Ahsoka has to die sometime, right?

Discussion in 'Star Wars TV' started by JediMasterKendo, Mar 8, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GGrievous Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2005
    star 5
    That was not needed, Rumblewagon. [face_tired]
  2. rumblewagon Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 24, 2004
    star 4
    Can you provide a reasonable and rational argument as to why it is not needed? The title as it stands now pre-supposes that Ahsoka needs to die...and by association, implies that she should die. That's a presumptive argument which steers people towards a false conclusion.
  3. Gry Sarth Ex 2x Banhammer Wielding Besalisk Mod

    Member Since:
    Jun 24, 1999
    star 5
    Well, the title is a question. If you think she should die, you answer yes and explain. If you think she shouldn't, you answer no and explain. It might be a bit loaded towards Ahsoka dying, but that's just because the majority of people assume that she will.
  4. MarkVader1991 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 10, 2010
    star 3
    By that logic, if Ahsoka had been created as a video game character first and then branched off into other forms of media you wouldn?t have had a problem with her?

    As it stands Ahsoka has no impact on ROTS whatsoever. Starkiller founded the Rebel Alliance; I say that had quite an impact on the OT.
  5. JediMaster1511 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 15, 2010
    star 9
    I think you may have misunderstood a little, Ahsoka not being in ROTS has sparked a continuity error and a controversy came as a result. Starkiller though founding the Rebel Alliance yes, doesn't hold the same power because of his relationship with Vader/Anakin. Chances are the rebellion would have been founded some other way because in the EU, there are other Jedi that could have help establish it. Rahm Kota comes to mind. yes, the fact remains that it was Marek that started it, but it could have been anyone. Ahsoka not being in ROTS raises issues such as where is she? Why isn't she here? Why isn't she mentioned? Is she dead? Etc. That is was I meant in that statement.
  6. XCell Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 7, 2004
    star 4
    Well, I guess I'd understand some of the reasoning behind her overpoweredness. Again, I'm not too familiar with Starkiller, so who's to say I would or wouldn't have a problem with him? He's not exactly sounding great to me at this point.

    And I still think it's a different scenario with Ahsoka. With all that's happening in the OT, I don't think it's that important who created the Alliance. Ahsoka is Anakin's Padawan and the other main characters from the films know it. She's a main hero in the Clone Wars, and plus she's more involved in an overall story I do follow, so consider the 'personal canon' aspect.
  7. MarkVader1991 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 10, 2010
    star 3
    Sure without Starkiller story the OT would turn out the same. Someone else would probably have founded the rebellion, heck someone else probably did before Starkiller was retconed into the mix. But to say Starkiller is not a continuity problem because the OT would be the exact same with or without him isn't much of a point. ROTS would still be the same without TCW. After TCW ends I have a funny feeling that ROTS will still be fundamentally the same movie as it was before, some people may have a different way of looking at it after TCW, but I doubt anything will actually be changed.

    Ahsoka and Starkiller are both characters that where added out of the blue, they are both characters that are familiar with much of the main cast, they are both never mentioned in later material. The reason Starkiller is a bigger problem is because the things that Starkiller did actually had a serious impact of the fate of the galaxy.
  8. JediMaster1511 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 15, 2010
    star 9
    Perhaps, but wouldn't Ahsoka be just as important to the fate of Anakin. Clearly he is attached to her, and part of the reason he fell, if not the reason, was his attachment issues. To say Ahsoka doesn't have an impact on the galaxy is still to early to call.
  9. MarkVader1991 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 10, 2010
    star 3
    True, he was attached to Ahsoka, but the reason he fell was because of Padme. He also had an attachment to Obi-wan but that was irrelevant in his fall, all that mattered to him at that point was Padme.

    Also true, but I doubt there is anything left for Ahsoka to do. The Rebel Alliance has been founded. Sidious told everyone were Grievous was. Maybe Ahsoka was the reason Anakin changed his wardrobe, who knows?
  10. GGrievous Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2005
    star 5
    Anakin's ROTS robes were the same as his in AOTC.
  11. XJapanRoX Official Star Wars Artist

    VIP
    Member Since:
    Dec 5, 2004
    star 2
    For the most part, but the tunic with sleeves he wore in ROTS was much darker.

    See AOTC
    http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/anakinskywalker/img/ep2_12.jpg

    Vs.

    ROTS
    http://www.sonsofthesuns.com/reference/ROTS/Promo/images/anakin_and_obi-wan_1.jpg
  12. GGrievous Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2005
    star 5
    Visually, though, they do look the same. Mainly every Jedi in ROTS had no clone armor so I don't think that's a factor of something that occurred. Of course Lucas probably didn't care for the look. :p
  13. Gry Sarth Ex 2x Banhammer Wielding Besalisk Mod

    Member Since:
    Jun 24, 1999
    star 5
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.