Imperial Military/Government Ranking (help plz)

"I also find the Zaarin=Grand Admiral hing decidedly ''iffy''."

It's what LFL has officialy mandated plot device inside the essential chronology(Inuniverse historians) and later omnicient sources(whills or whatever),gamer #5 article, TOS, etc. If that's what they say, and intend, then there is no if, buts, doubts about it. It is the hard rules of what is now intended.

 

Hmmpfff. In any case call for the authorities, right.

In that case we have a contradiction of hard rules and sources again. Like ROTJ-Novel telling us the planet of the Endormoon destroyed, while according to other sources it is still there.

But maybe the writers of the EC haven´t read the DarkEmpireSourcebook careful enough.

About warlords: The HttE-novel makes clear, that Thrawn was personally promoted to Grandadmiral by Palpatine and given the right to carry the title of a warlord of the empire.

All the other guys were warlords in the sence of bandit-leaders.

And if we believe, that Palpatine was testing his subjects and eliminating the failures, well, almost the entire elite of the former empire was whipped out in the years following Endor. What a disappointment.

About Thrawn being a rouge. If we define becoming rouge as something bad, compared to loyal service to the "true" empire (funny, i always thought, there was only one empire) we have to assume an intention. But that is something Thrawn lacked. In this regard he was still a loyal servant, if not of the emperor, but of the empire.

 

*Shrug.* Can't argue with the official line, I guess. I suspect that it was just dodgieness on the part of the cutscene artist, originally.

 

"In that case we have a contradiction of hard rules and sources again. Like ROTJ-Novel telling us the planet of the Endormoon destroyed, while according to other sources it is still there."

Just to clarify to those that may not understand your refrences:

ROTJ novel said it(the planet) was destroyed 1000 or more years before rotj("millenia ago")

The movie script itself(written before the novel, and possibly altered after the novel was written) said it was there, albeit a small planetoid.

In later sources it developed into being a gas giant, including lucas's own ewok movies set within 5 years of ANH, and in one scene from the marvel monthly comics that came out about the same time, or a little after the ewoks: Caravan of courage movie, and later Ewok Cartoons, and most of the EU.

If what lucas said(from his movies and even script) the planet was still there within 5 years of the battle of endor, then that definately threw out the novelization quotes of "millenia", written by Kahn, making them invalid, for many years from the release of his book already.

 

Or in the time between the two, a new planet was pulled into orbit. It's not relevent to things, so it hasn't been explicitly stated. 1,000 years ago, the planet was destroyed. Sometime in between, a new one came along.

 

"Or in the time between the two, a new satellite was pulled into orbit. It's not relevent to things, so it hasn't been explicitly stated. 1,000 years ago, the moon was destroyed. Sometime in between, a new moon came along."

What are you talking about?

The moon wasn't destroyed, it was the planet, endor revolves around which was said to have been destroyed a millenia ago in rotj novel. Something that would have killed all life on endor moon anyways. But all other sources say the planet is still there, and you can see it in the ewok movies which is set within 5 years of rotj.

 

There...

 

Impossible. There is a hypothesis(I can't remember it's name),which states that planets are created by gases and debries coming together from a big exlosion over trillions of years. Gasgiants hold the largest gravity and pull moons to them, not other way around. Endor doesn't hold the mass needed to pull a planet closer to itself. If endor did have the mass of that level, life would not be able to develop on it. They would be crushed under the gravity.

As well, if moon could have had the mass to pull that gasgiant to it, the gas giant would then be the moon, with endor being the planet.(moons revolve around a planet, planets revolve around the sun.) But as I said, if gravity on terrestial planet needed for it to grab a gas giant to happen, it would be extremly high, life could not be supported on it. Especially life from low gravity planets.

There is only a certain area in which gas giants(which give out a bit of heat) can rotate around the sun, and if they were to be devestated it would not only most likely destroy there moons, but moon would probably freeze as well(because of the distance from the sun).

 

TOS databanks says:

Movies section:

"Secluded in a remote corner of the Outer Rim Territories, the gas giant Endor and its verdant moon of the same name would easily have been overlooked by a busy galaxy were it not for the decisive battle that occurred there. Endor serves as the gravesite of both Emperor Palpatine and Darth Vader. It was here that the Rebel Alliance began the path of victory over the Galactic Empire."

EU section:

"Endor is one of nine moons orbiting a lifeless gas giant in the Moddell sector. A convoluted hyperspace route and the enormous gravity well of its mother planet renders Endor a difficult place to visit, making it an ideal secret construction site for the Empire."

Behind the scenes section:

"The description of Endor's planet has changed in different publications. In the film Return of the Jedi, a distant orb can be seen along with the green moon, but it isn't large enough to be definitively labeled a planet. Special effects storyboards for this scene call one of these orbs "Planet Endor."

The Return of the Jedi novel describes the planet disappearing in a long-forgotten cataclysm, a theory supported in the original printing of the Dark Force Rising Sourcebook. The Ewok television movies, however, clearly showed a large gas giant in the Endor skies. The Truce at Bakura and Dark Apprentice novels also make reference to a large central planet visible from Endor's skies. The Ewoks animated series calls the planet Tana, but also shows a binary system, where all other sources show one sun. The twin suns can be attributed to Ewok lore and myth, rather than a real stellar phenomenon."

Seeing two suns can probably attributed to a "Sun Dog phenomena".

"Or in the time between the two, a new planet was pulled into orbit. It's not relevent to things, so it hasn't been explicitly stated. 1,000 years ago, the planet was destroyed. Sometime in between, a new one came along."

The other problem with your idea is the fact that ROTJ novel states there is no planet near endor since the cataclysm and during the events of ROTJ.

Yet we see it exists in stories set within a few years before rotj, and stories set a few years after rotj, by lucas, and other authors. All it turns out to be is an outdated quote in a book, much like luke being said to be in blue squadron in anh novel.

 

Val...
"The other problem with your idea is the fact that ROTJ novel states there is no planet near endor since the cataclysm and during the events of ROTJ."

Perhaps it got pulled from somewhere else through an anti-matter wormhole.

However, you should know it's generally wrong to suggest that one official source is better than another official source. ROTJ novellization is neither outdated nor "incorrect" - it is canon. 1,000 years ago, the planet was devastated. The later stories are also not "incorrect" - a planet indeed exists there after the cataclysm. They are canon as well. So, a planet was destroyed at some point in the past, and a planet exists again sometime more recently. That's not too hard to understand.

You can't just arbitrarily state something is a typo or is outdated or incorrect. LFL will retract/alter it if it's incorrect. They will state which source is wrong if one is indeed wrong.

 

"You can't just arbitrarily state something is a typo or is outdated or incorrect. LFL will retract/alter it if it's incorrect. They will state which source is wrong if one is indeed wrong."

I didn't, LFL did imply it:


"The Return of the Jedi novel describes the planet disappearing in a long-forgotten cataclysm, a theory supported in the original printing of the Dark Force Rising Sourcebook. The Ewok television movies, however, clearly showed a large gas giant in the Endor skies."

"however:
: in spite of the fact that : even though"

Since the ROTJ novel says that planet hasn't existed for a millenia, and doesn't exist in the events of the rotj. It contradicts the script by lucas,and his later movies, which show that it did infact exist in the last millenia, even in the movie. The movies and the EU section of the TOS says that endor revolves around it's moon, during the battle of endor:

"Secluded in a remote corner of the Outer Rim Territories, the gas giant Endor and its verdant moon of the same name would easily have been overlooked by a busy galaxy were it not for the decisive battle that occurred there. Endor serves as the gravesite of both Emperor Palpatine and Darth Vader. It was here that the Rebel Alliance began the path of victory over the Galactic Empire."

EU section:

"Endor is one of nine moons orbiting a lifeless gas giant in the Moddell sector. A convoluted hyperspace route and the enormous gravity well of its mother planet renders Endor a difficult place to visit, making it an ideal secret construction site for the Empire."


But the rotj novel says it wasn't there.

That would a contradiction. As well, we can see the planet exists in truce at bakura, and a marvel issue right after battle of endor. so yes it was there.

Before that we can see it existed within the last 1000 years in ewok movies, aura sing oneshot, ewok cartoons, marvel rotj adapation etc.

 

Val...
They actually didn't imply anything of the sort.

"The Return of the Jedi novel describes the planet disappearing in a long-forgotten cataclysm..."

The novel describes the planet disappearing...

"...a theory supported in the original printing of the Dark Force Rising Sourcebook."

Their opinion is that this is indeed supported in later works...

"The Ewok television movies, however, clearly showed a large gas giant in the Endor skies."

Point 1: This is LFL stating the facts - they do not give explicit approval of any of the three (ROTJ novel, DFRS, ETV). The facts are that the planet disappeared. Later works support that fact. And that a large gas giant is shown in the Ewok movies. There's no implication that any source is wrong.

Point 2: "...a large gas giant in the Endor skies..." A gas giant. Not the gas giant. Nor the original planet Endor.

So, according to LFL, the clear facts are that Endor was destroyed long ago in a catyclysm. DFR Sourcebook supports it. But, a gas giant appears in other sources.

It's not rocket science to put together that "the planet was destroyed" and "a gas giant took its place." That's merely restating the official facts.

 

"...a large gas giant in the Endor skies..." A gas giant. Not the gas giant. Nor the original planet Endor"

Actually TOS does say "The" gas giant:

"Secluded in a remote corner of the Outer Rim Territories, the gas giant Endor and its verdant moon of the same name would easily have been overlooked by a busy galaxy were it not for the decisive battle that occurred there. Endor serves as the gravesite of both Emperor Palpatine and Darth Vader. It was here that the Rebel Alliance began the path of victory over the Galactic Empire."


It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that two issues dispute each other:

That rotj novel says, that during rotj the death star orbits the moon endor, and that the moon hasn't orbited a planet anymore, for a very long time. That it's mother planet "died" in a cataclysm a long time before, and disappeared.

Yet we see that it does infact orbit during ROTJ(marvel rotj comics, in one scene), and ROTJ script(albeit it says the planet is a small rock in the background for some reason), and stories taking place in a short time around rotj, before and after. As well as the movie section, and the EU section of TOS saying that it does orbit "the" planet.

That sources that say the planet hasn't been around for a long time, and source that show it is around in the short time around the event, are disputing each other.

Something can't, be there and not be there at the same time. Unless we think cloaking device was involved. Which is one theory I preposed to save the quote on the first page of ROTJ novel. As well, 9 moons would have been shot out into space, and life would die if the planet was ever lost, truly, that can't be physically possible(as well a moon ceases to be a moon if no longer orbits anything). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know how astro physics work, then again maybe it does .

 

Val...
Now, you're mixing references.

"Actually TOS does say "The" gas giant:"

It says this elsewhere, not in the "however" statement which you incorrectly suggested they inferred ROTJ novel was in error.

There's an easy explanation for this. After being in place for so long, the (second) gas giant by right of being the only planet in the Endor System was also called Endor.

Not rocket science.

 

"There's an easy explanation for this. After being in place for so long, the (second) gas giant by right of being the only planet in the Endor System was also called Endor."

Then would dispute the quotes that say that the moons orbit the gas giant. If that second gas giant was already in the system.

If "they don't orbit the moon like the rotj novel says", then they would cease being moons, but planets by astro definitions.
But many sources dispute by saying that they do orbit a planet.

I also will bring up your ingoring of the word, "However"

"However" means as I've said before means "in spite of fact something else saying".

"In spite of" means:

In Defiance of, which means contrary too, "Despite", which is a variation of dispute.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what "however" means, or to use a thesaurus, or dictionary.

Which would translate the quote to

"Inspite of the fact that The Ewok television movies, clearly showed a large gas giant in the Endor skies."

"Despite the fact the ewok telivision movies, clearly showed a large giant in the endor skies."

Standard english paraprasing using like terms, "synonyms".

 

This is very interesting, watching you guys debate. This must be what it's like when encyclopedias quarrel...

 

Want me to break out the definition of "imply."

I didn't ignore it. I stated it doesn't matter, as well as the fact that "however" in that context did not mean that LFL felt any of the three sources were wrong.

What they were doing was laying everything out on the table...
1. ROTJ novel states it disappeared...
2. Which was backed up by other sources...
(HOWEVER)
3. Other sources show a gas giant.

Their use of "however" does not suggest LFL feels anything is incorrect, merely that they acknowledge a planet has disappeared and a gas giant has appeared.

If you substitute "LFL" for the "Ewok Movies" then it would mean what you incorrectly suggested they meant - that LFL feels the planet never disappeared.

As it stands now, they merely acknowledge that the Ewok movies show a gas giant after ROTJ novel says a planet disappeared.

So, officially, the planet disappeared and a gas giant is there now.

What we don't know are how it disappeared, how the gas giant appeared, etc. We may not ever know.

But what we do know is that ROTJ novel is not wrong, nor is DFR Sourcebook, nor are the Ewok movies. They haven't addressed that matter yet. Because of that, you can't arbitrarily assign incorrectness to sources of your choosing - that's no better than fan-fic.

 

Genghis,

No offense or anything, but your theory just would not hold water from a astrophysics standpoint.

First of all, where would such a gas giant come from? Let's examine the options:

The Endor system itself? (It would've had to have a highly unstable orbit that would've decayed rapidly LONG before life could evolve on Endor.)

Another star system? (Which one? Where is that other star? Barnard's Star, which is about 6 LY away from us, is moving towards us at only 87 miles per second. In 1000 years it moves about 0.25 LY. Any star passing that close would have set off massive tidal forces that could tear planets apart. Such a cataclysm would be almost certain to destroy all life on any planets in the system. Even assuming that such a cataclysm did destroy the original planet Endor, it would also have destroyed the moons of Endor. They would certainly not have been captured into a stable orbit around another planet so quickly.)

Unless you are planning to suspend such basic laws of physics as Newton's laws of motion, the law of conservation of momentum and the law of universal gravitation, your "continuity fix" does not work. Since we have seen these laws operating in the GFFA, I must assume that they are as valid there as they are here.

It is still a contradiction.

Kimball Kinnison

EDIT: Barnard's star moves about 0.25 LY every 1000 years, not 0.5 LY. Sorry.

 

No, genghis, all I'm saying is however = dispute, meaning two sources do dispute each other. Maybe they arn't applying which one is right, but they are defining that a dispute has arisen.

Also ewok movies don't apear after rotj, they are set before ROTJ. When the planet should be gone for a very long time(according to rotj novel), it's there a short time before the movie.

When the planet should be gone for a long time, It's there around tpm time period in aura sing oneshot.

When the planet should be gone a long time(according to the ROTJ novle), it's there in the marvel rotj adapation.

When the planet should be gone(according to the rotj novel), it's there a few days later in truce at bakura, and rotj novel.

When the planet should be gone, it's gone in the dark force rising sourcebook.

When the planet should be gone, it's in the sky in the Dark apprentice.

When it should be gone for (a long time according to the rotj novel) it's there in the ROTJ script.

When it should be gone for a long time, it's there around the planet during ROTJ, according to the movie and Eu sections of tos databanks.

Dispute is risen between all those sources, even within 2 versions of adapting the ROTJ story they dispute each other, some say it's there during the movie(marvel ROTJ and tos) some say it isn't(dark force rising, and the rotj novelization). By the definition of dispute they call each other into question. Even if lfl hasn't decided to crack down on which one is the right one, they still call into question which event of rotj is the right one? The ones that show a planet there or the one that says the planet isn't there? Or which history is right? the ones that say the planet hasn't been there for a very long time, or the ones that say that moon endor still cirlcles a planet?

Dispute means to call into question, and that is what happened.

I think the simpliest and easiest explanation if one wants to fit rotj novel idea in and save most of which was said, is that cloaking device was in effect which in affect made the planet, there and not there at the same time(depending on if it was on or off you would be able to see the planet, or not see the planet).

 

There is always the moon capture theory. However, for the forest moon to have been captured by another planet after the destruction of it's original planet, the process of evolution would have to be speed up as it is a great likelyhood that all life would have been killed off at the point where it was shot from the original planet's orbit prior to ever being captured by another planet. Thusly, if one uses the capture theory then they must be making a bit of a mistake as even if the forest moon lost one planet to be captured by another, a millenia would not be long enough for the evolutionary stage of life we see in RoTJ and the Ewok movies.

There is another possible theory, perhaps highly unlikely, that could explain the difference in the novelization and all other sources. That being that the forest moon's original "planet" was actually another moon of the gas giant Endor. This is similar to some thoughts that Pluto and it's moon of Charon are actually moons of one of the other outer planets. The forest moon and this other moon orbited the gas giant at such a distance, with the forest moon also orbiting this other moon, as to appear to be a planet and moon. Over time, the other moon was lost for whatever the reason, with Endor laft to orbit the gas giant. Those who had believed the forest moon was orbiting a "planet" (remember, they would be incorrectly thinking that this other moon was a planet due to how far out the two orbit the gas giant) would naturally think that the planet had been destroyed.

Another possible theory, similar to the one above, would have the two moons orbiting the gas giant in highly eliptical orbits, orbits that would occasionally bring the two close to each other if they are normally far apart. At the their farthest point from the gas giant, the two look like a planet and moon with the bigger moon actually having enough pull to cause the forest moon to temporairly orbit it while they are close to one another. Then as they begin to get near to the gas giant again, it's pull would cause the two to seperate and move in different directions, in part due to the forest moon orbiting the other moon. This would cause someone observing the Endor system to think that the larger moon is the forest moon's planet. Observation at a later date, when the two have seperated, would locate the forest moon, but not the other moon (perhaps obstructed by the gas giant). Seeing the forest moon at the apex of it's orbit around the gas giant, the same point it was at before when orbiting the other moon, would lead the observer to believe that the "planet" was destroyed between then and the last observation.

Ok, the two are highly unlikely theories which undoubtedly contain numerous flaws. One of which is that the gravitational forces of the other moon, or the loss of the other moon, would most likely result in the destruction of all life on the forest moon. But if the second theory did not cause any loss, it would be the one I'd go with.

 

Val...
"Dispute means to call into question, and that is what happened."

Exactly. My theory is that all are officially correct until any are deemed officially uncorrect. Your theory is fan-fic.

I also stated that the reasons don't have to be given. The planet may exist. It may be gone. A gas giant may exist. That's the official facts.

We can come up with any sorts of speculation we want to - and no, our laws of the galaxy need not apply.

A Sith Lord may have pulled the gas giant from his arse for all we know. It's as good a one as a cloaking device until the official clarification is given.

 

"Val...
"Dispute means to call into question, and that is what happened."

Exactly. My theory is that all are officially correct until any are deemed officially uncorrect."

Only one or the other can be correct, they can't be all correct. To opposing quotes can't both be facts. In any leaps of logic. As people have pointed out.

"Your theory is fan-fic."

Your the one that came up with a theory in the first place, as others have pointed out, it is fanfic as well, and doesn't explain the contradictions at all.

If two sources dispute each others events that happen at the exact same time then only one can be valid. The ROTJ novel says that endor is not around a planet, other sources set at the exact same time say otherwise, they disput what the novels says. This is not me making something up this is fact.

Or dark force rising sourcebook that said endor hasn't been circling a planet for many years. But we see that it has, in things taking place between it.

I wonder what happens if someone was to use the majority rule, , which side would win. There are more sources saying it's there than those saying it isn't and alot of those sources are straight out of the movies themselves, even cerasi, said that the movies are "absolute canon", a type of canon that outclasses the other canon material.

"When it comes to absolute canon, the real story of Star Wars, you must turn to the films themselves - and only the films."

Ewok movies are indeed films.

So if the films say that the planet is there, like is shown in the ewoks films, then that would be more absolute than the novels, which why the books they may be farely accurate when a dispute crops up, but the films take precidence because they are absolute. Luckily this doesn't happen too much.

"I also stated that the reasons don't have to be given. The planet may exist. It may be gone. A gas giant may exist. That's the official facts."

As I've been saying, but because it calls into question one saying it exists the other saying it's gone they do dispute each other that is the fact. No matter which one is right, they still do dispute each other because they are complete opposites. When there is opposing information only one can be correct. They can not exist at the same time. A person can't be an athiest, and be a christian at the same time it's impossible, dare I say it oxymoronic.

"We can come up with any sorts of speculation we want to - and no, our laws of the galaxy need not apply."

You have come up with alot of ideas of your own, and they do not follow the laws of the universe set down by novels or other sources, which do follow the laws of the galaxy.

 

This debate should be intresting. Two of the most knowledgeable people concerning SW on the forum going head to head. this will certainly prove enlightening to those of us less knowledgeable on the forum.

 

Oh please.