I have just started reading the Paradise Snare. I know that one and the rest of the trilogy are legends, but does it conflict any new canon?

I kind of tried a little googleing on it, but was too afraid of dpoilers, so I stopped....

Can anyone tell me, without spoiling anything in the book? Be vague and don`t go into specifics I guess.

Thanks

Well, given they are making an anthology movie specifically about Han Solo's origin I would say it's going to likely.

Also since they've already said everything Legends is not canon, seems like the question has been answered by the Mouse already.

The approach I've chosen to take is that, until and unless contradicted on screen, everything set prior to the OT "counts." And if it does get contradicted on screen, I can probably still find a way to make it work.

The approach I've chosen to take is that, until and unless contradicted on screen, everything set prior to the OT "counts." And if it does get contradicted on screen, I can probably still find a way to make it work.

The way I make it work is thinking in terms of alternate versions of reality. You know, like the unlimited numbers of the Marvel universe. So if the SW canon is like Earth 616, the legends are other versions

Hmmm... I'm old school. The trilogy I read was by Brian Daley in 1979, about 18 years before what you are reading. It will be interesting to see if Disney pulls anything from either of these trilogies for the new movie. I seriously doubt they'll be using stuff from the Daley, but I'll be keeping an eye out.

The approach I've chosen to take is that, until and unless contradicted on screen, everything set prior to the OT "counts." And if it does get contradicted on screen, I can probably still find a way to make it work.

The way I make it work is thinking in terms of alternate versions of reality. You know, like the unlimited numbers of the Marvel universe. So if the SW canon is like Earth 616, the legends are other versions

Hey, as long as you don't shove Miles Morales in there, have at it. I take that back...bring in Miles if he's being used for Rancor chow.

The further back in the old Legends timeline you go, the easier it is to hand-wave it away as some sort of story based in fact and embellished over the millennia (sort of like what FFG has done with their references to the Tales of the Jedi era stories).

Hmmm... I'm old school. The trilogy I read was by Brian Daley in 1979, about 18 years before what you are reading. It will be interesting to see if Disney pulls anything from either of these trilogies for the new movie. I seriously doubt they'll be using stuff from the Daley, but I'll be keeping an eye out.

I'd be happy with a background nod to Bollux and Blue Max.

You mean the new canon consisting of the 7 movies + a few cartoons, none of the latter of which feature Han? I'd say you're probably good.

Additionally, my suggestion would be to approach any "Legends" novels with an attitude of "To blazes with 'canon', is it an enjoyable story?" and if you can do that, both the Crispin and Daley trilogies are most certainly enjoyable. In fact, I'm mildly disappointed that Crispin didn't do more in the SW setting...then again, after seeing what Traviss went through, maybe it's better for authors and readers alike that she didn't.

Oh, and for the pedants, last I knew, the Crispin three were collectively known as the "Han Solo Trilogy " while the Daley three were collectively known as the "Han Solo Adventures ". Casually, I usually just specify, but there you have it. I also love how Crispin wrote around Daley's work. Didn't let her stuff intermingle with his too inextricably, but also didn't pretend that the prior work simply didn't exist.

i like the Han Solo Trilogy. what went wrong for you?

Hmmm... I'm old school. The trilogy I read was by Brian Daley in 1979, about 18 years before what you are reading. It will be interesting to see if Disney pulls anything from either of these trilogies for the new movie. I seriously doubt they'll be using stuff from the Daley, but I'll be keeping an eye out.

You mean there's a new Han Solo trilogy? Given the thread title, I thought we were talking about the Daley books.

Hmmm... I'm old school. The trilogy I read was by Brian Daley in 1979, about 18 years before what you are reading. It will be interesting to see if Disney pulls anything from either of these trilogies for the new movie. I seriously doubt they'll be using stuff from the Daley, but I'll be keeping an eye out.

You mean there's a new Han Solo trilogy? Given the thread title, I thought we were talking about the Daley books.

Well, if you consider 1997-1998 "new" in 2016....

I am kind of new to all the books. The ones that were listed as the Han Solo trilogy online and in the shops were the Crispin ones. I didn't know any books came out even before Empire Strikes back was out!

I am kind of new to all the books. The ones that were listed as the Han Solo trilogy online and in the shops were the Crispin ones. I didn't know any books came out even before Empire Strikes back was out!

You can currently find them collected in a single volume as The Collected Han Solo Adventures (as well as the later The Collected Lando Calrissian Adventures, which followed Lando during part of the time that he owned the Falcon). I had the first book - Han Solo at Stars' End in hardback from way back when it was released. The other two, I had in paperback. But, a few years ago, I found hardbacks of Han Solo's Revenge and Han Solo and the Lost Legacy in hardback, in decent shape, and dirt cheap at a used bookstore. They now sit proudly on my overflowing Star Wars bookcase.

i like the Han Solo Trilogy. what went wrong for you?

i like the Han Solo Trilogy. what went wrong for you?