In spite of what Hollywood tells you, even throwing a knife isn't a very reliable tactic without a lot training and practice. Throwing a sword is even worse, as they are not even remotely aerodynamic and certainly not balanced for such a thing. A tomahawk is very much designed to be thrown, and is a pretty effective throwing weapon even for someone that doesn't have a lot of specialized training.

Lightsabers are a funny weapon, in that all the weight is in a fairly small cylindrical hilt while the energy blade has no mass or actual weight of it's own. So getting any kind of throwing accuracy, especially with the kind of throw Vader used, would pretty much necessitate employing the Force to get any sort of accuracy; otherwise it's an improvised thrown weapon.

As for Yoda, that was probably him dealing with self-deprecating guilt from getting so wrapped up on the Clone Wars that he didn't realize the true threat (Sidious) was right under his nose until it was far too late. Thus, focusing on winning wars doesn't make one great. I never took that line as Yoda saying "I'm a crappy warrior" but rather an admonishment to Luke to not be so focused on being a warrior that he forgets that there's more to life than fighting. I'd be very much akin to a WW2 or Vietnam veteran seeing a comparative "youngster" say they want to be a full-time soldier in the military and espousing the idea that war is a grand adventure.

It seems this was not the Dev's intention after all. From the latest update:

Although there are many different types of lightsabers, for rules purposes, any weapon that is listed in this section (Lightsaber weapons) is considered a lightsaber.

So the only benefit of an Ancient Sword is being able to use the Lightsaber skill with a Melee weapon, talents that require Lightsabers do not apply.

yup. *plays taps*

Unless they had two different people handling those sections, I doubt the interplay got overlooked. I think they responded to public pressure on this one. But yeah, the RAW now unambiguously states what people wanted it to before.

That's possible, but I'm always weary of the tyranny of the majority, or design by comity, or public pressure. Not that I disagree in this instance, but it makes me sad, really sad when People (businesses) bend to a vocal minority. Because that isn't always good business. Again, not exactly this instance.

I'm remembering the way the ending of Mass Effect 3 was changed because people didn't like it.

Anyway. Near topic rant over.

I'm remembering the way the ending of Mass Effect 3 was changed because people didn't like it.

And it was still crap (I'd argue it became a bit worse, but then I'm cranky that way).

yeah, kinda takes the teeth out of the Ancient sword since it only has 1 hp to begin with.

I'm remembering the way the ending of Mass Effect 3 was changed because people didn't like it.

It wasn't "changed", it was "clarified".

And it was still crap (I'd argue it became a bit worse, but then I'm cranky that way).

Whether it got worse or not, I couldn't say. literally, I've never seen it. But that a company, a major company, that is heavily invested in the idea that storytelling in a game is a key building block of game design, would change their decision on what that story ending should be because 5% of the player base complained... well, I think that shows a sort of spinelessness to stand up for the product they made. Call me old fashioned or idealistic, but I like my artists to be artists, and I believe story telling is an art.

yeah, kinda takes the teeth out of the Ancient sword since it only has 1 hp to begin with.

True. Although if an ancient sword is an example, nothing stops a GM from making significantly better "ancient swords" for the player that may not want to use a saber.

In my games I have better versions of slugthrowers that have more hard points. because you should always be able to file the sight off a pistol.

Whether it got worse or not, I couldn't say. literally, I've never seen it.

But that a company, a major company, that is heavily invested in the idea that storytelling in a game is a key building block of game design...

would change their decision on what that story ending should be because 5% of the player base complained...

well, I think that shows a sort of spinelessness to stand up for the product they made. Call me old fashioned or idealistic, but I like my artists to be artists, and I believe story telling is an art.

It would be like if 20th Century Fox jumped in and altered the ending of RotJ to be how the Death Star was really built by an ancient race of Droids that were manipulating the Emperor to kill off all living things. But all this is only reveled after Vader tosses Palpy down the chute and Luke finds the secret entrance to the Droid's control room under the Emperor's throne. Luke saves the day by choosing to blow up the Death Star by pushing one of three buttons! FADE TO BLACK

In the extended DVD release you get to see the other two endings, which are the same, but the Death Star blows up in different colors... and you get a clip art montage of how the other characters managed to survive.

But I digress...

I think digression is the name of the game at this point.

Again, I don't know the inner workings of bioware, so corporate futzing could be it, adn the writters may have been denied their story arc.

All I know is people on the internet, vocal minorities, really really love to voice their opinion. My self included. But while I can say my piece and make myself heard, Often it's an agitated few who love to talk about how much smarter they are than everyone else. I'm not exempting myself from that, but i hardly think it's a suitable base to build a quorum from.

That being said, the point of the open beta is to opine, so opine away, everyone. But (to bring this back around) just because a majority of people in a beta support an option doesn't mean it's a good idea. Instead, it may mean that these people haven't thought about the broader play experience, for people beyond the core fan groups and how that may impact the product as part of a glorious whole (or in some opinions hole).

Again, I don't know the inner workings of bioware, so corporate futzing could be it, adn the writters may have been denied their story arc.

Kinda like KotOR 2, but with less "petering out" and more "flaming out spectacularly".

honestly all this back and forth on the ancient sword if they just added cortosis to it it would solve most of it..then you could better see it using reflect while with 1 hp still not as strong as some melee or lightsabers and making it hold up defending a lightsaber...cause what is the point of something using lightsaber skill if you cant at least defend from a lightsaber?

We have Magic Space Knights and we're arguing about throwing swords? Magic Space Knights who in the OT have proven VERY adept at Telekinetics? Sorry, no issues with throwing a sword from my end.

honestly all this back and forth on the ancient sword if they just added cortosis to it it would solve most of it..then you could better see it using reflect while with 1 hp still not as strong as some melee or lightsabers and making it hold up defending a lightsaber...cause what is the point of something using lightsaber skill if you cant at least defend from a lightsaber?

Even though (per the Beta Updates) an ancient sword can't use the Reflect talent, it can Parry just fine since it is included in that talent's text (which allows for Melee weapons). The ancient sword also has Defensive 1, which can be applied non-discriminatingly to Lightsaber checks, Brawl checks, and Melee checks. So the ancient sword can defend against lightsabers just as well as anything—until it gets sundered best trick it out with some Cortosis weave if you want to avoid that!

To add on to what Away said, a the Parry ability does not have to be taken literally. Mechanically you avoid damage, how that translates narratively is up to you and the GM.

why couldn't the ancient sword use reflect?

pg. 124 "anything that uses the lightsaber skill is a lightsaber, even if it uses a different name."

this isn't a combat simulator, this is a role playing game, and according go the quick rule, this is a lightsaber with different fluff. if it used melee, it would be a different story?

wait, I don't have a book in front of me, but the ancient sword does use lightsaber, right? if not, disregard this entire post.

why couldn't the ancient sword use reflect?

pg. 124 "anything that uses the lightsaber skill is a lightsaber, even if it uses a different name."

this isn't a combat simulator, this is a role playing game, and according go the quick rule, this is a lightsaber with different fluff. if it used melee, it would be a different story?

wait, I don't have a book in front of me, but the ancient sword does use lightsaber, right? if not, disregard this entire post.

It was updated in an errata. Essentially only things listed under Lightsaber sections/ shoved into the Lightsaber stat tables count as Lightsabers now.

The updated text:

Lightsabers (page 124): Change the following sentence “Although there are many different types of lightsabers, for rules purposes, any weapon that uses the Lightsaber skill is considered a lightsaber, even if the weapon has a different name” to the following: “Although there are many different types of lightsabers, for rules purposes, any weapon that is listed in this section (Lightsaber weapons) is considered a lightsaber.”