Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
Anyways, I ALMOST bought Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader but I wasn't sure about it.
I almost bought it too but I didn't. Went to the library and picked it up. Finished it in 3days - saved 25 bucks..Got the Ep 3 DVD with the money.
But It should be at your local library. By now at least.
Originally posted by Ganner Rhysode
Hey hey, you were the guy from the "Sidious Debate" thread who agreed with me about portions of the EU being ridiculous, like Palpatine destroying fleets with his Lightning. You're a good guy. =DAnyway, I highly reccomened the Star Wars: X-Wing series. It's fantastic.
Humm was it me? (quoting the person your responding too helps 😛)
At any rate I do agree with you. And it was my post in the Sidious thread that sparked this thread to come to mind. I kinda wanted to read some good EU, but amongst the masses of horrible horrible overwritten, overpowered, anything goes crappy EU it becomes a VERY difficult task to weed out the books that are not absurd and ridiculous and are true to what Star Wars actually is (which is the movies).
So yea, any suggestions are still welcome.
I just ordered Labyrinth of Evil yesterday off Amazon.ca. It should be here in a few days. 😎
Re: EU - Non-Absurd books.
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
absurdly overpowered Jedi.
Define "absurdly overpowered" . Cuz even the movies had some absurd shit: force pushing people, summoning things to your hand with your mind, jumping 50 feet. All of those things are pretty whack, so how is a "thought bomb" so hard to beleive after watching the movies??
So where do you draw the line between believable bullshit and absurd bullshit???
Where do I draw the line.
well Jumping 50 feet is a little less "absurd" then say destroying an entire fleet of star destroyers with force lightning.
Throwing people is SLIGHTLY less "absurd" then throwing a star through space.
Don't try to mock me, there's a clear line in the "absurdity" level of the EU characters and the movie characters.
The difference (just to entertain your obviously annoying question). Jumping 50 feet and picking up objects with you mind EVEN force lightning make more logical sense then what most of these overpowered "Super hero" type characters do. The force makes you more adapt then regular people. You do get some pretty cool (and slightly absurd) abilities in terms of reality but The force should not make you a "Dragonball Z character" Capable of destroying planets and all that crap. Its just retarded. I mean think of how dumb a jedi fight would be when the participants are throwing stars at each other? and yet (for some reason) these "Super Jedi/ Sith" still find it necessary to use lightsabers? why? lol. If you can throw stars around why in gods name would you need to have a lightsaber...lol??
The entire concept of these "Super Jedi" takes away from the whole point of what Star Wars is. It might as well be a different story all together. Why not make a story where the "Super Jedi" battle Goku to see who's the most powerful being in the universe. lol
Gimme a break man.
What constitutes "absurd" is pretty obvious.
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
What constitutes "absurd" is pretty obvious.
No it's not. Supernatural is Supernatural. The only difference between Force Lightning and throwing stars is the scope of it. C'mon dawg, jumping 50 feet is just plain whack, so destroying and entire fleet of star destroyers shouldn't be to hard to grasp.
To answer your post: I think the best EU is anything that pretains to the ancient Jedi. KOTOR, GAOTS, TOTJ, etc. Those Jedi back N the day were ass-kickers that actually got shit done and weren't restricted by pussy politics, unlike the inefective Jedi of the PT era.
I completely disagree with you.
What you are saying is not logical
By your definition if I can pick up a basketball and throw it at you because I can then thats as absurd as if I picked up a planet and threw it at you.
See what I mean? There is a huge difference. Scope is a major issue. Not a minor one.
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
By your definition if I can pick up a basketball and throw it at you because I can then thats as absurd as if I picked up a planet and threw it at you.
Bad example. Shooting lighting out of your finger tips is just as fictional as trowing a star. One is not more realistic than the other, since they are both entirely unreal. (Its just cuz your a Palpatine fan, right???)
btw: In what EU book does someone throw a star anyways? I dont remember that one.
Your wrong actually, Its a perfect example. Despite the Lightning being fictional in terms of our reality in the Star Wars universe it is not a fictional ability. Just as being able to lift up a basketball is a nonfictional ability in our reality. The lack of it being "real" in our reality is merely circumstantial. In logical argument giving arguments based outside of reality is perfectly acceptable so long as the argument points out a flaw in the premises of the previous argument.
So again, you are not correct.
What I am saying is that "Scope is directly related to believability". Thus I could give you any argument that points out this and it would be a valid statement. The fact that it might not be real is not the point. The point is to flush out a logical error you made and in logic I am permitted to do so with any example, which I have done.
As for the person who actually throws stars I think its supposed to be Naga Shadow. I've noted a few times a quote something like "he played ping pong with stars" or something. But I'm no EU expert. I'm sure there's about a million other people who could answer this better then I.
I don't beleive anyone in EU threw stars, and it definately wasn't Sadow. Naga Sadow (who was an actual member of the Sith species) is one of my favorite villians in ancient Jedi EU. He once used the Dark Side to cause a solar flare to rise from a nearby star to destroy a Republic fleet, though. But literally throwing stars? I recall anything like at all, dawg. You probly just pulled it outta yer ass for your argument.
Nope, Palpatine threw stars, in addition to destroying fleets with his lightning.
Not only does that overpower the Jedi/Sith VASTLY from what we see in the movies, (which, in actuallity make "advanced" versions of humans, not Superman versions) but totally undermines what you see. It takes away from the significance of everything. What point is there in having a huge fleet if it can be destroyed in seconds? Or a planet, if it can just have a star thrown at it? Or a lightsaber, if you can just use the force to create another Sith to fight your battle for you?
There are just some plain absurdities in the EU. As the Anomaly said, what is normal in real life is not normal in Star Wars. In the Star Wars universe, what constitutes as normal is NOT the ability to pick up planets and disintegrate them into rocks which you then reform into the biggest capital ship ever, using your force ability, which is shortly thereafter destroyed by a new ship built by the ghost of Yoda which is even bigger and better then your new ship.
(Also, this is why I dislike things like the Sun Crusher and the Eclipse Star Destroyer. They just totally undermine/make so much of the Star Wars universe absolete and pointless, IE, Courscant could be destroyed in a second by a single capital ship, a star system could be destroyed in a matter of seconds by the same capital ship, and so on.
IMO, the Executor-class Super Star Destroyer is "realistic" in terms of Star Wars, whereas the other two are not so much. The same goes for Palpatine closing his eyes and become the center of the universe upon which all stars and planets revolve.
Except it's like, playing a video game and hacking to god mode so your character is invincible and stuff like that. That's what I equate stuff like this to.
The Death Star, the Executor, they were realistic (for Star Wars), they had limits, they had weaknesses, and so on.
Sun Crusher? Galaxy Gun? DE Palpatine? In the blink of an eye, they could destroy three Death Stars, plus a few planets and a couple of large fleets.
Heh. Nice, See now what I was talking about DiamondBullets?
Thanks Ganner Rhysode for that. Thats exactly what I was talking about. Except your knowledge of EU Star Wars is obviously more vast then mine, so thanks for proving what I'm saying with valid examples.
Oh and Naga Sadow DID throw stars, Apparently with a kind of Sith artifact or something. I don't know, but I've seen this statement repeated over and over again. Most recently actually. I think Fishy said it. But I cant remember.
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
Heh. Nice, See now what I was talking about DiamondBullets?
I do now. That godmode example from Rhysode help put things into perspective.
It wasn't who Sadow threw stars, if anyone it was a more ancient Sith Lord who I can't think of.
Anomaly, lemme axe you a question.....don't you think its ironic and little fukt-up that someone with SUPERMAN in his avatar and signature is dissin' on excessive powers? LOL!!!
Originally posted by DiamondBullets
I do now. That godmode example from Rhysode help put things into perspective.It wasn't who Sadow threw stars, if anyone it was a more ancient Sith Lord who I can't think of.
Anomaly, lemme axe you a question.....don't you think its ironic and little fukt-up that someone with [B]SUPERMAN
in his avatar and signature is dissin' on excessive powers? LOL!!! [/B]
In Supermans World, His powers make sense. In the SW universe, having powers close to Supermans is just stupid.
I have nothing against powerful characters at all. The problem I have with the Super EU characters is the fact that its 'Un-Star Wars' and takes away from what Lucas intended in his story.
Oh and I believe you about the Shadow thing. As I said I'm just going by what I hear around these forums. I'm no EU expert to say the least.
And Superman isnt THAT powerful. Not in comparison to some Marvel characters. (Cosmic beings and Silver Surfer come to mind)