(December 8, 2015 at 8:01 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: If qui gonn's skull was thicker the impact with the handled might have made no difference, but Imagine if maul banged the cross guard into qui gonn's forehead.
Regarding the danger, if the force lets one feel where a laser bolt coming at speed of light would strike and block it, wouldn't you think it would also let one feel where the wayward cross guard, coming at much less than speed of light, would be and keep vital parts out of its way?
Translation: light saber duels are so ridiculous no additional amount of ridiculousness will hurt them.
1) It's my understanding that no one uses lasers in the SW universe. Blasters, however, are charged ion bolts projected magnetically toward the target. (See, e.g. the scenes in Episode III where the cannon crews aboard the vessels are loading "shells", presumably of magnetically-contained high energy particles or perhaps antimatter, into the breeches of the great guns.) This gives a much-lower-than-light-speed velocity for the blaster bolts, which a Jedi might sense and deflect.
2) During a light saber battle, the Jedi are warring not only with their blades, but with their force powers. The ability to hit a Jedi (or Sith) with a saber would be impossible for you or me, since they would sense our swing long before it connected, but that is not necessarily so for two force-users. That is the main reason only Jedi can/do wield them.
3) I would have preferred to see Ren's light saber set up so that the side-blades can be deployed at will, much like Darth Maul was able to turn on/off one side of his dual saber. The surprise kill of a side-dagger blade could prove to be quite useful, in situations like the one in which Maul smacked Qui-Gon on the head. It's useless as a cross-guard, yes, but as a mechanism of intimidation against a neophyte (as in the scene we see in Episode VII, in the forest) it might prove quite effective to deploy it even without the surprise.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
