishment, called decimation, was a standard -- although somewhat uncommon -- punishment for a Roman legion, and demonstrates the kind of summary authority possessed by legionary commanders in ancient Rome. One tenth of the legion was killed as punishment for egregious failure. N.B. that the verb "to decimate" means "to kill one-tenth", not "to badly damage" &c.

The Kernel wrote:First off, exactly which Caesar are you referring to? The word means "king", it isn't a name.

Completely and wholly false, sir. Your ignorance of Roman politics and history is incredible. "Cæsar" is indeed a name; it is a cognomen, or familial nickname, belonging to a branch of gens Iulia, an ancient noble family which claimed descent from Iulus, a son of Æneas, himself said to have been a son of the goddess Venus. It certainly does not mean "king", as the family's most famous scion, Caius Iulius Cæsar (better known simply and somewhat inaccurately as Julius Caesar), became supreme ruler of the Roman Republic, and adamantly refuse kingship, saying on one occasion "Non sum rex sed Cæsar" ("I am not king, but Cæsar"). The name is believed to be derived from the noun cæsaries ("hair") or from the verb cædere ("to cut") by way of the phrase "a matre cæso" ("cut from his mother"), which some philologists believe to be a reference to a Cesarian section.

The wildly inaccurate claim that it means "king" must surely be derived from a grossly simplistic understanding of the nature of the Roman Empire. The first "emperors" -- commonly called Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius I, and Nero -- all descended (by birth or adoption) from Julius Caesar's branch of the gens Iulia and consequently all of them were legally named Cæsar. The first emperor after Nero also assumed the name, as it was permanently associated with the "position" of emperor. It subsequently became used as the designation of the "heir" to the emperor, and under Diocletianus's tetrarchy, referred to the two subemperors (the two full emperors were each titled "Augustus"). "Cæsar" in this sense does not translate to "king" at all, but "emperor", as demonstrated by the German Kaiser and the Russian czar, both of which are derived from "Cæsar".

Hence, the fact that your two-part claim that Cæsar is not a name and means "king" can be seen to be incorrect on both counts. When used alone as a name, "Cæsar" almost invariably refers to Julius Caesar (although Augustus is referred to as such in William Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra, and this usage is correct as his full name at the time was Caius Iulius Cæsar Octavianus).

PUBLIUS

The Kernel wrote:First off, exactly which Caesar are you referring to? The word means "king", it isn't a name.

Completely and wholly false, sir. Your ignorance of Roman politics and history is incredible. "Cæsar" is indeed a name; it is a cognomen, or familial nickname, belonging to a branch of gens Iulia, an ancient noble family which claimed descent from Iulus, a son of Æneas, himself said to have been a son of the goddess Venus. It certainly does not mean "king", as the family's most famous scion, Caius Iulius Cæsar (better known simply and somewhat inaccurately as Julius Caesar), became supreme ruler of the Roman Republic, and adamantly refuse kingship, saying on one occasion "Non sum rex sed Cæsar" ("I am not king, but Cæsar"). The name is believed to be derived from the noun cæsaries ("hair") or from the verb cædere ("to cut") by way of the phrase "a matre cæso" ("cut from his mother"), which some philologists believe to be a reference to a Cesarian section.

The wildly inaccurate claim that it means "king" must surely be derived from a grossly simplistic understanding of the nature of the Roman Empire. The first "emperors" -- commonly called Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius I, and Nero -- all descended (by birth or adoption) from Julius Caesar's branch of the gens Iulia and consequently all of them were legally named Cæsar. The first emperor after Nero also assumed the name, as it was permanently associated with the "position" of emperor. It subsequently became used as the designation of the "heir" to the emperor, and under Diocletianus's tetrarchy, referred to the two subemperors (the two full emperors were each titled "Augustus"). "Cæsar" in this sense does not translate to "king" at all, but "emperor", as demonstrated by the German Kaiser and the Russian czar, both of which are derived from "Cæsar".

Hence, the fact that your two-part claim that Cæsar is not a name and means "king" can be seen to be incorrect on both counts. When used alone as a name, "Cæsar" almost invariably refers to Julius Caesar (although Augustus is referred to as such in William Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra, and this usage is correct as his full name at the time was Caius Iulius Cæsar Octavianus).

PUBLIUS

I wholy appreciate the correction. I guess you learn something every day. Truthfully, my understanding of the name Ceasar came from a Western Civilization class from college in which we more or less glossed over the Roman Empire (a lot to cover for a semester). I have no trouble believing that the teacher of the class was wrong on several facts and I guess that this was one of them.

Out of curiosity are you a history buff/teacher?