Lit Crucible by Troy Denning

Discussion in 'Literature' started by Manisphere, Sep 4, 2012.

  1. Sinrebirth SWC and EUC Forum Moderator

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 15, 2004
    star 7
    Daala was appointed? Keith tried to kill Saba? The Jedi appointed one third of the executive... Like they did for four centuries during the New Sith Wars and after Constipex... Then launch strikes against the Sith who seized control of the government... Not quite thuggery.
    Chewbacca89 likes this.
  2. mnjedi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 4, 2012
    star 1
    Of couse there are justifications for the actions, and in some cases, such as removing the criminaly insane Dalaa from power, (though one could argue she was already well on her way to impeachment) and removing the sith from thier infulince in government, they were even nessecary. Still I am of the opinion that the Jedi in FotJ often took the easy and quick way out of these situations, abandoned thier principles, and by doing so ceased to act like Jedi at all.
  3. Jedi Ben Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 19, 1999
    star 6
    I think you're confusing rationales for actions with justification for actions, they're related certainly but also distinctly different.

    The problem here though is that IF the Jedi had taken the route you advocate, we'd likely be here carping about Denning rendering the Jedi overly principled, ivory tower in-effectives who know nothing of the real world!

    There's been shed-loads of criticism of character actions over the last decade and a half from EU fans, but what's often lacking is a sense of what the heroes are actually permitted to do!

    It often seems, in this forum, that the villains should be able to steamroller the heroes with ease because anything the heroes do is seen as making them the "same" as the villain(s)! It's a lazy kind of thinking that avoids grappling with the challenge that any form of war poses to morality.

    In this respect Traviss is one of the best examples of this tendency at its worst, as if the Jedi were as principled as she claims to want them to be, she'd then damn them for not doing enough or achieving anything. But when they do do something on utilitarian grounds of using a lesser evil to fight a greater? Out comes the touchy-feely, emotional argument that it's wrong to use the clones. Yes, it is, but there is a better option? The point of the PT, in part, is that better options had been systematically engineered off the board courtesy of one D. Sidious!

    Or, to put it another way, in more simplistic terms, what happened to giving responsibility for the actions of the villain(s) to the villain(s)?
    Last edited by Jedi Ben, Feb 19, 2013
    kataja and colojedi7 like this.
  4. mnjedi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 4, 2012
    star 1
    Not defending Traviss by any means here, she did plenty wrong. Of course I don't believe that the Jedi should have refused the use of the clones, considering their options it was the only choice, they couldn't very well sit back and watch the galaxy burn. As Mace Windu would say the Jedi Order was well and truly forked. In the Jedis favor, most did treat the clones like actual people, cared about them and encouraged their personality’s, trying to make something good out of the unfortunate situation. This is fantastic, seeing a story of the Jedi fighting a war that they know is in some matter wrong but must fight anyway to prevent an even greater evil, and how the struggle between their duty and their morals affects them. The old clone wars MMP did this very very well and I commend them for it.

    The problem I have with the way the Jedi act in FotJ isn't in their actions particularly, as I said, Dalaa needed to be removed from power, and the sith needed to be dealt with, I think it has to be the lack of internal conflict the actions take, we don't see the Jedi considering whether or not taking a ship full of hostages and destroying a significant portion of Coruscants weather control system is justified under the circumstances, if the compromising of their role of peace keeper is really necessary to the greater good. We don't get to see the struggle between ideals and duty, and so the whole thing comes off as rather harsh and thug-like. Considering that the series is nine books long it is something I find inexcusable.

    (on an unrelated note, we also miss a huge chance to see democracy actually work, by giving Dalaa her walking papers the Senate would have proved to the reader that they aren’t as corpulent and worthless as they have seemed to be for the last forever.)

    Certainty I'm not advocating that anyone is responsible for Dalaa being an insane, genocidal power-hungry lunatic except for Dalaa, and her irrational actions and eventual removal from office are all on her, not the Jedi or anyone else. Just as ultimately Anakin Skywalker was responsible for his own fall and his detestable actions as Darth Vader and not the Jedi, Sidious or anyone else. I definitely don't wish to take the responsibility or consequences for the villains actions off of the villains shoulders, and I don’t want the Jedi to be some group of comatose stooges either. What I want to see is, the Jedi wrestling with the morality and necessity of their actions, I want to see them struggle, and learn, and grow.

    Loving the discussion. -mnjedi.
  5. Tim Battershell Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 3, 2012
    star 4


    Do we actually know if Booster had told any of the Jedi exactly what form his 'distraction' would take? I see that as the highly understandable action of a very peeved grandfather (who has never been exactly a 'law and order' man, in any case)! Whatever the property damage (and there appear to be a large number of OSETS stations in orbit, according to the serial numbers in "Wedge's Gamble"), there was never any question of causing death or injury.
  6. Dr. Steve Brule Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 7, 2012
    star 4
    Don't forget the only reason Daala was in power to begin with was because Denning's characters all thought it would be a good idea to install her through what was basically a military coup to begin with.
  7. Sith_Sword Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 23, 2004
    The Jedi have caused more problems than they've solved in recent times IMO,they should really get their house in order before millions of civilians perish....."oh wait"
  8. Jedi Ben Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 19, 1999
    star 6
    Sorry, should have specified I was talking more in general terms on that post - wasn't aimed at you personally.

    I think the hardest point to achieve will be the last part of your sentence - for there to be character growth there needs to be a better plan than that which has been demonstrated by LOTF/FOTJ, sure Sinny's retcons are smart and creative but they really shouldn't be needed.

    One point the EU needs to crack in the books is how they're going to handle war, as the idea that the object of war is to hurt the enemy to the point where they surrender is often deemed evil! It is that, but there are times when war is not the greatest evil. The PT took a stab at showing that, didn't do it all that well in the films but the EU did much better on the whole. NJO aimed for this too but pretty much fluffed it. As for LOTf/FOTJ - they seem to go too far in the other direction from most accounts.
    mnjedi likes this.
  9. AusStig Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2010
    star 3
    1. By Luke. And she should have been removed democratically. You know that thing the heros fought to get back in the OT. But that's not what matters, people overthrowing a government that's cool:(

    2. He attacked her. Trying to stop her from starting a war with the government of most of the galaxy. She then let him die when she could EASILY have saved him. May as well have stabbed him in the gut. She is at least guilty of manslaughter, or second degree-murder as you call it.

    3. In the cases you site, the government is in a state of collapse. I think (don't know) that the jedi were invited to take over. Big difference between that and an armed coup against an otherwise functional government.

    4. You make it sound like a military attack, not a series of targeted assassinations, which to me felt like terrorist actions. Big difference. What ever happened to "No one deserves execution. No matter what their crimes." They did not try to capture them, maybe they could have learned their plans. These are not pure evil, they were born into, they had no choice. Simply say "Surrender or die." Is not enough.

    I Think the villains should be able to walk over the heros. It creates tension, something all of Dennings FoTJ, fail to do. The cloest it gets is some parts of Vortex (just before the jedi save them) and a with Ben and Ves in Apocalypse.

    I want my heros to act like heros, with the moral high ground.

    Not:

    The heros are right because they are heros and they are heros because they are right.
  10. Sinrebirth SWC and EUC Forum Moderator

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 15, 2004
    star 7
    1. Not just by Luke. And Daala was ruling under the Emergency Measures Act. Removing her democractically wouldn't have stopped a lot of people dying in that immediate future.

    2. She could have saved him at the expense of the mission, which was designed to stop the Sith, who themselves have proven on dozens of occasions to be a subversive group.

    3. Millions of people were protesting on Coruscant about Daala's reign. The Jedi were invited to take over after they and a coalition of species had deposed Constipex. An otherwise functional government does not aim to kill civilians exercising their rights and actively tries to do so. The Republic imploded and the Jedi stepped in during the New Sith Wars.

    4. The Sith had replaced the government by murdering the old Chief of State and forcing through, by use of the Force, a measure which put Abeloth in charge. The moral high ground does not equate to the legal high ground. The Sith promptly took into place laws which suppressed rights. The Jedi certainly had the moral high ground by attacking Coruscant, complete with an army of commandos.

    To the tension point; I spent Apocalypse expecting Abeloth to kill Corran, or rip Coruscant apart. The Sith were never the villains of FotJ. They were simply one of our antagonists.
  11. ChildOfWinds Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 7, 2001
    star 5
    AusStig:
    No, Luke didn't appoint Daala. Daala was actually one of the worst choices for the Jedi as she didn't like the Jedi at all.

    It was Bwua'tu who suggested Daala. I have no idea why everyone who wanted Bwuat'tu to be the CoS was willing to accept Daala instead. But Luke wasn't the one who appointed Daala. Luke appointed Jag as the head of the Empire.
  12. Jedi Ben Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 19, 1999
    star 6
    3 points:

    If you mean the villains should have it easier due to a void of morals then that tends to be the traditional outlook. The heroes could easily stop the villains dead in their tracks by fighting fire with fire.

    But what does having the moral high ground mean in terms of permitted action? If a Sith is terrorising a population and using them as human shields, may a Jedi not cloak their presence in the Force and snipe said Sith? Do they have to declare themselves and let the Sith have a defence in place? I don't think so. Being moral does not mean being stupid and endangering those you are sent to protect. The problem is that a lot of the time any action taken against the villains is deemed to be as bad as them, which I am exceedingly sceptical of.

    However, if the villains are successful, it is often deemed now to render the heroes incompetent! Used to be the villain was expected to escape, often by nefarious means without it reflecting badly on the heroes. Now, those heroes will be blamed for any future deaths and harm committed by the villain because they failed to stop him/her. If we want villains to be more successful and flexible due to amorality and heroes to be more virtuous, then the latter needs to be given some slack!
    Last edited by Jedi Ben, Feb 21, 2013
    colojedi7, Sinrebirth and Chewbacca89 like this.
  13. AusStig Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2010
    star 3


    1. No it would have, since the wheels were already in motion, they discussed it with at least one senator. Also if Daala tried to kill people then the jedi could be there to stop them, like what happen with that Mado-reporter thing. Only less behind the GMs back.

    2. She decided her morals and goals were more important then someone's life. Didn't Jacen start off like that? But here it is treated like it is nothing. lol Saba, no one like him, so don't worry. Now lead us to war.:rolleyes:

    3. Your first sentence does not equal your other examples. That's like comparing the 'Occupy Wall Street' protests to the fall of the Roman Empire. Daala was using stolen money to hire mercenaries to enforce her will. Her and her entire regime should have been removed by the senate, after this scandal was revealed. Right now the GA looks as stable and functional as South Vietnam.

    4. I thought Abeloth kill the CoS? I don't have an issue with the jedi fighting Sith. My issue is with the jedi acting as ASSASSINS, with going out and deliberately, with premeditation killing people(with Gargoyles told me was wrong). Why not take them alive, why not try to NOT KILL SOMEONE LIVE ON TV.


    A. Which in Dennings books they do.


    B. They are lots of ways for the jedi to fight back without being a pack of murderous thugs, protecting lives above all for one.

    C. There needs to be a balance. V(2009) is an example of making the villain to successful, same with Young Justice season two. The heros accomplish nothing and if they come close the villains turn it into a win any way. Denning's books just show Luke as being too powerful for anything less then a God to touch. You can have the heros win, with the villains having a back up plan or maybe just have more stuff coming. Shadow Raiders is a good example, the heros win but the Beast is still out there.
    Last edited by AusStig, Feb 21, 2013
  14. Zeta1127 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 4
    This kind of discussion is one of the reasons why I don't understand why anything in the post-NJO happened the way it did.
  15. Jedi Ben Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 19, 1999
    star 6
    You'll probably have noticed I go by second-hand info on LOTF/FOTJ due to bailing at Betrayal, nothing I've read has convinced me that was a bad call.

    On point B - care to expand? I'm not playing Devil's Advocate, of what you've got in mind here, I wish to know more. (You get bonus points if you get the ref. ;) )

    Point C: Shadow Raiders? I'd be inclined to see about 75% of NJO falling into the too unrestrained villain criticism too.
    Sinrebirth likes this.
  16. Todd the Jedi Mod and Sitcom Dad of SWTV

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Oct 16, 2008
    star 5
    Don't worry, Zeta, I'm fairly certain this is spillover from the SOS thread. ;)
  17. Jedi Ben Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 19, 1999
    star 6
    Few people do, even Sinny's hard-pressed to render it all comprehensible! :)
    Zeta1127 likes this.
  18. Zeta1127 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 4
    When you feel like you need to justify what you are seeing on screen or reading on the page, then the work starts to loose credibility.
    GrandMasterKatarn likes this.
  19. The_Forgotten_Jedi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 12, 2010
    star 4
    So the Jedi, upon learning who exactly the Sith were, should have gone up to them wearing Jedi robes and politely asked them to surrender, and if they shockingly did not, try to capture them instead of trying to kill them? Why would they risk doing it like that when the Sith had a numerical advantage and had subordinated most of the government/military? The Jedi needed every edge they could get, and when fighting a war, you don't shoot to wound and capture, you shoot to kill. Assassinating a opponent who won't surrender and could cause massive damage to both your side and civilians isn't immoral: it's a smart tactical choice that will save lives in the long run.

    Also note that when Ben tried to capture a Sith, the guy started to fake surrender before sending a dagger into Ben's leg with the Force. Capturing a Force user is not like capturing a regular soldier.
    colojedi7 and Sinrebirth like this.
  20. Sinrebirth SWC and EUC Forum Moderator

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 15, 2004
    star 7
    1. The GM was assisting in protecting an immoral and illegal CoS. He had to be deposed, and judged. He is the one who disabled his guardians and challenged the Council. Saba tried to stop him, but he put her in a position where she had to save the Jedi (and by extension the galaxy) or save him. All of it had to be done. Right then. Otherwise the Sith would have killed Luke. Otherwise Daala would have slaughtered more civilians. Otherwise Lecersen and the others would have continued pushing Daala towards another autocratic Empire. Daala wouldn't negotiate. They surrendered, or they died. Nothing else.

    2. No, the whole Jedi Order decided their morals and goals were more important than Kenth's. That wasn't the decision of one person seeking to impose his will on everyone else. It was a group decision to act against Daala.

    3. And who would blame them? The government, which had lasted 25,000 years, was overthrown, shortly after it was constitutionally reformed into a horrible mockery of itself. That government was only destroyed four decades ago. Since then, said deposed government continued fighting for two decades, an armada arrived from another galaxy which overthrew the galactic government and then the next galactic government that consolidated the galaxy ruled for less than a decade before terrorists (Sith) launched a concerted effort to overthrow the government. Unsurprisingly, it's a mess. It should be.

    4. Abeloth, as Grand Lord of the Sith, yes. So we shouldn't kill Sith if they're on TV? We should let them go and kill more people?

    (Incidentally, I enjoy debating this stuff. Not an ounce of negativity to it, and loving that we're discussing it)
    kataja and colojedi7 like this.
  21. Zeta1127 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 4
    I say again, why did anything in the post-NJO happen the way it did? Every plot choice I have heard about from the post-NJO set off alarm bells, what is wrong with that picture?
  22. AusStig Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2010
    star 3

    On point B- They could help orgainse a resistance to the Sith. They could save people while acting from the shadows. What I'm basicly saying is the jedi sould be more like Batman :p

    Point C: Have never herd of Shadow Raiders? CGI cartoon from the 90s. How about Beast Wars? That's another good example. OR even the 03 TMNT cartoon; they beat the Shredder, but he came back with a bigger plan and he was always as boss.


    No.

    The jedi could still their guerrilla style attacks, but with aim to capture not kill. There are sleep darts, knockout gas and a bunch of other ways to take down a force user. The jedi seem to have no probs getting a Ysamlairi or tow when they needed, so why get some and use them to keep the SIth out? These Sith never had a choice to be anything other then Sith, why are the jedi not sympathetic? Why does no one, other then maybe Ben, suggest trying to bring them to the light side?


    1. HA HA, no. Ok how was she illegal? second point; he wasn't protecting her he was trying to protect the jedi from her. The jedi were going to declare war on her when they had no plan to fight it. THey had show that the blockade didn't work (which was stupid as they could have gotten more jedi, mostly young ones, out) and now they were going to humiliate an irrational CoS who hates them any way, how is that a good idea? He put Saba in a place to make a 'Friend or Idol decision', she choose the Idol, she choose her war. The jedi did not know Luke was in any immediate danger, and I still think his escape would have been more exciting with out their help, maybe the cult of master illusionest force users could have helped (I know some of them were in Abeloths' thrall but if Wynn Dorvan could resist why not them?).

    2. Yes but the jedi were acting like children. And they did not kill him that was Saba.

    3. I don't get what you are saying here at all. Shouldn't the heros have accomplished something other then getting people killed in their wars? Also shouldn't the government be more stable? the main thing that destroyed the NR was the Vong, so with out would not a government based upon it's structure last more then 5 years? Also yes I can blame them and I will.

    4. Usurper Grand Lord. Off topic but anyone else think that Grand Lord Vol was wasted? I mean he could fight Abeloth, that's something only Luke could really do. Any way still not really the Sith. Well she wasn't going to kill people on live TV, just wait until she leaves the studio floor, no tv cameras in the corridors, unless their cheap and using it cheat a 'live cross'. Also there is a reason why 'kids show' don't show people dying (robots is ok though).
    Last edited by AusStig, Feb 22, 2013
  23. The_Forgotten_Jedi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 12, 2010
    star 4
    IMO, I think people who are raised Sith would be harder to turn to the lightside than normal Sith. They've been living surrounded by Dark Side energy and teachings since birth. Look at Vestera: every time things got tough, she fell back on Sith thinking rather than trying to take the Jedi path she supposedly wanted to walk.

    Force users also have defenses against sleep darts, knockout gas, etc., all of which could reveal the Jedi's presence if they fail. Targeted lethal attacks have a better chance of success. And Ysamlairi would also work against the Jedi, and the Sith might dectect the blank spots approching.

    There were 5,000 Sith on Coruscant at that point. If the Jedi captured 1/10th of that number, that would leave them 500 highly dangerous prisoners who would outnumber the Jedi attacking the planet. Think of the disasters that could happen if those prisoners broke out.
  24. Dr. Steve Brule Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 7, 2012
    star 4
    Okay seriously, there is no, literally no, justification for Daala to be Chief of State. Either in-universe or out.

    In-universe: First off, it's not even clear how she would qualify as a GA citizen. She continued to lead renegade Imperial forces against the NR after the peace treaty with the Empire. She terror-bombed civilian worlds, attacked the Jedi Academy, tortured NR citizens, and also tried to blow up Coruscant. Not to mention her role in the Maw Installation, which is basically the GFFA's version of Nazi war crimes. She has no history of political leadership, and her past military leadership she got by being the mistress of the GFFA equivalent of Himmler or Heydrich. And she's put into power with no vote whatsoever.

    Out-of-universe: Seriously, what was going through Denning's head where the best choice to lead the heir of the Rebel Alliance was an Imperial warlord who most fans considered to be a bad joke and hadn't appeared in the EU for something like fourteen years prior to the previous book in the series? Not to mention this is the conclusion to a nine-book series and she's introduced out of the blue in book 8. There's no theme, no character arc to conclude, nothing. The fact that she was apparently the best choice Denning could come up with speaks volumes about how piss-poorly planned LOTF was, how terrible the recent EU has been in cultivating characters outside the central cast (consider how many politicians were developed in TTT, BFC, HOT, even New Rebellion or Planet of Twilight), and how little they care about simple things like pleasing the fans or even simple logic.

    Daala as COS was completely, utterly, absolutely, in no way debatable an utter fiasco and a slap on the face of every fan on the part of Denning and whoever at LFL approved it. It's the single worst plot point from the post-NJO storyline, and that should speak volumes.
    Havac, Danzo, ChildOfWinds and 8 others like this.
  25. Barriss_Coffee Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 29, 2003
    star 6
    Another reason to despise the whole Daala fiasco just dawned on me: she didn't even need to try to become COS. Lucas created an multi-movie epic to explain how Palpatine devised his rise to power. Ditzy ol' Daala just got it handed to her in a gold-plated epilogue without even submitting a resume.
    Last edited by Barriss_Coffee, Feb 22, 2013