Do any of you name your lightsabers, your npcs' lightsabers, or your ancient lightsaber artifacts?

I hadn't really thought about it until going to Disney and building my own. One of the two I built had a slightly quirky sound board, that gave it a very throaty rumble. I decided to name it "the Growler." It has since become part of my campaign, in the possession of an npc the players have yet to encounter.

Going to disney to build your own? IS there something i dont know about there?

As for naming, among the idea I would think that would seem a very narcissistic thing to do. Something that would build an undue pride. A lightsaber is a tool, like a hammer or a pen.

I think outside of the old jedi order, such as dark jedi, sith, or any other force group that uses lightsabers; i think it just depends on the tennents of that group as to if thats an okay thing to do or not

One of the gift shops in Magic Kingdom, and the Star Tours gift shop both allow you to build your own lighsaber using modular pieces. It was one my favorite parts about my last visit there.

I'm kind of jealous of your funky sound card. A growling lightsaber sounds very interesting.

I would take the LotR philosophy - opposed to Game of Thrones. You don't give a sword its name. It should be earned.

A named weapon has an importance and a story.

It doesn't strike me as being very "Star Wars."

On the other hand, named swords in history and fantasy fiction are "a thing."

And, Star Wars is basically a space fantasy with sci-fi aesthetics.

I think it would work best if it were for famed lightsabers surrounded by legend.

Or, a quirk of a particular Jedi - yours - who names sabers.

The key is for the named lightsabers - and their naming - to be unique.

"I call her 'Vera'."

Nope. Gear, other than starships (and not even all of those), doesn't get names.

I could see a stodgy old Clone Wars veteran name their lightsaber. PC's lightsabers possibly, but there'd have to be a reason. Ancient Swords on the other hand . . . Definitely name those (especially if they're Sith Warblades)

The only named lightsaber I can think of is the Darksaber (not to be confused with the battlestation) from Clone Wars.

Unlike magic swords and the ilk that might be made by master smiths and be passed through the generations, most lightsabers are deeply personal weapons made by individuals and don't really pass between people. There's no point naming a lightsaber because it's simply "your lightsaber". If a lightsaber were to be inherited it would probalby be named for whoever made it (i.e. Luke inherits "Anakin's Lightsaber").

I think it might be more credible that certian unique crystals might be named, and perhaps different people use them in their lightsabers across the generations. I think KoToR had something like that. I can imagine the Jedi order having a collection of very special crystlas in their vaults that occasionally get given to Jedi when the Force wills it in some manner or similar (but probably not as a "reward" as that would seem to go againt the philosophy of the Jedi who do not work for reward). Given that a Jedi connects to the crystal in their lightsaber they could even contain a certian essence of the past Jedi who have used it (much like the Archancelor's Hat). Basically if I wanted to get into a kind of "special named weapon" fantasy trope for Lightsabers in my campaign this is where I would go.

There is a very interesting scene in Episode VII which sheds some light on this.

I don't think most lightsabre would have names due to the impersonal nature of having a lightsabre. Though Sith swords I can see as having a name.

Mine was dubbed "the proctologist"..... I kid

I think Jedi naming their weapons would be rare. A named weapon is meant to intimidate, so I would see it being much more common among darksiders. That said, a particularly unique lightsaber would probably pick up a nickname, especially if the Jedi himself downplayed his identity or the saber passed among several users. A lightsaber with a Dragite gem might make an impression on the locals with its intense ringing sound, especially when it strikes down a tyrannical ruler. Word may spread of the "Song of Justice," which rings like a hammer striking a bell as it smites evil.

For Jedi specifically, naming a lightsaber would seem out of character (no attachments, y'know?), but that doesn't mean a lightsaber couldn't have a name. A particularly notable historical weapon might pick up a name or moniker (or several) over generations (I could see a distant future story with Anakin's lightsaber simply being called "Skywalker"), a group might name the weapon of a hero or tyrant (as above).

A PC in the setting of Force and Destiny, depending on their backstory, mentality and culture (and without extensive knowledge of the Jedi dogma), might name a weapon if it suits them. Naming weapons isn't unheard of in Star Wars, but mostly with blasters.

Remeber that they already have a special name, it's "Lightsaber", a very rare and special weapon. Most citizens will never see one in their entire lives, and when they do they'll remeber it as "The Lightsaber".

The Grand Falloon has the right idea, and points out the reason that lightsabers generally aren't named.

The origin of naming weapons comes from treating them like talismans in tales and fables. Excalibur, Mjolnir, Hrunting and Naegling, all come from the talismanic desire to "pass on" something from the great heroes.

In modern society, we find it increasingly rare to have such talismanic behavior, mostly because of the change in how we tell stories. Originally, we told stories using word of mouth; if we were lucky we had a picture. Most storytelling was done by travelling bards who acted out the sagas, or merely told tales, but in both cases, it helped the audience visualize the narrative if a prop or item could be conjured - this made it convenient to make items (which long outlived the hero) a strong, named element of the story. It made a tangible link through the sense of touch. Now, we find our storytelling medium to be visual based - we need no stronger link to visualize things because it is right there in front of us!

The development of modern fairytale has switched. Heroes from WW1 and WW2 (such as the Red Baron or Vasily Zaytsev) don't need to have talismans with them to be passed down to us, because we have pictures, see them in action themselves through cinema, and have accepted technology in place of magic as a society. This demystification of the past through visual storytelling and technology makes the naming of a weapon merely an affectation, and no longer contributes to the "hero" themselves.

I have always wondered this, as humans, we tend to name things we talk to (cars, guns, computers, etc) even if it is just that we are talking to ourselves when the item is present. we anthropomorphize everything. I see no problem naming a weapon (although it is usually the prideful that name something like their weapons "...I call 'er Vera.")

I could see an old jedi, hiding our after Order 66 that has gone a little "shifty" that has named his weapons, the things kept close to him, these deeply personal items. They are symbols of years of training, or hardships, and most of all, the force. If one of my players wanted to call his lightsaber "Oathkeeper" or "Ben's light" after his fallen brother, who am I to stop him. If anything, it is forming a connection, a bond, a sentiment, which as we learned from Yoda, can lead down the path to the dark side.

I have always wondered this, as humans, we tend to name things we talk to (cars, guns, computers, etc) even if it is just that we are talking to ourselves when the item is present. we anthropomorphize everything. I see no problem naming a weapon (although it is usually the prideful that name something like their weapons "...I call 'er Vera.")

I could see an old jedi, hiding our after Order 66 that has gone a little "shifty" that has named his weapons, the things kept close to him, these deeply personal items. They are symbols of years of training, or hardships, and most of all, the force. If one of my players wanted to call his lightsaber "Oathkeeper" or "Ben's light" after his fallen brother, who am I to stop him. If anything, it is forming a connection, a bond, a sentiment, which as we learned from Yoda, can lead down the path to the dark side.

This is really it though, where once the item was part of the hero (in some cases it was intrinsic to the hero) now it is merely named as affectation. As an example, King Arthur was permanently bonded to Excalibur in myth, as without the divine right of rulership housed within the blade, he was nothing. Moreover, Excalibur itself gave him effective immortality, and it wasn't until he sent the blade back to the Lady that he was able to die.

Iron Man is a modern example of hero who is enabled through an item, this time the armor. While we could argue that the suit of armor is named (The Iron Man), that isn't quite accurate as the armor changes often and the identity of the hero is Iron Man. In this case, the item bears no name (merely the affectation of "MK Whatever").

Thanks for the replies. It seems to me we are mostly in agreement, that if done, it is relatively rare.

Looking around my room, I have a rather large collection of weapons - swords, pistols, flintlock muskets, blunderbusses, etc. - and of all of those, the only thing that I've pinned a name to is that plastic toy lightsaber.

Thinking about what in my life I have named, and it's basically just vehicles and computers, things that seem to have a life and personality of their own. My car has to have a name so I can shout at it or plead with it when it isn't behaving. On the other hand my bow is just my bow, it does what a bow does every time and never got a name.

So I can see you "growler" getting a name if it seems to behave strangley (even just the sound) and you can sense (or imagine) it's personality (i.e. of the sound changes in different circumstances and you can imagine this is an expression of it's mood). Beyond it sounding wierd though, a lightsaber is basically just a lightsaber, and it either works or doesn't, and if it doesn't you fix it quick or die like a chump. It's not quite like a car, if your lightsaber sometiems didn't start easily on a cold day you wouldn't just consider it part of it's personality, you'd **** well fix it.

In the Fafherd and Grey Mouser books they named their swords but with a bit of a twist. Grey Mouser's rapier was always called "Scalpel" even when he just got a new one.

This is my lightsaber, there are many like it but this is mine. It's called Mr Buzzy!

I think a lightsaber could be named. Obi Wan keeps telling Whiney Brat off for loosing his in Attack of the Clones, and does say something like "this (lightsaber) is your life." Then there is the way he hands his father's lightsaber to Luke in A New Hope.

Ultimately it's down to GM/player choice. I would definately name a lightsaber that I wanted the players to know it had a history.

I doubt lightsabers see much naming in the Star Wars universe. Primarily for the reasons we've heard in the other numerous posts for this. Even among the Sith it doesn't appear to happen. You don't read about Nightbringer the fabled lightsaber wielded by the fearsome Darth Bane, it's just Darth Bane's lightsaber. In this case I believe that is largely because the power is believed to be with the individual and the lightsaber itself is merely one of their tools. I think among the Sith it would be seen as a weakness if their weapon was thought to be the powerful and fearsome part of the equation and they were merely the one wielding it.

We can compare this to The Darksaber mentioned earlier. In this situation, The Darksaber itself is thought to be the power and what gives the one wielding it the edge rather than their abilities as an individual. "Ha ha! Now I can defeat you Jedi... I have The Darksaber!" kind of mentality. This sort of power bestowed upon the object or tool doesn't happen around other Jedi and Sith. It's not "Oh no! I better run... he has the Red Reaver!" it is "Oh crap! They sent Darth Vader.. we're doomed now!"

Sith want themselves to be seen as the entity of power, not their tools or their weapons or their vehicles (In general.. Sidious worked somewhat differently to the standard I think with his Death Stars and Storm Troopers.. and doing very little directly himself.) and Jedi want to bring peace, harmony and balance so on multiple levels the naming doesn't work. They aren't looking to incite fear, intimidation and awe.. plus they want a Jedi as a person to be seen as the peacekeeper and again not their weapon to be giving them this power. On top of that, Jedi naming their weapon would be creating bonds and attachments which they are supposed to avoid and to do so with what is an instrument of war/combat is additionally unfitting. A jedi shouldn't seek to use their lightsaber, it should be a last resort.

I think Clone Wars treatment of the Lightsaber is not the best example of standard Jedi behavior either. Firstly, they ARE at war. And they have become not just troops in that war but the generals and commanders leading the armies of the republic. Telling a Jedi in that situation that their ligthsaber is their life is akin to the marine's today doing the same for their guns.

Well, for the Jedi at least, the lightsaber was a combination of a badge of office (member in good standing of the Jedi Order) and a symbol of who and what they were (guardians of peace and justice).

But yeah, I agree that the Jedi wouldn't go around naming their lightsabers, simply because such a concept is a form of conceit (I do like the Hound's take on the sort of folks that name their swords in the Game of Thrones TV series) and a big part of being a Jedi Knight is to act as a humble servant of the Force. Sith have the conceit/arrogance for it, but as ShiKage said they'd want themselves to be the object of awe/fear rather than their weapon.

I'd like to agree more with Dono on this...

..., but I don't think it's actually possible!

Bounty Hunters? They might name a particular weapon or maybe, it might get named *for* them by the people who have encountered it.

Scoundrels? I can see them naming a weapon or two that they particularly like.

Mercenaries? Maybe, depending on the personality.

Regular military? Probably not, since 'their' gear is issued to them, and might not even be the same rifle from mission to mission. It may not even be the same *model*.

Sith? Maybe the ancient blades of long-dead Sith Lords. I can see *those* having gained names as part of the tales of glory associated with their owners.

Jedi? Probably not. It speaks too much of 'attachment' to name a tool, no matter how personal it is to the Jedi in question. After all, the lightsaber is seen by the Jedi as an extension of themselves and their will. It takes a person with a pretty big ego to name their own body parts in anything other than jest, and ego is something the Jedi strive to eliminate.