Two things I hate when it comes about Star Wars/EU
1. Palpatine
2. Force users vs non-Force users(as main characters)
I mean, either one or another category. It just creates plot inconsistencies to the lore(in my opinion)
When you think that Obi-Wan could simply crush or incapacitate Grievous with the Force - is a bit silly, isn't it?
Except the Yuuzhan Vong - they were immune to the Force in some way and the plot's logic made sense.
For my list, I'd switch those two and then change "Palpatine" to....I can't even decide. I was going to say that there are some things some authors do which I don't like, just because what we think is cool is different, but part of the reason I like star wars is because there is a diversity of genre in its creation. There are concepts made for 70's kids, 80's kids, 90's kids, 2000's kids, noir, space opera, adventure sci-fi, so on.
So first, let me just get this out: The Force, as great of a concept as it is, is just too powerful to make sense in a story like this. It makes sense in comic books, anime, or maybe even novels, but characters this powerful just don't make sense in movies and TV. And novels/comics/video games made for the universe also make just as little sense. Because according to the internal logic of the universe, the Force is just that powerful.
If the Force really gives characters the kind of power it gives them, then they should be able to walk casually through any obstacle which regular humans would think of as impossible, because we're not used to these kinds of powers. Which is what makes story-telling that much harder. You can't think of a proper physical obstacle.
Vader should have been able to get Luke, like 5 times in "A New Hope" alone, and 10 more during the Empire Strikes Back. The rebels would have no chance against him. And Sidious could have killed every Ewok in existence in an instant if he'd wanted to, but plot induced stupidity stopped that.
And then comes the matter of the disparity between a force user and a non-force user. It's like the disparity between Superman and humans. It's too great for the world George Lucas wanted to create to make sense. If the Force users are SO much more powerful than regular people, then the world we've been shown would not function.
So for plot reasons, Force users have to be weak enough to be taken down by a well-organized, and relatively smart group of non-force sensitives. Although really, if you had the Force, you could take down armies with military tanks and aircrafts without too much effort. Gevious I guess has the excuse that he was built to fight Jedi and even Mace Windu's force crush couldn't kill him, but other than things specifically made to fight Force users, there's no way a non-force sensitive is ever stepping up to a force-sensitive.
And the worst part is, there are parts of star wars which acknowledge this. There's the "no one can kill a Jedi" line by Anakin, there's those freaks from Dark Empire who were surprised when Luke easily evaded their attacks, and there's tons more indication that Force sensitives are just THAT much superior.
Well, now that that's out of the way, what's your reason for hating my favorite villain in star wars?
Star level stuff from the 90s lol. Brakiss manipulating solar flares across a star system by himself was pretty dumb. At least Sadow and Aleema were amped. But, I wouldn't have made them do that. There's a reason why nobody references that stuff anymore. I even wrote Kevin J Anderson a letter not too long ago asking about those feats and he doesn't even remember writing that, ending it by saying "No Jedi or Sith is that powerful"
Anyhow, just look at the films is my answer to how powerful Force Users are meant to be. Is it underwhelming? Compared to EU yeah. But, Jedi and Sith were always envisioned to be able to take down squadrons of soldiers but not armies. If Mace had the power that he had in 2002 CW series he would have stomped the forces surrounding the Geonosian arena.
Originally posted by The Merchant
Star level stuff from the 90s lol. Brakiss manipulating solar flares across a star system by himself was pretty dumb. At least Sadow and Aleema were amped. But, I wouldn't have made them do that. There's a reason why nobody references that stuff anymore. I even wrote Kevin J Anderson a letter not too long ago asking about those feats and he doesn't even remember writing that, ending it by saying "No Jedi or Sith is that powerful"Anyhow, just look at the films is my answer to how powerful Force Users are meant to be. Is it underwhelming? Compared to EU yeah. But, Jedi and Sith were always envisioned to be able to take down squadrons of soldiers but not armies. If Mace had the power that he had in 2002 CW series he would have stomped the forces surrounding the Geonosian arena.
To be honest - those Sith crystals might as well be infused with Sadow's own power(before he went to battles) because it's a lot easier when you don't have to access and focus your power at the same thing during a battle.
If the implication is Sadow can destroy stars by himself, then the answer is maybe and no. Maybe, since Brakiss could manipulate solar flares by himself and said he might be able to blow up a star when asked. No, in the sense that this was written back in 90s star wars where the Force was "magick" and force powers treated as "spells" Indeed, Sadow used Sith magick along with his crystals.
Whatever "spell" he casted doesn't seem to be applicable to anything else. Otherwise, why not just flatten Coruscant with his star level TK and be done with the Jedi? In fact, he caused a supernova in the 1st place to get away from Queen Keto and Republic warships, the nova wiping out said warships. Why didn't he just use his star level TK to destroy the ships themselves?
But anyhow, like I said this stuff is from the 90s. Nobody ever talks about it, most likely because it's a dumb power. Last thing to mention anything like that is Book of Sith, which states Ancient Sith had /technology/ that can cause supernovas ad rip out the core of stars. So, the idea that it was Force power might have been retconnd
I meant that when it comes about destroying stars with telekinesis or, maybe, overloading the star with energy. It is required a huge amount of concentration/meditation in directing your own power. So, Sadow came to the logical conclusion that the most efficient way to do that in an instant - would be to infuse crystals with his dark side power while 'he' - only needs to direct that said energy without the requirement of applying too much meditation.
I mean, that's why he needed his Meditation ship, right? I always assumed that the ancient Sith had the raw power to do outstanding Force feats, but lacked the necessary amount of Force mastery or were too lazy for that - and built devices and relics to help them in battles(concentration-wise)
It's a lot easier when you only need raw power and your Force mastery is 'boosted' by trinkets to perform 'star' level feats?
Look at Palpatine and Plagueis' attempt to cause an imbalance in the Force. They needed months of meditation for that. Unlike their predecessors - maybe, out of pride, they wanted to increase their Force mastery through training and not relics and trinkets.
Originally posted by Freedon NaddYes and no.
When you think that Obi-Wan could simply crush or incapacitate Grievous with the Force - is a bit silly, isn't it?
From an in-universe POV, the Jedi believe in using 'necessary Force' and nothing more. To use all your power in every situation is considered excessive by Jedi standards, and to routinely overuse the Force in such a way can ultimately lead toward the dark side.
As Kit Fisto said: "Those who have power should restrain themselves from using it." -TCW S01E10
Sure, but if Kenobi would've done that *before* RotS, then Grievous wouldn't have been part of the film itself... So obviously that was never going to happen.
Flip side, if Kenobi would have utterly pwned/killed Grievous with the force at the onset of their battle *in* the film itself, he would've been swiftly gunned-down by the hundreds of droids that surrounded them... So obviously that was never going to happen either, but I digress.
In the end, the powers of Jedi/Sith are only going to be as effectual as the story warrants. That's why PIS and CIS are a thing.
Originally posted by Galan007
Sure, but if Kenobi would've done that *before* RotS, then Grievous wouldn't have been part of the film itself... So obviously that was never going to happen.Flip side, if Kenobi would have utterly pwned/killed Grievous with the force at the onset of their battle *in* the film itself, he would've been swiftly gunned-down by the hundreds of droids that surrounded them... So obviously that was never going to happen either, but I digress.
In the end, the powers of Jedi/Sith are only going to be as effectual as the story warrants. That's why PIS and CIS are a thing.
Hence, you're further proving my observations. But I like your Thrawn-y pattern of thinking.
Well, wait, maybe you are Thrawn. Who knows. Only time shall tell. 💃 😉
I kind of like the concept of star level feats. I know that they kind of don't make sense, but it took Sadow all those crystals, that meditation pod, and a ritual/sith magic to do that, so maybe there are limitatons we're not aware of. I like to think that it would take years of figuring the ritual/spell out, but I like to think that such powerful magicians should be able to do things like that.
Anyway, I want to ask Nadd why he hates Palpatine again.
For the Sadow feat - look above.
"I want to ask Nadd why he hates Palpatine again."
Let me see:
-gets the highest praise in both canons just because he is Lucas' character
-petty and childish villain
-one-dimensional character - "HAHAHAHA! AM EVIL, POWAHFULL! UNLIMITED POWAAAAH!"
-will always be the MvP because "accolades"
-he is evil for the sake of being evil
I just hate his portrayal in the EU(mostly) He is a generic Mary Sue that needs to have "DBZ" powers to be appreciated as character.
If you are a person with common sense - it would be impossible to not have a slight of dislike for this character. Well, my hate is as big as his strength in the Force.
Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
-gets the highest praise in both canons just because he is Lucas' character
Not just because he is Lucas' character, but because he's a good character. He was played by a good actor in an enticing performance, and the idea of the character, along with the writing and look, were perfect.
-petty and childish villain
I don't know what you mean by this. If you think so, I'm not going to try and convince you otherwise, but he's the galactic emperor. Not petty.
-one-dimensional character - "HAHAHAHA! AM EVIL, POWAHFULL! UNLIMITED
POWAAAAH!"
He's not a one-dimensional character. He was born psychopathic, but his motivations are enticing. Maybe not relatable, but there's a reason so many people love the character. He's legitamately enjoyable to think about. And captures the essense of the Dark side of the force very well. He wants unlimited power, but limitless greed is a basic part of human emotion.
-will always be the MvP because "accolades"
-he is evil for the sake of being evil
I can't argue with the first one, but I don't know why such a general statement as the latter one means a bad thing. For a villain who's evil for the sake of being evil, he's better than a lot of villains who are evil for "better" reasons.
And if you think there's no complexity, I would suggest reading about him again, since there are comlex sides to his "evil-ness". He says that evil is just what people call things they don't like or aren't familiar with, though he himself agrees that he is evil, because he wants things no one else does and is willing to enforce others with those things. He understands his own psychology as well as the psychology of others well enough to provide at least SOME commentary beyond surface level "evil" whispers and laughs.
I just hate his portrayal in the EU(mostly) He is a generic Mary Sue that needs to have "DBZ" powers to be appreciated as character.
He is a villain. A villain can't be a Mary Sue, since the villain is the one that needs to be trumped. He can be as powerful as he wants, because he's the one that has to be taken down. If the hero was a Mary Sue, that would kill the story, because then you know the hero will win, and you know how. The villian being the Mary Sue does the exact opposite. Just because he's the most powerful doesn't mean he's not a good character.
If you are a person with common sense - it would be impossible to not have a slight of dislike for this character. Well, my hate is as big as his strength in the Force.
I guess I can't argue why you dislike something, but at least I now know. Although some of the things you said are just strait up false.