There's a lot of interesting ideas in there.

One slight variation would be to go back to the way the Order is described (in some sources, like the Saga Edition KOTOR guide) during the Old Republic where there was a formal Jedi structure with a Jedi High Council and multiple Jedi Councils spread across the galaxy but Jedi Knights had a lot of autonomy and it was expected that they could take or leave the "decisions" of the "local" Jedi Council or Jedi High Council.

I liked that structure and the feel it gave the Jedi order way better than the prequels, but you could argue that centralization of hierarchy through the council on Coruscant was a sign of them losing their way.

Maybe I missed some clues but the Tales of the Jedi comics made it look like the Jedi Order was made up of wandering nomad types that got together in huge conclaves for important decisions. Having the assassination of a bunch of Jedi masters and the return of the Sith certainly explains a shift between that style and that of the KotOR games and comics. The Jedi Order would necessarily have had to change to various threats through the years.

IIRC even in the KotOR era Revan was pushing the Jedi to work more closely with the Republic Navy/Army while the older Jedi balked at that kind of militarization.

(I haven't read the WEG Tales of the Jedi sourcebook so I don't know what they said about the Jedi Order structure in there.)

“Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you; here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere, yes. Even between the land and the ship.”

“Ohhh. Great warrior. Wars not make one great.”

And they still gave him a ******* lightsaber! Probably the worst part of the prequels.

“Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you; here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere, yes. Even between the land and the ship.”

“Ohhh. Great warrior. Wars not make one great.”

And they still gave him a ******* lightsaber! Probably the worst part of the prequels.

Actually, that part makes sense.

By the time Luke meets him, Yoda has had 2 decades to think back on fall of the Jedi and how and what went wrong. Yoda could have concluded that going to war was a bad idea and so was giving him hard-learned advice at that point.

It's okay for characters to learn from their past - to grow and change.

“Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you; here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere, yes. Even between the land and the ship.”

“Ohhh. Great warrior. Wars not make one great.”

And they still gave him a ******* lightsaber! Probably the worst part of the prequels.

Actually, that part makes sense.

By the time Luke meets him, Yoda has had 2 decades to think back on fall of the Jedi and how and what went wrong. Yoda could have concluded that going to war was a bad idea and so was giving him hard-learned advice at that point.

It's okay for characters to learn from their past - to grow and change.

And Yoda had reticense about the Clone War.

That's why Sidious' plan was so brilliant - the Jedi only had bad choices.

And I don't see what's inconsistent with Yoda wielding a lightsaber and claiming that wars don't make one great or that being a great warrior isn't what a Jedi is focused on.

I was wondering, in a hypothetical re-write, what changes you might make to the Jedi order and the ways in which they operate during [the prequel trilogy].

(I hope you don't mind the edit above)

Honestly, not much when I think about it... But,what I would change is based on two points of reference: how rare they are, and my personal reference.

I basically see the Jedi as very similar to monastic orders, fantasy wizards, and professional organizations, and I think that really colors my opinions below.

In a galaxy of quadrillions, I think 1,000 - 10,000 Jedi is reasonable range, but that means over a THOUSAND Earths, there would only be handful of Jedi. The rarity of Jedi (about 1 in a TRILLION; ) would make seeking potentials very important, and potentials would need to be pretty evident to other sensitives, i.e. they can feel each other from like a system over. Sensing each other would be very much like the way wizards in Edding's Belgariad series worked. The risk of one "bad seed" (looking at you, Anakin) would still lead to a lot of arguing about who should be trained.

Anyway, changes:

#1 No formal Jedi council

#2 A lot more laxity in what it means to be a Jedi

#3 Jedi go out of their way to disguise that they're Jedi

#4 Republic funds the Jedi, quietly, to deal with dark-siders.

#5 Jedi wouldn't go anywhere NEAR organized warfare.... officially

I like this a lot.

I would add that by making Jedi less unified, the "Jedi Code" becomes less unified and more of what your master taught you. It creates situations like, "Oh, you studied under Qui Gon? That explains a lot."

I'm envisioning scattered individuals that occasionally congregate as equals to discuss goings on in the universe (no official schedule, they just know where and when). Much more democratic, and not everyone shows up (some Jedi are known for being loners who never show, while others are very involved with their peers). You get more individualized takes on the code as well as personal rivalries.

Actually, one thing I would change from Ep I (yeah... the one thing...) is that when the Jedi start talking about the "the prophesy of the one that will bring balance to the force," at least ONE guy looks around and says:

"Hey, you know... the Lightside is really rocking it right now. No Sith sightings for a thousand years.

So, 'bringing balance to the force' would be more dark side... OH WAIT THAT BAD!

Don't train the brat."

And then everyone goes to get ice cream and throw little orphan annie off a bridge.

Well, Sidious was still active and thus a blight on the Force. The question then becomes would he have succeeded without Anakin? It also depends on your view of the prophecy; is it the eradication of the dark side or culling the numbers of Jedi too?

I think Sidious would still have brought about the destruction of the Jedi/Republic. Also, if the Jedi turned Anakin away that would have left him open to being recruited by Sidious at a much younger age.

And I don't see what's inconsistent with Yoda wielding a lightsaber and claiming that wars don't make one great or that being a great warrior isn't what a Jedi is focused on.

It's not exactly an inconsistency. The issue is that Yoda is so unphysical that giving him a sword and having him fight devalues what he offers as a character. In Empire he tells Luke in no uncertain terms that a Jedi's power is entirely outside the physical realm and those two quotes really are the epitome of Yoda's teachings.

First we see Luke say that he is looking for "a great warrior" and Yoda corrects him. The brilliance of this exchange is that Luke (and us as an audience) are expecting a traditional warrior; someone who is physically powerful. By making Yoda tiny and unimposing, Lucas is showing us that the Force is inherently beyond the physical; that being a powerful Jedi is not the same as being a powerful fighter.

Later, when Yoda explains that we are "luminous beings, not this crude matter" he is telling Luke where his power comes from. Again, it is expressly not from the muscles in Luke's arm.

So how's that relate to Yoda fighting with a lightsaber? Well sword fighting is by it's very nature a physical contest. Sure, the Force aids a Jedi when he is fighting, but it still relies on him being physically powerful. Watch the scenes where Yoda uses a lightsaber again. He has to jump around the entire time while his opponents don't have to; a disadvantage based entirely on his size (which we are told isn't important) and compensated for by his physical prowess (which we are told isn't important). Had Yoda been a more powerful swordsman, he might have killed Palpy and saved us this whole mess, but then he never even bothers to teach Luke to use his lightsaber.

Could Yoda's 19 years in hiding have resulted in a complete 180? Maybe so, but Yoda's ~900 years old in Empire/Jedi; says he's been training Jedi for 800 years. So either this centuries old monk suddenly has a huge unexplained opinion change, or Lucas sacrificed Yoda's core character in favor of more CGI swordfights.

It also depends on your view of the prophecy; is it the eradication of the dark side or culling the numbers of Jedi too?

This was basically my point: I don't see how you read "balance in the force" in that context, and not get really worried as a light-sider. Eradication of the dark-side is in no way "balance."

I can't believe that the Jedi Council would see that prophesy as a good thing for them, hence, I would change that about the Jedi in the PT.

It also depends on your view of the prophecy; is it the eradication of the dark side or culling the numbers of Jedi too?

This was basically my point: I don't see how you read "balance in the force" in that context, and not get really worried as a light-sider. Eradication of the dark-side is in no way "balance."

I can't believe that the Jedi Council would see that prophesy as a good thing for them, hence, I would change that about the Jedi in the PT.

From the context of the movies, I get the impression that the Jedi council believes that it means the destruction of the Sith. So from their point of view they have no reason to worry about someone who is bringing balance. And since they hadn't heard from the Sith in a thousand years, they dismissed Qui Gon's claims about Anakin and the Sith. If there is no Sith then why would there be need for a chosen one?

Outside the movies, I still buy into Lucas's claim that the Dark Side is a blight on the Force that needs to be "cleansed". That the Dark Side is a corrupting influence on the Force. Remember, there is no claim of a Light side in any of the films to date. (It looks like EP VII will change that though). Plus what we see of Yoda's travels in season 6 of The Clone Wars that idea is sort of reinforced. That the Living Force and Cosmic Force sort of exist as is and the areas of the Dark Side are anomalies. Plus the idea of balance as an equal number of both sides just seems off/wrong to me. Unless the ST finds a way to work that out.

And I don't see what's inconsistent with Yoda wielding a lightsaber and claiming that wars don't make one great or that being a great warrior isn't what a Jedi is focused on.

It's not exactly an inconsistency. The issue is that Yoda is so unphysical that giving him a sword and having him fight devalues what he offers as a character. In Empire he tells Luke in no uncertain terms that a Jedi's power is entirely outside the physical realm and those two quotes really are the epitome of Yoda's teachings.

First we see Luke say that he is looking for "a great warrior" and Yoda corrects him. The brilliance of this exchange is that Luke (and us as an audience) are expecting a traditional warrior; someone who is physically powerful. By making Yoda tiny and unimposing, Lucas is showing us that the Force is inherently beyond the physical; that being a powerful Jedi is not the same as being a powerful fighter.

Later, when Yoda explains that we are "luminous beings, not this crude matter" he is telling Luke where his power comes from. Again, it is expressly not from the muscles in Luke's arm.

So how's that relate to Yoda fighting with a lightsaber? Well sword fighting is by it's very nature a physical contest. Sure, the Force aids a Jedi when he is fighting, but it still relies on him being physically powerful. Watch the scenes where Yoda uses a lightsaber again. He has to jump around the entire time while his opponents don't have to; a disadvantage based entirely on his size (which we are told isn't important) and compensated for by his physical prowess (which we are told isn't important). Had Yoda been a more powerful swordsman, he might have killed Palpy and saved us this whole mess, but then he never even bothers to teach Luke to use his lightsaber.

Could Yoda's 19 years in hiding have resulted in a complete 180? Maybe so, but Yoda's ~900 years old in Empire/Jedi; says he's been training Jedi for 800 years. So either this centuries old monk suddenly has a huge unexplained opinion change, or Lucas sacrificed Yoda's core character in favor of more CGI swordfights.

I still don't see how Yoda's teachings on the Force would require him to not be very effective with a lightsaber.

Yoda is teaching Luke the essense of what it means to be a Jedi and the nature of himself and the Force.

None of that precludes being an effective warrior. I agree that Yoda was trying to correct Luke's attitude and perspective but I don't think he was trying to steer him away from being a warrior. In fact Yoda was training Luke to confront and defeat Vader.

Lucas actually intended Yoda in Empire Strikes Back to teach Yoda how to use a lightsaber but the technology of the time didn't let him do it.

It also depends on your view of the prophecy; is it the eradication of the dark side or culling the numbers of Jedi too?

This was basically my point: I don't see how you read "balance in the force" in that context, and not get really worried as a light-sider. Eradication of the dark-side is in no way "balance."

I can't believe that the Jedi Council would see that prophesy as a good thing for them, hence, I would change that about the Jedi in the PT.

From the context of the movies, I get the impression that the Jedi council believes that it means the destruction of the Sith. So from their point of view they have no reason to worry about someone who is bringing balance. And since they hadn't heard from the Sith in a thousand years, they dismissed Qui Gon's claims about Anakin and the Sith. If there is no Sith then why would there be need for a chosen one?

Outside the movies, I still buy into Lucas's claim that the Dark Side is a blight on the Force that needs to be "cleansed". That the Dark Side is a corrupting influence on the Force. Remember, there is no claim of a Light side in any of the films to date. (It looks like EP VII will change that though). Plus what we see of Yoda's travels in season 6 of The Clone Wars that idea is sort of reinforced. That the Living Force and Cosmic Force sort of exist as is and the areas of the Dark Side are anomalies. Plus the idea of balance as an equal number of both sides just seems off/wrong to me. Unless the ST finds a way to work that out.

Obi-wan explicitly connects Anakin as being the Chosen One with his destiny to destroy the Sith.

Yoda says the prophecy may be misunderstood.

But I think that saying the the Jedi were foolish for not "properly" interpreting what it meant for Anakin to bring the Force back into balance is misplaced.

We, the viewers, don't really get much information about this prophecy. We don't know where or who it comes from. What it actually says. We know very little. All we do know is filtered through characters in the story. Maybe this was all hashed out in Legacy EU (I haven't followed the EU that closely in the past so maybe it has).

So, what's more likely - the characters in the story are idiots or we the viewers are mostly in the dark?

I'm gonna say this one more time, and then I'm out.

This thread is about what we would change.

I think the view points below represent what's in the movies:

From the context of the movies, I get the impression that the Jedi council believes that it means the destruction of the Sith. So from their point of view they have no reason to worry about someone who is bringing balance. And since they hadn't heard from the Sith in a thousand years, they dismissed Qui Gon's claims about Anakin and the Sith. If there is no Sith then why would there be need for a chosen one?

Outside the movies, I still buy into Lucas's claim that the Dark Side is a blight on the Force that needs to be "cleansed". That the Dark Side is a corrupting influence on the Force. Remember, there is no claim of a Light side in any of the films to date. (It looks like EP VII will change that though). Plus what we see of Yoda's travels in season 6 of The Clone Wars that idea is sort of reinforced. That the Living Force and Cosmic Force sort of exist as is and the areas of the Dark Side are anomalies. Plus the idea of balance as an equal number of both sides just seems off/wrong to me. Unless the ST finds a way to work that out.

Obi-wan explicitly connects Anakin as being the Chosen One with his destiny to destroy the Sith.

Yoda says the prophecy may be misunderstood.

But I think that saying the the Jedi were foolish for not "properly" interpreting what it meant for Anakin to bring the Force back into balance is misplaced.

We, the viewers, don't really get much information about this prophecy. We don't know where or who it comes from. What it actually says. We know very little. All we do know is filtered through characters in the story. Maybe this was all hashed out in Legacy EU (I haven't followed the EU that closely in the past so maybe it has).

So, what's more likely - the characters in the story are idiots or we the viewers are mostly in the dark?

I also think these view points are ****ing dumb.

So I would change how that's handled in movies.

That's why I said:

Because what we would change is the point of this thread. Is that clear yet?

At this point, If someone decides to continue explaining what actually happened in the movies and willfully ignore the point of the thread, that's their choice.

It ain't my problem anymore.

Someone mentioned above about not trying to fix the past, which wasn't my intention when starting this thread. There are some interesting ideas in here that could be used as the backdrop for a group's own take on the universe, independent to the canon, and I find that inspiring. Getting things back on track, I'd like to explore the Force ghost idea more. I've already said that I'd prefer a smaller Jedi order, so how about they remain in touch with the voices of many Jedi from long ago; that their voices can be sought out for (perhaps conflicting) perspectives. Perhaps a holocron is a proxy force ghost, a contingency plan in case a Jedi fails to become one with the Force.

I still don't see how Yoda's teachings on the Force would require him to not be very effective with a lightsaber.

Yoda is teaching Luke the essense of what it means to be a Jedi and the nature of himself and the Force.

None of that precludes being an effective warrior. I agree that Yoda was trying to correct Luke's attitude and perspective but I don't think he was trying to steer him away from being a warrior. In fact Yoda was training Luke to confront and defeat Vader.

Lucas actually intended Yoda in Empire Strikes Back to teach Yoda how to use a lightsaber but the technology of the time didn't let him do it.

I believe you are misunderstanding my criticism. I don't think it is terrible that Yoda is proficient with a lightsaber. I think that showing him using one is in direct conflict with the character we see in Empire and Jedi who dismisses the physical in favor of the intangible. Yoda tells Luke that size and strength do not matter, but those things do matter in sword fights. So showing Yoda fight takes away from that.

As to your other statements:

Yoda tells Luke that he must face Vader again and Obi Wan tells Luke that he must confront Vader. It is Luke's own perspective that leads him to believe that his only option is killing Vader. As it turns out, Luke is able to succeed without killing him. I'm going to skip writing much about this confrontation because I could seriously write 15k+ words on this. It's by far the most interesting duel in the Star Wars canon, and one of my favorite scenes across all films. Suffice to say, the throne room duel was about a lot of things, but the least important was two characters swinging laser swords at each other.

As to what Lucas intended to do, man, it's not even worth worrying about that. Han would be some alien, Luke would be old, etc etc. I think it's safe to say that Lucas' opinion on what Star Wars "should" be is something we should take with a grain of salt. I mean, in his mind Han shot second.

I don't know;that's just like my opinion man.

Someone mentioned above about not trying to fix the past, which wasn't my intention when starting this thread. There are some interesting ideas in here that could be used as the backdrop for a group's own take on the universe, independent to the canon, and I find that inspiring. Getting things back on track, I'd like to explore the Force ghost idea more. I've already said that I'd prefer a smaller Jedi order, so how about they remain in touch with the voices of many Jedi from long ago; that their voices can be sought out for (perhaps conflicting) perspectives. Perhaps a holocron is a proxy force ghost, a contingency plan in case a Jedi fails to become one with the Force.

I like the idea of holocrons being fallible. I mean, we don't know much about how they work so who's to say they are perfect sources of knowledge? What if the PCs get their hands on one, only to later discover that it's been corrupted all along and this Force Ghost has been using the PCs as physical pawns in some centuries old scheme? That could be a fun twist.

I'm gonna say this one more time, and then I'm out.

This thread is about what we would change.

I think the view points below represent what's in the movies:

From the context of the movies, I get the impression that the Jedi council believes that it means the destruction of the Sith. So from their point of view they have no reason to worry about someone who is bringing balance. And since they hadn't heard from the Sith in a thousand years, they dismissed Qui Gon's claims about Anakin and the Sith. If there is no Sith then why would there be need for a chosen one?

Outside the movies, I still buy into Lucas's claim that the Dark Side is a blight on the Force that needs to be "cleansed". That the Dark Side is a corrupting influence on the Force. Remember, there is no claim of a Light side in any of the films to date. (It looks like EP VII will change that though). Plus what we see of Yoda's travels in season 6 of The Clone Wars that idea is sort of reinforced. That the Living Force and Cosmic Force sort of exist as is and the areas of the Dark Side are anomalies. Plus the idea of balance as an equal number of both sides just seems off/wrong to me. Unless the ST finds a way to work that out.

Obi-wan explicitly connects Anakin as being the Chosen One with his destiny to destroy the Sith.

Yoda says the prophecy may be misunderstood.

But I think that saying the the Jedi were foolish for not "properly" interpreting what it meant for Anakin to bring the Force back into balance is misplaced.

We, the viewers, don't really get much information about this prophecy. We don't know where or who it comes from. What it actually says. We know very little. All we do know is filtered through characters in the story. Maybe this was all hashed out in Legacy EU (I haven't followed the EU that closely in the past so maybe it has).

So, what's more likely - the characters in the story are idiots or we the viewers are mostly in the dark?

I also think these view points are ****ing dumb.

So I would change how that's handled in movies.

That's why I said:

Actually, one thing I would change from Ep I [...]

Because what we would change is the point of this thread. Is that clear yet?

At this point, If someone decides to continue explaining what actually happened in the movies and willfully ignore the point of the thread, that's their choice.

It ain't my problem anymore.

Oh, so when you suggested the Jedi Council could just murder a kid by throwing him off a bridge that was a serious suggestion for how to change the Jedi in the setting and not just a rant about what you didn't like about the canon setting?

I think if you'd actually said anything about how the prophecy could be different, or interpreted differently, or manifested differently and what this would mean for the Order in an alternate setting you'd have gotten a much different response.

But changing the prophecy and the Chosen One would be potentially something very interesting.

If the Jedi Order is changed then this might mean something different for the Sith as well.

In legends (is it still legends?) the Jedi who fell to the dark side fled to Korriban (Morriband) and enslaved the Sith natives...

Maybe the Sith are a secret evil sect within the Jedi.

Or maybe the Jedi and the Sith are both factions within the Jedi Order and the Order has an amoral outlook on the Force and things in general allowing for the evil of the dark side as "balance" and they're mostly interested in exploring and manifesting the Force, even the dark side.

Or you could keep a "Republic" that has a Sith Order in a similar (but evil, dark side) role as the canon Jedi Order. Perhaps the Jedi are so small in number that the Sith Order and the "Republic" don't bother to eradicate them, so the Jedi work on the fringes of society but it's not so dangerous for them as during the canon Empire.

Maybe Darth Sidious and Anakin converted most/many of the Jedi to his new order and the Jedi devoted to the light side left?

Oh, so when you suggested the Jedi Council could just murder a kid by throwing him off a bridge that was a serious suggestion for how to change the Jedi in the setting and not just a rant about what you didn't like about the canon setting?

If you're too dense to figure out that single line was hyperbole and meant to be humorous, I'm gonna let you keep thinking I was serious.

I'd ask how what I said *wasn't* reinterpretation of the prophesy, but this is obviously pointless: You're more interested in condescension than discussion.

Oh, so when you suggested the Jedi Council could just murder a kid by throwing him off a bridge that was a serious suggestion for how to change the Jedi in the setting and not just a rant about what you didn't like about the canon setting?

If you're too dense to figure out that single line was hyperbole and meant to be humorous, I'm gonna let you keep thinking I was serious.

I think if you'd actually said anything about how the prophecy could be different, or interpreted differently, or manifested differently and what this would mean for the Order in an alternate setting you'd have gotten a much different response.

But changing the prophecy and the Chosen One would be potentially something very interesting.

I'd ask how what I said *wasn't* reinterpretation of the prophesy, but this is obviously pointless: You're more interested in condescension than discussion.

And your response wasn't condescending? I thought I was having a reasonable conversation.

In the interest of having a discussion I looked back at your comments and all I see you saying is that you don't like how the Jedi interpreted the prophecy so you'd change it...but you don't really elaborate.

I would separate the Jedi Order from the Republic Senate and politics and bring them back to the order of mystics that is alluded to in 4, 5, and 6. In the movies we see the Jedi are ostensibly policemen the Republic uses because there is no standing army. Mace Windu tells the Chancellor that if trouble in the Republic keeps escalating, there simply won't be enough Jedi to keep the peace. They could still have a nice, visible temple on Coruscant, but it would be a sham, something visible for the masses to gawk at at not be fearful of. The real centers of the Order would be remote monasteries located here and there, without billboards that say "Jedi temple here."

I wouldn't make Palpatine a Sith Lord, but he would be guided by one. Put the Sith way back in the shadowy background. Never show him directly, only vaguely, when Palaptine is alone in his quarters. Palpatine can still be the megalomaniac he is. He can still be the sly manipulator, but he's receiving advice from beyond the pale.

You can still have the Clone Wars as they were in the movies: The Republic's army of manufactured soldiers vs. the Separatist's army of manufactured droids. The clone armies can still be created through the machinations of the Sith Lord and his apprentice, Count Dooku. But the Jedi would not be the generals. They would not even be involved in the Wars on an official basis. Some Jedi might get involved individually, but the Order would not. In 4, Leia tried to get a message to General Kenobi, not Jedi Master Kenobi, who fought alongside her father in the Clone Wars.

At the end of the Wars, the clone troopers would have been tasked with obliterating the Jedi, but that would have been on the advice of the Sith Lord whispering in Palpatine's ear. The whole everything was a machination of the Sith, but Emperor Palpatine doesn't care.

1, 2, and 3 would have been Kenobi's story and the Clone Wars. And how his padawan turned.

But chiefly, the first sentence in my post is what I would change. The rest is my own conjecture of how it would have played out.

Hi folks

Less of this, please:

Oh, so when you suggested the Jedi Council could just murder a kid by throwing him off a bridge that was a serious suggestion for how to change the Jedi in the setting and not just a rant about what you didn't like about the canon setting?

If you're too dense to figure out that single line was hyperbole and meant to be humorous, I'm gonna let you keep thinking I was serious.

I think if you'd actually said anything about how the prophecy could be different, or interpreted differently, or manifested differently and what this would mean for the Order in an alternate setting you'd have gotten a much different response.

But changing the prophecy and the Chosen One would be potentially something very interesting.

I'd ask how what I said *wasn't* reinterpretation of the prophesy, but this is obviously pointless: You're more interested in condescension than discussion.

And your response wasn't condescending? I thought I was having a reasonable conversation.

In the interest of having a discussion I looked back at your comments and all I see you saying is that you don't like how the Jedi interpreted the prophecy so you'd change it...but you don't really elaborate.

And more of this:

I would separate the Jedi Order from the Republic Senate and politics and bring them back to the order of mystics that is alluded to in 4, 5, and 6. In the movies we see the Jedi are ostensibly policemen the Republic uses because there is no standing army. Mace Windu tells the Chancellor that if trouble in the Republic keeps escalating, there simply won't be enough Jedi to keep the peace. They could still have a nice, visible temple on Coruscant, but it would be a sham, something visible for the masses to gawk at at not be fearful of. The real centers of the Order would be remote monasteries located here and there, without billboards that say "Jedi temple here."

I wouldn't make Palpatine a Sith Lord, but he would be guided by one. Put the Sith way back in the shadowy background. Never show him directly, only vaguely, when Palaptine is alone in his quarters. Palpatine can still be the megalomaniac he is. He can still be the sly manipulator, but he's receiving advice from beyond the pale.

You can still have the Clone Wars as they were in the movies: The Republic's army of manufactured soldiers vs. the Separatist's army of manufactured droids. The clone armies can still be created through the machinations of the Sith Lord and his apprentice, Count Dooku. But the Jedi would not be the generals. They would not even be involved in the Wars on an official basis. Some Jedi might get involved individually, but the Order would not. In 4, Leia tried to get a message to General Kenobi, not Jedi Master Kenobi, who fought alongside her father in the Clone Wars.

At the end of the Wars, the clone troopers would have been tasked with obliterating the Jedi, but that would have been on the advice of the Sith Lord whispering in Palpatine's ear. The whole everything was a machination of the Sith, but Emperor Palpatine doesn't care.

1, 2, and 3 would have been Kenobi's story and the Clone Wars. And how his padawan turned.

But chiefly, the first sentence in my post is what I would change. The rest is my own conjecture of how it would have played out.

Cheers!

PM3D

Actually, one thing I would change from Ep I [...]

Because what we would change is the point of this thread. Is that clear yet?

At this point, If someone decides to continue explaining what actually happened in the movies and willfully ignore the point of the thread, that's their choice.

It ain't my problem anymore.

Apologies, I meant no offence and sorry to derail the thread.

I didn't intend any offense either. I was trying to establish what is even known about about the prophecy in canon (it's wide open for interpretation and alteration). I wasn't trying to derail the thread or tell someone they couldn't depart with canon but apparent I came across as a ****** so I apologize.

The Jedi could also be more like a guild where there's basic rules for membership and expectations for behavior with training of new Jedi following an apprentice/journeyman/master model like other guilded professions. So you can have maverick Jedi. As well as those who "run" the guild and put some effort into maintaining and enforcing guild standards.

So you could have two opposing factions (whether political or martial or whatever) who have both retained the services of Jedi....

What about running jedi more like clans of Samurai? They have a Daimyo like individual who the republic senate of planetary governments can petition for help.