1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:Nope. It’s a different one. Also, watch the other episodes, Holocrons are definitely more than simple “recording devices”.
I didn’t say the where only simple recording devices.
Unlimited Power -- Sourcebook for Mystics
3 hours ago, Eoen said:Darth Bane makes one in the one of his trilogy books, they spend a lot of time describing the creation of a Sith Holocron.
You know those books aren’t part of official canon. It is part of legends.
There is very little in new canon that gives specific details.
4 hours ago, Thebearisdriving said:You know those books aren’t part of official canon. It is part of legends.
There is very little in new canon that gives specific details.
Yeah, I know that but it’s still a very good description of the creation of a holocron.
3 hours ago, Eoen said:Yeah, I know that but it’s still a very good description of the creation of a holocron.
Sure. Just in a conversation about the official way to do it, not that helpful.
Until the actual canon examples exist, legends is the closest we have to the truth. There's nothing the conflicts with banes trilogy so it's useful material until something more concrete exists.
i mean, mandolorian jedi says it all.
4 hours ago, LordBritish said:Until the actual canon examples exist, legends is the closest we have to the truth. There's nothing the conflicts with banes trilogy so it's useful material until something more concrete exists.
i mean, mandolorian jedi says it all.
Sure, but it’s also not “the truth”. If I think all holocrons are made from rock candy, and the soul of a parakeet I’m not really wrong. (Of course I am).
For the people who were heavily invested in the arguement of is a holocrons alchemical in nature, the bane books are no longer relevant, in the same way aristotle’s Theory of the elements is not really relevant to chemistry. It’s neat, but it’s just a legendary theory.
2 hours ago, Thebearisdriving said:Sure, but it’s also not “the truth”. If I think all holocrons are made from rock candy, and the soul of a parakeet I’m not really wrong. (Of course I am).
For the people who were heavily invested in the arguement of is a holocrons alchemical in nature, the bane books are no longer relevant, in the same way aristotle’s Theory of the elements is not really relevant to chemistry. It’s neat, but it’s just a legendary theory.
Until Canon says otherwise, I'm inclined to disagree with that assessment, particularly since Darth Bane himself is part of the new Canon, courtesy of Clone Wars . Not only that, but the way Holocrons are depicted as operating, certainly supports them being made the way they're described as having been made in that trilogy and in previous sources, i.e. through Force Alchemy.
1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:Until Canon says otherwise, I'm inclined to disagree with that assessment, particularly since Darth Bane himself is part of the new Canon, courtesy of Clone Wars . Not only that, but the way Holocrons are depicted as operating, certainly supports them being made the way they're described as having been made in that trilogy and in previous sources, i.e. through Force Alchemy.
Your opinion is yours, but that does mean it’s right.
Im just pointing out that we don’t know, officially, much of anything. Protracted debates using unauthoritative sources is a pointless endeavor. I’m not weighing in on whether they are alchemical or not. Because no one knows that (except possibly the story group).
Remeber when the reason sith crystals were red was because tgey were pressure molded in a furnace, and their synthetic nature was not “ok” because the Jedi were hippies that needed organic crystals? Up until last year that was the “legend”, but it was dead wrong.
So how about we stick to what we know, not what we think it should be, probably will be, or would like it to be when discussing what they actually are, and then give our opinions about what we’ll use in our home games. Those seem like really good topics; if the bane novels are going to possibly be canon in some form is a boring topic.
2 minutes ago, Thebearisdriving said:Your opinion is yours, but that does mean it’s right.
Im just pointing out that we don’t know, officially, much of anything. Protracted debates using unauthoritative sources is a pointless endeavor. I’m not weighing in on whether they are alchemical or not. Because no one knows that (except possibly the story group).
Remeber when the reason sith crystals were red was because tgey were pressure molded in a furnace, and their synthetic nature was not “ok” because the Jedi were hippies that needed organic crystals? Up until last year that was the “legend”, but it was dead wrong.
So how about we stick to what we know, not what we think it should be, probably will be, or would like it to be when discussing what they actually are, and then give our opinions about what we’ll use in our home games. Those seem like really good topics; if the bane novels are going to possibly be canon in some form is a boring topic.
It wasn't wrong, LFL just decided to change it. and that is why I said, "until Canon says otherwise."
9 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:It wasn't wrong, LFL just decided to change it. and that is why I said, "until Canon says otherwise."
Actually, that does mean it was wrong. That’s how canonizing things works.
Just now, Thebearisdriving said:Actually, that does mean it was wrong. That’s how canonizing things works.
No. It means they changed it, as is their prerogative. There is a difference. "Wrong" means it was never right, and this is not the case. "Canonizing" is simply establishing what is considered part of the official lore and story. Until 2012, everything in the EU was canon, now it isn't. However, they still bring material from the EU back into canon, other stuff they or change. That doesn't make the previous information "wrong", it simply means they've changed it for the new canon. They haven't done that yet with Holocrons. In fact, the way holocrons are depicted in the new canon is consistent with how they were depicted in the old EU. Thus, it stands to reason that how they're created is the same as well, at least until such time as Lucasfilm says otherwise. That's my view on it.
In terms of Canon vs Legends debate I think that warrants its own thread, for me personally its "Believe what you want to believe" If something I love isnt canon, but COULD be at some point, then fine that;s great, but it ifs legends only, so what I still believe it part of the overall Star Wars universe, but its only just me thinknig that way. So making a holocron, be it a Sith or Jedi, isnt easy, its detailed in a trilogy that has yet to be brought into canon, so I personally consider it quasi-canon myself.
Onto other things, lightsaber hilts and crystal appearances, any pictures ?
When it comes to Legends my philosophy is "smoke 'em if you've got 'em."
If there's something you like, use it. If there's something you don't like, don't.
Others will do the same.
6 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:No. It means they changed it, as is their prerogative. There is a difference. "Wrong" means it was never right, and this is not the case. "Canonizing" is simply establishing what is considered part of the official lore and story. Until 2012, everything in the EU was canon, now it isn't. However, they still bring material from the EU back into canon, other stuff they or change. That doesn't make the previous information "wrong", it simply means they've changed it for the new canon. They haven't done that yet with Holocrons. In fact, the way holocrons are depicted in the new canon is consistent with how they were depicted in the old EU. Thus, it stands to reason that how they're created is the same as well, at least until such time as Lucasfilm says otherwise. That's my view on it.
Like I said, you've had trouble adjusting to the Disney reboot, you still cling to/rely on things that were blanket invalidated and haven't (yet) been granted a reprieve/pardon from governor Mickey.
6 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:That doesn't make the previous information "wrong", it simply means they've changed it for the new canon. They haven't done that yet with Holocrons. ... Thus, it stands to reason that how they're created is the same as well, at least until such time as Lucasfilm says otherwise. That's my view on it.
To respect others I’ll end my part of this conversation with this: if something is not canon, then it is not fact. Even things within canon are open to interpretation.
My point is that in a discussion regarding holocron facts there are shockingly few confirmed facts, and a ton of EU wish listing. I’ll avoid “wrong” as a word, but any conclusions reached regarding any SW lore that isn’t based on canon is spurious at best.
And like I said, many times, what’s good for your game is awesome and I don’t want to diminish it or tell anyone that there game is wrong. But it's Important to acknowledge non-canon lore is not actually founded in the universe as it is presented. It’s like a house rule; even if it’s a house rule everyone uses (looking at you starship combat) it’s still not actually the rules, and acknowledging that is important.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to consult with my wonka holocron: 50% gobstopper, 50% glass elevator, powered by edible kybers grown in a furnace with the soul of a bad egg that wants the whole world.
7 hours ago, Thebearisdriving said:To respect others I’ll end my part of this conversation with this: if something is not canon, then it is not fact. Even things within canon are open to interpretation.
My point is that in a discussion regarding holocron facts there are shockingly few confirmed facts, and a ton of EU wish listing. I’ll avoid “wrong” as a word, but any conclusions reached regarding any SW lore that isn’t based on canon is spurious at best.
And like I said, many times, what’s good for your game is awesome and I don’t want to diminish it or tell anyone that there game is wrong. But it's Important to acknowledge non-canon lore is not actually founded in the universe as it is presented. It’s like a house rule; even if it’s a house rule everyone uses (looking at you starship combat) it’s still not actually the rules, and acknowledging that is important.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to consult with my wonka holocron: 50% gobstopper, 50% glass elevator, powered by edible kybers grown in a furnace with the soul of a bad egg that wants the whole world.
The designation of canon is no more important than any particular individual wants it to be (Disney cannot force you to accept their canon, and you can always substitute your own). Facts will exist both within and outside of any paticular viewing of canon. Canon is simply a sorting of facts into accepted and not accepted, and much like religion, no one can really decide that for you.
12 hours ago, Thebearisdriving said:To respect others I’ll end my part of this conversation with this: if something is not canon, then it is not fact. Even things within canon are open to interpretation.
My point is that in a discussion regarding holocron facts there are shockingly few confirmed facts, and a ton of EU wish listing. I’ll avoid “wrong” as a word, but any conclusions reached regarding any SW lore that isn’t based on canon is spurious at best.
And like I said, many times, what’s good for your game is awesome and I don’t want to diminish it or tell anyone that there game is wrong. But it's Important to acknowledge non-canon lore is not actually founded in the universe as it is presented. It’s like a house rule; even if it’s a house rule everyone uses (looking at you starship combat) it’s still not actually the rules, and acknowledging that is important.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to consult with my wonka holocron: 50% gobstopper, 50% glass elevator, powered by edible kybers grown in a furnace with the soul of a bad egg that wants the whole world.
On this we agree.
Our group ALWAYS PLAY WITH LEGENDS!.. never the Disney BS
10 hours ago, LordEnforcer said:Our group ALWAYS PLAY WITH LEGENDS!.. never the Disney BS
How it should be. I don't see why canon even matters. If it's in a book that says "Star Wars" it's Star Wars. Regardless if Disney wants it to be or not. They may not put it in a movie, but why does that matter at all? You can't get a PhD on Star Wars so any of these canon "facts" really are fiction and it all doesn't matter.
Not sure if this has been brought up in a different place, but I have a question about a weapon in the Ouro Blade found on page 50. Could anyone give further explanation about the special "spend 1 Advantage to inflict an automatic hit" feature?
Namely, does it add to the initial attack damage, or is it separate? Does it bypass soak? Is the base damage just "+1" or is it "+1 (plus brawn)?"
1 hour ago, Joress said:Not sure if this has been brought up in a different place, but I have a question about a weapon in the Ouro Blade found on page 50. Could anyone give further explanation about the special "spend 1 Advantage to inflict an automatic hit" feature?
Namely, does it add to the initial attack damage, or is it separate? Does it bypass soak? Is the base damage just "+1" or is it "+1 (plus brawn)?"
My reading is that it is a separate hit, soak applies, and the damage is Brawn + 1. This fits in the with the "death of a thousand cuts" aspect, as you'll have to have a pretty high Brawn or be dealing with a low soak opponent for them to really feel it.
For everyone in Scandinavia, i've got some news! Have been in contact with FFG's distributors in Denmark and they've just got the books in. Should arrive in Sweden within the week, provided the postal service doesn't get delayed. Not holding my breath...
Hi.
I have some questions that I hope that you guys can help with.
Crafted Talismans .. are they permanent?
The Protective amulet.... that is insanely over powered for 300 credits!
Or am i missing something?
9 minutes ago, 09/20/Thanos said:Hi.
I have some questions that I hope that you guys can help with.
Crafted Talismans .. are they permanent?
The Protective amulet.... that is insanely over powered for 300 credits!
Or am i missing something?
- Some talismans are described as being one use. Read the descriptions to find out which is which.
- A fine example as to why crafting is problematic.
On 6/19/2018 at 2:51 PM, Kaigen said:My reading is that it is a separate hit, soak applies, and the damage is Brawn + 1. This fits in the with the "death of a thousand cuts" aspect, as you'll have to have a pretty high Brawn or be dealing with a low soak opponent for them to really feel it.
Can this be triggered multiple times?