Originally posted by NewGuy01
fug u power rangers is teh best!
Scrublord.
Originally posted by Darth Abonis
I think he was a well written character, but people for some reason don't like Drew Karpashyn and I think hes among the best Star Wars authors.
Pardon?
Thrawn is a well written character.
Sheev is a well written character.
Verge or whatever her name is a well written character
Traya, Gilad Palleon, Krayt, and even Kenobi are well written.
To each his own, but there are junior novelizations with better characterization than PoD, so...I don't see how Bane is well written.
The most interesting Bane moment was when he died. The theory was that Zannah actually lost and Bane was pretending otherwise, so as to achieve the same result with Cognus. It was interesting to see the great Darth Bane, praised for a thousand years by the Sith as the Sith'ari and founder of the Rule of two, reduced to a pretender who, in the end, was no less selfish and power hungry as any other Sith. Even more interesting was to think of how far down the Banite line, Bane himself managed to survive. The implications therein being obvious.
Of course, Drew Karpyshyn, in his relentless search for self-destruction, took the singular most interesting point of interpretation in his entire series and completely incinerated that potential legacy by making Zannah's mental victory 'canon'.
Originally posted by Darth AbonisI actually liked Annihilation by Drew, but the Bane books are just a different story. Could you elaborate on why you find him interesting?
I think he was a well written character, but people for some reason don't like Drew Karpashyn and I think hes among the best Star Wars authors.
Originally posted by Darth Abonis
I think he was a well written character, but people for some reason don't like Drew Karpashyn and I think hes among the best Star Wars authors.
Yes, he was a well written character at the start, but the trilogy showed very little of who he was as a character after book one and wholly lacked in terms of character development on all levels by the end of the first novel. The books were too short overall and for whatever reason DK decided that was adequate. If you look, most of what's mentioned in the thread about Bane as a char is from the first 20ish percent of the first novel.
Bane had a lot of potential, as did Zannah and others. Even the quirks of someone like Farfalla disappear completely in book two. IIRC the Dark Jedi who plays a part in book three has very little revealed about his motivations in detail, and has almost no depth. The central characters are just not very well fleshed out after the first novel, and Bane is most certainly one of those in that list.
He was infinitely more interesting in Jedi vs Sith then he was in the novels. It also had a far more intriguing reason for him creating the RoT as he himself was the victim of lesser Sith teaming up to overthrow him.
Originally posted by AncientPower
The most interesting Bane moment was when he died. The theory was that Zannah actually lost and Bane was pretending otherwise, so as to achieve the same result with Cognus. It was interesting to see the great Darth Bane, praised for a thousand years by the Sith as the Sith'ari and founder of the Rule of two, reduced to a pretender who, in the end, was no less selfish and power hungry as any other Sith. Even more interesting was to think of how far down the Banite line, Bane himself managed to survive. The implications therein being obvious.Of course, Drew Karpyshyn, in his relentless search for self-destruction, took the singular most interesting point of interpretation in his entire series and completely incinerated that potential legacy by making Zannah's mental victory 'canon'.
I really liked the idea that Bane was this quasi-immortal Sith Lord who lives down throughout his line all the way until Sidious, who figures out his secret and therefore kills him in his sleep.