5 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Technically, no, you don't. That's what Summary execution is.

Summary execution is for soldiers caught wearing the uniform of the opposite side, not political prisoners. Palpatine was not a soldier, he wasn't wearing a uniform, and he might not even legally qualify as a Separatist, given that he was never under Dooku's authority and Dooku was the supreme leader of the Separatists. Obviously, investigation would uncover a lot of wrongdoing...but no investigation was done or even attempted. It's certainly not a case where summary execution would be legal in any way, shape, or form.

1 minute ago, Benjan Meruna said:

Summary execution is for soldiers caught wearing the uniform of the opposite side, not political prisoners. Palpatine was not a soldier, he wasn't wearing a uniform, and he might not even legally qualify as a Separatist, given that he was never under Dooku's authority and Dooku was the supreme leader of the Separatists. Obviously, investigation would uncover a lot of wrongdoing...but no investigation was done or even attempted. It's certainly a case where summary execution would be legal in any way, shape, or form.

You're missing the point. You claimed that you need a trial before you can summarily execute someone. I'm correcting you on that error.

So it is possible. Good to know.

You can as a matter of fact create a Consular Yoda and a Guardian Yoda and a Mystic Yoda and they could all accurately represent Yoda and be mechanically perfectly identical.

At the time Mace was going to strike down Palpatine, the only things he knew for sure about him was that he had resisted arrest and in doing so had killed three Jedi. He had some evidence that suggested Palpatine was Sith, but this wasn't really ironclad.

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

You're missing the point. You claimed that you need a trial before you can summarily execute someone. I'm correcting you on that error.

The claim is that Windu and Anakin needed a trial, and did not have the authority to summarily execute the Chancellor of the Republic. Or are you conceding that point?

6 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Technically, no, you don't. That's what Summary execution is.

Well, since we're bringing Wikipedia into it.... I like this quote:

"Under international law, refusal to accept lawful surrender in combat (no quarter) is also categorized as a summary execution (as well as murder). Summary executions have been practiced by police, military, and paramilitary organizations and are frequently associated with guerrilla warfare, counter-insurgency, terrorism, and any other situation which involves a breakdown of the normal procedures for handling accused prisoners, civilian or military."

Also this one:

"Under military law, summary execution is illegal in almost all circumstances..."

and this one:

"Major treaties such as the Geneva Conventions and Hague Conventions, and customary international law from history, protect the rights of captured regular and irregular enemy soldiers, along with civilians of enemy states. Prisoners-of-war (POWs) must be treated in carefully defined ways which definitively ban summary execution..."

There were exceptions, but pretty much all of them were done away with after WW2. Oh, except by Hitler. He encouraged it.

1 minute ago, Dunefarble said:

There were exceptions, but pretty much all of them were done away with after WW2. Oh, except by Hitler. He encouraged it.

Don't you mean by WW2? I don't think Hitler encouraged much of anything after WW2...

Just now, Benjan Meruna said:

Don't you mean by WW2? I don't think Hitler encouraged much of anything after WW2...

Oops, yeah, no, definitely by WW2.

Physically, you could execute anyone without a trial. That doesn't actually prove much of a point.

I'd imagine, as Chancellor of the Republic, he and the citizens of the Republic itself deserved a trial. Summary execution isn't really appropriate for someone of that position. Mace Windu decided to act outside the law and was perfectly willing to accept the consequences of such actions. The evidence they attempted to arrest Palpatine on was shaky at best, and while killing him in self defense would have likely been legal, the decision to execute him after he was seemingly defeated is hard to defend in court. The fact that it was a ploy to convert Anakin wouldn't be provable in a court room and wouldn't be admissible as evidence to support Windu. However, as I said before, we don't have enough knowledge of their specific laws and statutes to know who had the law on their side in this specific circumstance.

11 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:

Hey, a blatantly untrue statement made in an attempt not to acknowledge your own behavior. I've only been here a short time, but that seems to be your thing.

Untrue, anyone will tell you when I'm being bad I actually admit it. I'm not going to pretend I've been an angel. Now in this conversation, though, I've yet to cross any lines and up until Tramp and you decided to be trolls we were all having a fairly good conversation about Conflict.

Now this thread is hopelessly lost.

5 minutes ago, ghatt said:

Physically, you could execute anyone without a trial. That doesn't actually prove much of a point.

I'd imagine, as Chancellor of the Republic, he and the citizens of the Republic itself deserved a trial. Summary execution isn't really appropriate for someone of that position. Mace Windu decided to act outside the law and was perfectly willing to accept the consequences of such actions. The evidence they attempted to arrest Palpatine on was shaky at best, and while killing him in self defense would have likely been legal, the decision to execute him after he was seemingly defeated is hard to defend in court. The fact that it was a ploy to convert Anakin wouldn't be provable in a court room and wouldn't be admissible as evidence to support Windu. However, as I said before, we don't have enough knowledge of their specific laws and statutes to know who had the law on their side in this specific circumstance.

It's very convenient that bad writing--rather than any real displays of brilliance--makes it so hard to pin anything on Palpatine.

7 minutes ago, Benjan Meruna said:

Don't you mean by WW2? I don't think Hitler encouraged much of anything after WW2...

Actually, a lot of the restrictions now in place regarding legal summary executions were put into place because of WWII, and were instituted as a result of the Nuremburg Trials, some as late as 1977.

4 minutes ago, ghatt said:

Physically, you could execute anyone without a trial. That doesn't actually prove much of a point.

I'd imagine, as Chancellor of the Republic, he and the citizens of the Republic itself deserve a trial. Summary execution isn't really appropriate for someone of that position. Mace Windu decided to act outside the law and was perfectly willing to accept the consequences of such actions. The evidence they attempted to arrest Palpatine on was shaky at best, and while killing him in self defense would have likely been legal, the decision to execute him after he was seemingly defeated is hard to defend in court. The fact that it was a ploy to convert Anakin wouldn't be provable in a court room and wouldn't be admissible as evidence to support Windu. However, as I said before, we don't have enough knowledge of their specific laws and statutes to know who had the law on their side in this specific circumstance.

Pretty much. We really don't know Republic law for this circumstance, and, given Palpatine's particular situation, whether or not trial was really an option.

3 minutes ago, Kael said:

Untrue, anyone will tell you when I'm being bad I actually admit it. I'm not going to pretend I've been an angel. Now in this conversation, though, I've yet to cross any lines and up until Tramp and you decided to be trolls we were all having a fairly good conversation about Conflict.

Now this thread is hopelessly lost.

To disagree with someone is not trolling. debating with someone is not trolling. Insulting someone, calling them names? That's trolling.

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

To disagree with someone is not trolling. debating with someone is not trolling. Insulting someone, calling them names? That's trolling.

You are not actually debating dude. Not even remotely debating. And you disagree with folks just to disagree with them. It's a pattern I've seen in several threads derailed by you. It's not insulting to point out that most of the threads you partake in devolve into this. And don't even pretend I'm the first to say this because this has been pointed out to you multiple times.

In mechanical game terms why can't Yoda be a Mystic, Seeker or Guardian? Even if you want to insist - as you are - that Yoda is a consular conceptually there is nothing mechanical in the system you cannot get in other careers and their specializations as I've demonstrated.
You can perfectly create the concept of Yoda as consular - in terms of characteristics and talents and skills and force powers - using the mechanical options outside of the Consular Career. I get it - you're hung up on the label of consular but that's all it is - a label. All the aspects of Yoda that make him what he is can mechanically be realized outside the Career.

Point out which mechanical options inside the Consular career and it's specializations are only found in Consular and are absolutely essential?

In fact the opposite is true in your case. You insist - mechanically - that Yoda must have Ataru Striker. But there is nothing in Consular that cannot be replicated elsewhere that is essentially to the concept of a consular.

If we're going to accurately stat out a character like Yoda then we need actual Jedi careers and talent trees. Most Jedi are trained in many lightsaber forms and often switch forms to gain an advantage over their opponents. They aren't just trained in one form, even if they prefer one over the rest.

The Grand Inquisitor taunts Kanaan with the fact that he favors form 3 to ridiculous degree. This implies that well trained Jedi mix it up a bit more than him.

Actual Jedi wouldn't be using these careers or specializations as these don't accurately reflect the skills and talents that Jedi routinely display. These reflect force sensitive characters that are inspired by the teachings of the Jedi order, not the result of Jedi training and education.

48 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Also, you don't actually need a trial during wartime in some legal systems. Execution of traitors without a trial was legal until relatively recently in many countries. I wouldn't assume the Republic doesn't have such laws. It's the space Roman Wild West, after all.

If you actually wanna argue this, after asking @Benjan Meruna to show you some code to prove that executing a standing Chancellor without trial was illegal, then you've gotta pony up something other than raw speculation. You can't have it both ways, requiring proof for one argument about what is or isn't legal, and then not giving proof for your own argument about the same exact thing.

7 minutes ago, Kael said:

You are not actually debating dude. Not even remotely debating. And you disagree with folks just to disagree with them. It's a pattern I've seen in several threads derailed by you. It's not insulting to point out that most of the threads you partake in devolve into this. And don't even pretend I'm the first to say this because this has been pointed out to you multiple times.

No. I disagree with reason, and I explain my reasons. whether you like those reasons is irrelevant. I agree with people just as much as I disagree with them and often agree with someone on one thing and disagree with that same person on another.

2 minutes ago, Jedi Ronin said:

In mechanical game terms why can't Yoda be a Mystic, Seeker or Guardian? Even if you want to insist - as you are - that Yoda is a consular conceptually there is nothing mechanical in the system you cannot get in other careers and their specializations as I've demonstrated.
You can perfectly create the concept of Yoda as consular - in terms of characteristics and talents and skills and force powers - using the mechanical options outside of the Consular Career. I get it - you're hung up on the label of consular but that's all it is - a label. All the aspects of Yoda that make him what he is can mechanically be realized outside the Career.

Point out which mechanical options inside the Consular career and it's specializations are only found in Consular and are absolutely essential?

In fact the opposite is true in your case. You insist - mechanically - that Yoda must have Ataru Striker. But there is nothing in Consular that cannot be replicated elsewhere that is essentially to the concept of a consular.

Ateru Striker is only needed because that is the style we see Yoda use in the films. It's his signature style. Therefore he absolutely has to have that style specialization. As for his other Specs, while he could have one or two other specs from Seeker and Mystic, they are relatively few compared to Consular specs, of which only two don't fit him.

1 minute ago, ghatt said:

If we're going to accurately stat out a character like Yoda then we need actual Jedi careers and talent trees. Most Jedi are trained in many lightsaber forms and often switch forms to gain an advantage over their opponents. They aren't just trained in one form, even if they prefer one over the rest.

The Grand Inquisitor taunts Kanaan with the fact that he favors form 3 to ridiculous degree. This implies that well trained Jedis mix it up a bit more than him.

Actual Jedi wouldn't be using these careers or specializations as these don't accurately reflect the skills and talents that Jedi routinely display. These reflect force sensitive characters that are inspired by the teachings of the Jedi order, not the result of Jedi training and education.

Technically, they reflect both, since in order to play a Jedi in the Prequel era and before, you would still be using these same Careers. They're not going to make six brand new careers to cover Jedi specifically, especially considering all of the trouble they've gone to in the career books to tie these careers to the Jedi. And I am sure that when the developers did their Jedi Council game, they certainly used these Careers. The real trick with making a full-on Jedi is how you mix and match Specializations.

Is there some reason that you keep spelling it Ateru rather than Ataru?

6 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Ateru Striker is only needed because that is the style we see Yoda use in the films. It's his signature style. Therefore he absolutely has to have that style specialization. As for his other Specs, while he could have one or two other specs from Seeker and Mystic, they are relatively few compared to Consular specs, of which only two don't fit him.

You're still not explaining what mechanical options only found within the Consular career are so essential to Yoda, he can only be that.

Spoiler - the only thing that is tied to Careers in that way are Signature Abilities, so really, that would be the only thing that is so inherently essential, and we don't even know what the Consular ones do yet.

53 minutes ago, Benjan Meruna said:

You argue only for one side while decrying the other side as one-sided. You're either a troll or a giant hypocrite.

There's a bunch of people arguing with and insulting one person, and you're saying it's unfair not to join the bigger side. Now that is hypocritical.

3 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Is there some reason that you keep spelling it Ateru rather than Ataru?

Bad spelling.

1 minute ago, StarkJunior said:

You're still not explaining what mechanical options only found within the Consular career are so essential to Yoda, he can only be that.

Spoiler - the only thing that is tied to Careers in that way are Signature Abilities, so really, that would be the only thing that is so inherently essential.

Yes, Signature Abilities is one of the key factors. That and the majority of Specs he would have. However, it is more than just the "mechanical" I am looking at. The game mechanics are but one part of the reasoning; a big part, but still only one part.

4 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

You're still not explaining what mechanical options only found within the Consular career are so essential to Yoda, he can only be that.

Spoiler - the only thing that is tied to Careers in that way are Signature Abilities, so really, that would be the only thing that is so inherently essential, and we don't even know what the Consular ones do yet.

Hey now, maybe Tramp was a playtester for that book...without ever actually playing. I'm sure those reports would just be awesome to read.

6 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

No. I disagree with reason, and I explain my reasons. whether you like those reasons is irrelevant. I agree with people just as much as I disagree with them and often agree with someone on one thing and disagree with that same person on another.

Ateru Striker is only needed because that is the style we see Yoda use in the films. It's his signature style. Therefore he absolutely has to have that style specialization. As for his other Specs, while he could have one or two other specs from Seeker and Mystic, they are relatively few compared to Consular specs, of which only two don't fit him.

Technically, they reflect both, since in order to play a Jedi in the Prequel era and before, you would still be using these same Careers. They're not going to make six brand new careers to cover Jedi specifically, especially considering all of the trouble they've gone to in the career books to tie these careers to the Jedi. And I am sure that when the developers did their Jedi Council game, they certainly used these Careers. The real trick with making a full-on Jedi is how you mix and match Specializations.

I disagree. There's a large difference between actual Jedi and what this game's careers represent. For instance, lightsaber forms wouldn't be considered out of career specs for legit, temple trained Jedi. These careers and trees are representative of wanna be Jedi and other force traditions, not actual Jedi Knights. That's in the rule book, Tramp.

If given unlimited XP, can you create a good semblance of Republic era Jedi? Sure. Is that the same thing as having actual Jedi careers and specs? Nope.

17 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

If you actually wanna argue this, after asking @Benjan Meruna to show you some code to prove that executing a standing Chancellor without trial was illegal, then you've gotta pony up something other than raw speculation. You can't have it both ways, requiring proof for one argument about what is or isn't legal, and then not giving proof for your own argument about the same exact thing.

Those are two different things. He said something wasn't lawful. I said I assume something would be, and give a reason why it would. big difference.