16 hours ago, Absol197 said:

While you're 100% correct (and hilarious!) I suspect that Luke got special treatment because he helped save Leia, and she vouched for him. Besides, he shot down just as many TIE fighters as the space-hardened smuggler, so he's decent enough. And they need all hands on deck here, right?

14 hours ago, Daeglan said:

Also Red Squadron had a bunch of vacancies. And in the Novelization they tested him in a simulator and Biggs ALSO Vouched for him as being a good pilot.

14 hours ago, Daeglan said:

1. He didnt fly a T-16 a time or two. He did it all the time. He also Learned from Biggs before he who went to the Academy. and Biggs vouched for him.
2. It isnt like he just driving a car. He flew down canyons shooting wamp rats. Which is very much like doing ground attack runs and required more skill. And this is all stuff established in the movie to show he is not a noob. He is a skilled bush pilot. He wanted power converters to fix his T-16. Which you can see in the garage when he is working on C3P0 and R2

First off, I was joking. Secondly, you (Daeglan) were really focused on the T16 controls as if it was really a factor. Being shortstaffed, being roughly familiar with controls, or even having another pilot vouch for you are not good reasons for what happened either. I don't care how good of a bush pilot some Australian cattle rancher is, or if a fighter pilot says he can pick off kangaroo while flying through a canyon, you wouldn't give an untrained, unbattle tested child an F22 Raptor and have him join the battle.

I'm confident more happened off screen per the novel. I'm sure saving Leia gave him some respect. And they probably talked to Han too. It's just the reasons given in the movie are total BS and make absolutely no sense. He'd be a bigger liability to the rebels than a threat to the Empire. ****, the reason the T16 was in the garage and not used by Luke was that he had just recently damaged it flying like an idiot. "He's a great pilot, he has a T16 he flies around and shoots rats with. I mean, he did almost crash the thing and damaged it in a reckless stunt, but I'm sure he's be a great help against a gigantic space station and dozens of tie fighters."

You may want to rewatch the scene however. You seem to think Biggs vouched for him...but if you pay attention, that makes no sense. Luke and crew deliver the plans, they have the briefing, next we know Luke is suited up in the hanger, and that is when Luke and Biggs run into each other. They are both incredibly surprised to even be seeing each other. You see, Biggs vouching for him occurs literally seconds before they enter the cockpits to start the attack. A commanding officer questions the validity of Luke joining the mission, another pilot (that just joined the rebellion in the last couple days) says Luke is a good pilot because he flies in canyons and shoots rats (references the commanding officer most likely doesn't understand), and the commanding officer just goes with it.

This, this is ultimately the biggest issue I have with the prequels. They were so bad, so loaded with nonsensical junk that they make me now look more critical at the original trilogy and start seeing these flaws that I overlooked for 30+ years.

10 minutes ago, kmanweiss said:

First off, I was joking. Secondly, you (Daeglan) were really focused on the T16 controls as if it was really a factor. Being shortstaffed, being roughly familiar with controls, or even having another pilot vouch for you are not good reasons for what happened either. I don't care how good of a bush pilot some Australian cattle rancher is, or if a fighter pilot says he can pick off kangaroo while flying through a canyon, you wouldn't give an untrained, unbattle tested child an F22 Raptor and have him join the battle.

I'm confident more happened off screen per the novel. I'm sure saving Leia gave him some respect. And they probably talked to Han too. It's just the reasons given in the movie are total BS and make absolutely no sense. He'd be a bigger liability to the rebels than a threat to the Empire. ****, the reason the T16 was in the garage and not used by Luke was that he had just recently damaged it flying like an idiot. "He's a great pilot, he has a T16 he flies around and shoots rats with. I mean, he did almost crash the thing and damaged it in a reckless stunt, but I'm sure he's be a great help against a gigantic space station and dozens of tie fighters."

You may want to rewatch the scene however. You seem to think Biggs vouched for him...but if you pay attention, that makes no sense. Luke and crew deliver the plans, they have the briefing, next we know Luke is suited up in the hanger, and that is when Luke and Biggs run into each other. They are both incredibly surprised to even be seeing each other. You see, Biggs vouching for him occurs literally seconds before they enter the cockpits to start the attack. A commanding officer questions the validity of Luke joining the mission, another pilot (that just joined the rebellion in the last couple days) says Luke is a good pilot because he flies in canyons and shoots rats (references the commanding officer most likely doesn't understand), and the commanding officer just goes with it.

This, this is ultimately the biggest issue I have with the prequels. They were so bad, so loaded with nonsensical junk that they make me now look more critical at the original trilogy and start seeing these flaws that I overlooked for 30+ years.

Soooo by your logic they would leave an x wing on the ground rather than send an additional pilot up to stop the deathstar. That if they fail to stop they are all dead. Im not buying that because that is insane.

5 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

... because that is insane.

This could frankly be said for the entire process of trying to apply logic in general to Star Wars, which as a franchise has run on "rule of cool" and "rule of drama" from Day One and little things like logical sense and physics be damned.

Perfect example, the amount of back-bending rationalizing over the Kessel Run and Han's statement of running in parsecs, when the simplest (and my preferred explanation) was that Han was boasting in an effort to impress what he thought were a pair of local rubes. Heck, Obi-Wan even calls it a boast ("if that ship's as fast as he's boasting, we ought to do well") to say nothing of his facial expression (essentially doing an "oh really?" look) when Han makes his claim in the cantina.

3 hours ago, Daeglan said:

Soooo by your logic they would leave an x wing on the ground rather than send an additional pilot up to stop the deathstar. That if they fail to stop they are all dead. Im not buying that because that is insane.

With what they show in the movie? Absolutely.

No one has seen him pilot ANYTHING, not even a landspeeder. He shot 1 TIE fighter. He was involved in a pretty botched up rescue attempt that just sort of worked out by chance. He is affiliated with someone that is pretty annoying to Leia. He's never gone to the academy. He has no formal training. He's never flown in a military operation before. He has no history with anyone in the Rebel base (prior to right before he climbs into the cockpit). There is no one to actually vouch for his ability. The only mention of his piloting/gunnery skill is a humble brag (about shooting defenseless animals) he does in front of the actual fighter pilots. "I used to shoot bigger targets than that while flying much slower and not under enemy fire all the time!" It's as if millions of eyes suddenly rolled in disbelief and disgust.

It would be irresponsible to put him in an X-wing, even with a couple hours of simulator training. It would be a threat to him, it would be a threat to your X-wing (the rebels didn't have an abundance of military equipment), it would be a threat to the rest of the people on the mission. In reality, it would be more likely that he'd accidentally shoot down another rebel pilot than contribute to the battle in any meaningful way. Even in the desperate days of WW2, the RAF still demanded 100+ hours of flight training (on planes meant to simulate combat planes), along with 10+ hours of experience in the actual plane they'd be assigned before sending pilots into battle. And that is just flight time. Being a good fighter pilot is way more than being able to just fly too, so there would have been likely been considerably extra time spent in physical and mental training for combat scenarios.

During the battle he is a distraction to his squadmates and needs to be bailed out at least 3 times. He performs risky manuevers, he wanders out of formation leaving people to wonder where he is and waste time trying to locate him, he gets shot, he gets tailed by TIEs needing Wedge to save him, he does a piss poor job of protecting his squad leader during his attack run. He wasn't particularly helpful till the very end when he finally did something useful.

Out of 30 fighters, only 3 return. 27 academy trained, combat experienced pilots were killed. This was not some blue milk run. It was suicidal. To send a naive kid into that is reprehensible.

Was it good that they sent him? Sure. Does it make a lick of sense? Nope.

12 minutes ago, kmanweiss said:

With what they show in the movie? Absolutely.

No one has seen him pilot ANYTHING, not even a landspeeder. He shot 1 TIE fighter. He was involved in a pretty botched up rescue attempt that just sort of worked out by chance. He is affiliated with someone that is pretty annoying to Leia. He's never gone to the academy. He has no formal training. He's never flown in a military operation before. He has no history with anyone in the Rebel base (prior to right before he climbs into the cockpit). There is no one to actually vouch for his ability. The only mention of his piloting/gunnery skill is a humble brag (about shooting defenseless animals) he does in front of the actual fighter pilots. "I used to shoot bigger targets than that while flying much slower and not under enemy fire all the time!" It's as if millions of eyes suddenly rolled in disbelief and disgust.

It would be irresponsible to put him in an X-wing, even with a couple hours of simulator training. It would be a threat to him, it would be a threat to your X-wing (the rebels didn't have an abundance of military equipment), it would be a threat to the rest of the people on the mission. In reality, it would be more likely that he'd accidentally shoot down another rebel pilot than contribute to the battle in any meaningful way. Even in the desperate days of WW2, the RAF still demanded 100+ hours of flight training (on planes meant to simulate combat planes), along with 10+ hours of experience in the actual plane they'd be assigned before sending pilots into battle. And that is just flight time. Being a good fighter pilot is way more than being able to just fly too, so there would have been likely been considerably extra time spent in physical and mental training for combat scenarios.

During the battle he is a distraction to his squadmates and needs to be bailed out at least 3 times. He performs risky manuevers, he wanders out of formation leaving people to wonder where he is and waste time trying to locate him, he gets shot, he gets tailed by TIEs needing Wedge to save him, he does a piss poor job of protecting his squad leader during his attack run. He wasn't particularly helpful till the very end when he finally did something useful.

Out of 30 fighters, only 3 return. 27 academy trained, combat experienced pilots were killed. This was not some blue milk run. It was suicidal. To send a naive kid into that is reprehensible.

Was it good that they sent him? Sure. Does it make a lick of sense? Nope.

Soooo the fact that Biggs says he is the best bush pilot is what? We see several coversations where his skills as a pilot are discussed...

Do you actually read the posts you reply to?

Yes. And you guys seem to ignore all the data you don't like. Like the extreme shortage of pilots they have. As in they already lost Blue Squadron and a large part of Red Squadron was also lost. He also had Leia and Biggs vouching for him.

You are also ignoring the fact that at.this point they are a gorillafighters. Not a real military. You are assuming all the pilots had been to the academy. I seriously doubt that.

Do you guys think that having a low/no key approach allows for players to later take a Force Spec if they started off with no Force ability and have it make sense? Or would it be too jarring because Force Sensitives are gonna always be super lucky and able to repair droids at age 3?

2 hours ago, Archlyte said:

Do you guys think that having a low/no key approach allows for players to later take a Force Spec if they started off with no Force ability and have it make sense? Or would it be too jarring because Force Sensitives are gonna always be super lucky and able to repair droids at age 3?

All PCs are super lucky and able to do amazing things regardless of Force sensitivity, so it's not jarring in the least to me. Unless it's a droid...

11 hours ago, Daeglan said:

You are also ignoring the fact that at.this point they are a gorillafighters. Not a real military. You are assuming all the pilots had been to the academy. I seriously doubt that.

Guerilla. They're not a bunch of herbivorous primates from earth.

12 hours ago, Archlyte said:

Do you guys think that having a low/no key approach allows for players to later take a Force Spec if they started off with no Force ability and have it make sense? Or would it be too jarring because Force Sensitives are gonna always be super lucky and able to repair droids at age 3?

I don't see why not, though going from both Legends and current canon it seems that even latent/unaware Force-sensitives (such as Leia and Rey, and even Luke to some extent) have things go their way far more often than happens for mundanes. Looking at the films, we see Han and Lando have things not go smooth more often than we see for Luke or Rey. Of course, being that Luke and Rey are the leads of their respective trilogies, they're going to be "luckier" and generally more successful simply due to their status as the lead hero.

WEG and OCR/RCR d20 replicated this sense of "extra luckiness" by letting Force-sensitive characters have access to more Force points than a mundane would, so that said PCs could draw upon that resource to have things go their way more often.

That being said, while this system doesn't require it, I'd suggest not letting a player just suddenly decide out of the blue their PC is now a Force-sensitive and purchase one of the Universal specs out of the blue. I had one Rebellion era WEG campaign that got totally derailed because the players of the mundane characters (who comprised 3/5ths of the group) suddenly decide to be Force-sensitives, and I was a novice enough GM to not see where that would cause problems (especially with some of the players in question).

If you've got a player that wants to start out as an unaware Force-sensitive but later learn/develop their ability to tap into the Force, I'd say go for it, and work with the player to build an interesting story about how this person awoke to their ability to use the Force.

That being said, Luke is actually a pretty horrible template to use in a game of a character who suddenly discovers they're Force-sensitive, as his special bloodline/heritage (not really expounded upon until later films) makes him an exceptionally powerful Force user, who is really only stymied by his unwillingness to believe that the Force can enable one to do the truly impossible. Hitting the exhaust port in ANH wasn't an "impossible" feat (he even said so himself during the briefing), so tapping into the Force to make that shot without the aid of a targeting computer wasn't a big stretch for him, but lifting an X-Wing through just the Force was too much for Luke at that point in his training, thus why he failed (at least according to Yoda).

Now, if your campaign is set in and around the time of the new movies, then I suspect a burgeoning Force-sensitive isn't going to have as rough a time of it, as they have the legends of Luke Skywalker to draw inspiration from. They probably won't grow as fast as Rey (at least not with how FFG has things arranged in terms of increasing one's Force Rating), but they also probably won't hit as many mental road blocks as Luke did during his training.

On 5/8/2019 at 4:35 AM, Archlyte said:

It's only comical if you use the real military as your example and in a calm situation.

People bring up real military all the time when trying to justify/debunk something they do/don't like in Star Wars. I've lost count of how many people use this defense.

And it's frankly not a totally invalid criticism, since the people who created the fictional stuff, based a lot of it on real world military things. They use military command structure and rankings so that the audience can quickly and easily understand who is in charge, and what they are doing. The use the uniforms of real military to convey who is good/bad (*cough space nazis cough*). They use military attack terms like wings and strafing, etc. So yeah, comparing it to actual military is USUALLY valid.

15 hours ago, Archlyte said:

Do you guys think that having a low/no key approach allows for players to later take a Force Spec if they started off with no Force ability and have it make sense? Or would it be too jarring because Force Sensitives are gonna always be super lucky and able to repair droids at age 3?

My group started with one FaD character (Niman/Sage; a Padawan who survived Order 66 by being out on mission), a happy-go-lucky Smuggler Pilot with Force Sensitive Exile, but no initial force powers, and an AoR Engineer Saboteur. We started as pseudo-bounty hunters, but over time the Force became more of the game's focus.

My character, the pilot, started slowly with Enhance and its subtle effects, to explain why he seemed to be so lucky in the cockpit. Over time, he became apprenticed to the former Padawan. He has now added Seer and gone deep into Sense and Influence.

At around 300 earned XP, the engineer decided to also add a Force tree, though she had shown no signs of sensitivity prior. It changed the story dynamics quite a bit, but not in a bad way. Instead of bounty hunters, we're essentially a crew of Jedi trainees, trying to undermine the Empire and stay alive.

So to answer your question, yes, it can work to start off sensitive without powers and develop over the campaign. You can have no sensitivity for the majority of a campaign, come into it late, and still have a good story. I'm sure you could also tell a story of a child prodigy and have it pull some weight. Ultimately, it's all about the story you want to tell.

17 hours ago, Daeglan said:

Soooo the fact that Biggs says he is the best bush pilot is what? We see several coversations where his skills as a pilot are discussed...

Biggs vouches for him moments before he gets in the cockpit. Not before the briefing, not before he's in the pilot outfit, not before anything useful. They've already decided that he's going to join them on this attack mission. It's absurd. Had Biggs not run into Luke in the hanger by random chance, no mention of him being a bush pilot would exist.

We see all of one conversation about his pilot skills where he humble brags about shooting horse-sized rats prior to Biggs (brand new rebel himself, he literally just joined the rebels days earlier) vouching for Luke mere moments before he gets in the cockpit. Any other mention of his piloting occurred before meeting the rebels.

Most of the rebel pilots have actual training. They are either ex-Imperial (like Biggs, Wedge, Hobbie, etc), or they came from planetary defense/police forces (like Garvin). Yes, they had non-academy trained pilots also, but they didn't just throw them into battle immediately upon joining the Rebels. They were trained by veteran pilots. Even experienced pilots were trained in the Rebellion. There is much more to combat than how to fly/shoot. Even guerrilla forces have training camps and do regular training maneuvers in order to have a well disciplined force that can operate together in combat situations. The Rebellion is no different.

Beyond all that, Wes Janson is on Yavin 4. The man has piloting experience. He gets grounded though, and Porkins take's his place. Rue was also on Yavin 4 and was grounded due to some minor altercation. Takbright and Bren were on Yavin also. You have AT LEAST 4 experienced, trained pilots on Yavin 4. They are not flying because they were grounded or there wasn't enough craft for them to fly. Wedge's X-wing and perhaps other fighters are not in tip-top fighting shape. Several of them were in need of maintenance and repairs. They did NOT have extra X-wings just sitting around. They had good, well trained pilots on the base. They give a coveted x-wing, during a vital mission, to a bush pilot kid from some backwater desert planet. Takbright and Bren weren't grounded, they just didn't have enough fighters. Rue's issue could be overlooked for the greater good. And even if Wes had a medical condition, you'd at least entertain the idea of putting him in an x-wing before a rookie like Luke for such an important mission.

As I said before, more happened behind the scenes. It's mentioned in the books. But what we see on film is silly. Even with the material in the book, it's a strange concept. You have a vital mission, and you leave 4 accomplished pilots on the ground to throw a kid in the cockpit. This makes no sense. Even if his training simulator scores were better than the other 4, any military leader would lean towards the experienced pilots instead of some kid.

16 hours ago, Archlyte said:

Do you guys think that having a low/no key approach allows for players to later take a Force Spec if they started off with no Force ability and have it make sense? Or would it be too jarring because Force Sensitives are gonna always be super lucky and able to repair droids at age 3? 

Absolutely. In fact it makes sense. Take a character that really focuses on ranged combat. They've picked a class and spec that works well for combat. They have dumped a ton of points into ranged light/ranged heavy/gunnery. They are awesome in combat, and often take out serious threats in one attack, or wipe entire minion groups every time they activate. That player later taking a force based spec makes sense. The fact that they were force sensitive can be retconned into why they were so amazing at combat anyways. The only thing I make my players do is follow a logical path. We are playing after the events of Ep4, so it wouldn't make sense to jump into a full on trained Jedi path. But an emergent, racer, or aggressor makes sense. Something you could naturally develop. I limit force power growth a little also. If the player later on wants to move into a Jedi spec that would require actual Jedi training, then we need to work something into the story that allows this. Contact with a jedi in hiding, discovery of some training holocrons for that spec. If you have a player that hordes XP for explosive gains, you may want to limit how quickly they move into Jedi/force trees. Having someone with no force powers suddenly drop 100xp into force related stuff comes off as strange.

Some people are naturally good at things. Han and Wedge had no force powers, but were **** good pilots. But Anakin and Luke were good at piloting because of their natural connection to the force. Luke was never trained in the force, but was a talented pilot. He didn't learn of his connection to the force till he was like 19. As long as the force path they take makes sense, it's fine.

4 minutes ago, kmanweiss said:

As I said before, more happened behind the scenes. It's mentioned in the books.

The audience shouldn't be required to do homework to make a movie's choices in editing and writing make sense. This is a common excuse Star Wars fans use that I just can't ever agree with. "If you read the novel it all makes sense."
Well I didn't read the novel, and neither did like 90% of the people who go to see the films. Their entire understanding of the story, is based on what the Director decided to put on screen in the Theatrical Cut. If they cut stuff, or reshot things, and this caused continuity/logic errors, that's on them. It's not actually a big deal, it's only a "problem" to pedantic fanboy/girls on the internet, who spend weeks debating the nuanced details of a movie from 40 years ago, trying to make it make sense based on current information, and because they have nothing better to do with their time.

7 minutes ago, kmanweiss said:

But what we see on film is silly. Even with the material in the book, it's a strange concept. You have a vital mission, and you leave 4 accomplished pilots on the ground to throw a kid in the cockpit. This makes no sense. Even if his training simulator scores were better than the other 4, any military leader would lean towards the experienced pilots instead of some kid.

Creators aren't worried about making it make 100% sense logically, based on real world concepts and structures. They are trying to tell a story. The story of a magical, farmboy King Arthur who saves the day with a 1/million shot. Sure it doesn't make any sense to put someone that green into the vanguard of such a vital military strike, but that doesn't matter. He's The Protagonist. That trumps things like logic and reality, in the service of story and drama. It's the same reason why James Cameron, when shown why the science clearly indicated that Rose could've totally saved Leo DiCaprio's character in Titanic, because the door was big enough for both of them, he didn't care. He basically said "ok fine, the prop was too big, the bottom line is there wasn't enough room for both of them for the story." So in regards to New Hope, the bottom line is that only Luke could save the day, because he was the Protagonist, and that's just how storytelling works.

3 hours ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

I don't see why not, though going from both Legends and current canon it seems that even latent/unaware Force-sensitives (such as Leia and Rey, and even Luke to some extent) have things go their way far more often than happens for mundanes. Looking at the films, we see Han and Lando have things not go smooth more often than we see for Luke or Rey. Of course, being that Luke and Rey are the leads of their respective trilogies, they're going to be "luckier" and generally more successful simply due to their status as the lead hero.

WEG and OCR/RCR d20 replicated this sense of "extra luckiness" by letting Force-sensitive characters have access to more Force points than a mundane would, so that said PCs could draw upon that resource to have things go their way more often.

That being said, while this system doesn't require it, I'd suggest not letting a player just suddenly decide out of the blue their PC is now a Force-sensitive and purchase one of the Universal specs out of the blue. I had one Rebellion era WEG campaign that got totally derailed because the players of the mundane characters (who comprised 3/5ths of the group) suddenly decide to be Force-sensitives, and I was a novice enough GM to not see where that would cause problems (especially with some of the players in question).

If you've got a player that wants to start out as an unaware Force-sensitive but later learn/develop their ability to tap into the Force, I'd say go for it, and work with the player to build an interesting story about how this person awoke to their ability to use the Force.

That being said, Luke is actually a pretty horrible template to use in a game of a character who suddenly discovers they're Force-sensitive, as his special bloodline/heritage (not really expounded upon until later films) makes him an exceptionally powerful Force user, who is really only stymied by his unwillingness to believe that the Force can enable one to do the truly impossible. Hitting the exhaust port in ANH wasn't an "impossible" feat (he even said so himself during the briefing), so tapping into the Force to make that shot without the aid of a targeting computer wasn't a big stretch for him, but lifting an X-Wing through just the Force was too much for Luke at that point in his training, thus why he failed (at least according to Yoda).

Now, if your campaign is set in and around the time of the new movies, then I suspect a burgeoning Force-sensitive isn't going to have as rough a time of it, as they have the legends of Luke Skywalker to draw inspiration from. They probably won't grow as fast as Rey (at least not with how FFG has things arranged in terms of increasing one's Force Rating), but they also probably won't hit as many mental road blocks as Luke did during his training.

Thanks for this response Donovan, I think that you are right about this subject and I do not allow players to suddenly go Force Sensitive. On these forums and I assume in the larger SWRPG culture there is a lot of stuff that goes on that I would not do but I do want to know where people are at just out of curiosity. I agree that the template of Luke is not ideal but I won't go so far as to say it would never work as I would prefer to have some variation in how such characters enter a game and how they develop.

Having said that I do appreciate the caveat concerning the group that suddenly went FS and how that could really dump the continuity of the game and put the feel of it in a bad place. It's really true that with more power comes greater responsibility, and giving spazzy or low common sense players a sudden jolt of story and mechanic power has predictable results.

6 hours ago, Darth Revenant said:

Guerilla. They're not a bunch of herbivorous primates from earth.

they might be....

On 5/7/2019 at 5:57 PM, kmanweiss said:

You do realize that this isn't a very important factor right? I mean, I know how to drive a car, but that doesn't mean the US military is going to toss me into humvee and ship me off to Iran if I happen to wander into a military base the day we decide to invade them.

It's somewhat comical when you think about it. Hey, this farm kid with no training, combat experience, knowledge of our tactics, or formation flying experience, wants to join our impending battle against the greatest threat to our galaxy.

Are you insane? He'd be a liability! You want to give him one of our rare, valuable, incredibly important military aircraft on a whim?

Well, he flew a T16 alone in a desert a time or two, so you know, the controls are basically the same right?

Well why didn't you say so? Slap him in a cockpit and point him at the enemy!

As someone who served in the US Army,, I can tell you that pretty much yes, if you have a driver’s license, they will essentially through you in a Humvee. It is ridiculously easy to get your military driver’s license for a given vehicle. Military driver training is a few hours or days at best. What’s even more interesting, is, at least in New York, if you have a military driver’s license, NY will just give you a civilian driver’s license on the spot, no driver’s test needed.

18 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

As someone who served in the US Army,, I can tell you that pretty much yes, if you have a driver’s license, they will essentially through you in a Humvee. It is ridiculously easy to get your military driver’s license for a given vehicle. Military driver training is a few hours or days at best. What’s even more interesting, is, at least in New York, if you have a military driver’s license, NY will just give you a civilian driver’s license on the spot, no driver’s test needed.

How do people keep missing the major elements here. I'm not saying it's hard to get a driver's license. But the Army isn't going to take a guy who just signed his enlistment papers, stick him in a uniform, put him behind the wheel of a humvee, and ship him to an active warzone all in the same day. Even basic training for the coast guard is 7.5 weeks. Basic training in other branches is 8-10 weeks...and that's for grunt level stuff. Training to be a tank driver takes longer, and training to be an airforce pilot is longer yet. They also don't shorten that training during active wars, or for people that have driven a semi-truck or flown a crop duster.

22 hours ago, KungFuFerret said:

Creators aren't worried about making it make 100% sense logically, based on real world concepts and structures. They are trying to tell a story. The story of a magical, farmboy King Arthur who saves the day with a 1/million shot. Sure it doesn't make any sense to put someone that green into the vanguard of such a vital military strike, but that doesn't matter. He's The Protagonist. That trumps things like logic and reality, in the service of story and drama. It's the same reason why James Cameron, when shown why the science clearly indicated that Rose could've totally saved Leo DiCaprio's character in Titanic, because the door was big enough for both of them, he didn't care. He basically said "ok fine, the prop was too big, the bottom line is there wasn't enough room for both of them for the story." So in regards to New Hope, the bottom line is that only Luke could save the day, because he was the Protagonist, and that's just how storytelling works. 

This is going to sound conflicted. I like the movie, I don't mind that Luke participated, It was necessary for the story. I've always enjoyed the movie. But that doesn't mean the scene makes sense.

I do want to amend one thing though. That's how *bad* storytelling works. Good storytelling makes sense. Bad storytelling is heavy handed an defies logic. That's not to say bad storytelling can't be entertaining as heck. I find bad B-movies particularly entertaining.

It wouldn't have been hard to have a throw away line that they have a spare X-wing if Luke wants to join in. Or have some sort of justification in the movie. Luke begging to join the fight, the rebel officers resisting but someone stating that he showed the highest scores in the simulator they had ever seen. Then another officer saying that they have a spare X-wing and they'd rather see it blown up in the attack then sitting on the ground. Also, don't show a bunch of pilots in flight suits standing around the command center. Now you have justification for what occurred. You can still question the decision, but you can see why it makes sense. Bad decisions in movies/shows can be good, and as long as the reason for the decision makes sense, even if it's the wrong choice, it's fine for storytelling. Non-nonsensical decisions however are just bad storytelling. If nobody with a lick of sense would make the same decision, then it's a heavy handed attempt to force the story because the writers were incompetent or lazy.

45 minutes ago, kmanweiss said:

This is going to sound conflicted. I like the movie, I don't mind that Luke participated, It was necessary for the story. I've always enjoyed the movie. But that doesn't mean the scene makes sense.

I never said it meant it made sense, not from a logical standpoint. It makes perfect sense from a Narrative perspective. The Protagonist will be involved in all the major events, and play a pivotal role in their outcome, that's what makes them the Protagonist. Logic and realism take a backseat to narrative flow and dramatic buildup, all the time in storytelling.

51 minutes ago, kmanweiss said:

I do want to amend one thing though. That's how *bad* storytelling works. Good storytelling makes sense. Bad storytelling is heavy handed an defies logic. That's not to say bad storytelling can't be entertaining as heck. I find bad B-movies particularly entertaining.

Star Wars are B movies in a lot of ways. From the original source material that inspired them, to the way they were structured and filmed, to the overall tone of a lot of the content. They are high camp, pulp fantasy stories, with a flashy sci-fi palette swap. The fact that they've made more money than some countries GDP doesn't mean they aren't B-movies. And let's be brutally honest, the Star Wars films have a TON of flaws in their stories, from gaping plot holes, to contradictory dialogue, to just plain bad writing. But that doesn't mean a person can't still enjoy them. No movie is perfect, and nobody should demand that of a film. Making movies has always been a messy, chaotic process, with so many variables to consider, that the fact that anything even remotely good gets made, is mindboggling.

58 minutes ago, kmanweiss said:

It wouldn't have been hard to have a throw away line that they have a spare X-wing if Luke wants to join in. Or have some sort of justification in the movie. Luke begging to join the fight, the rebel officers resisting but someone stating that he showed the highest scores in the simulator they had ever seen. Then another officer saying that they have a spare X-wing and they'd rather see it blown up in the attack then sitting on the ground.

But it really wasn't necessary. For the purposes of Generic Moviegoer, they established all that was really needed. Off the top of my head, this is the basic plot points that were used to establish Luke having at least some understanding of flying. Most of them are kind of subtle, but to me, they were pretty telling:

1. He was planning on going to the academy later that year to learn flying, implying he's had a passion for it for some time.

2. He was playing with that model of a starship/fighter/whatever when giving 3PO his oil bath, implying he's been studying ship design and their flight mechanics to some degree.

3. Ben comments about hearing that Luke was a pretty good pilot himself, which Luke humbly shrugs but smiles about, not denying. Implying he's had at least some experience, either in simulators, or in somebody's backyard fighter ship or equivalent. And this level of skill was prominent enough for a crazy old hermit in the desert to have heard about it, even in passing.

4. When they are escaping on the Falcon, Luke casually looks around the cockpit, taking in the details, but is able to fairly easily read the pursuit indicators on the ship's systems, when they are being chased by TIEs. "Are you kidding?! At the rate that they're gaining!?" So at lest some familiarity with the display systems and what they mean.

5. Commenting about bullseyeing womprats in his T16, further reinforcing personal experience with flying to some degree.

So the audience has had multiple, subtle hints given to them, that Luke is at least competent at flying.

They also clearly indicate his willingness to fight against the Empire. His eager reaction to 3PO talking about the Rebellion. "You know about the Rebellion against the Empire?!?" *fanboy eye sparkle* His willingness to throw himself into danger to try and rescue this Princess he's never met, because of her connection to the Rebellion.

So, the movie has established 2 key things. 1. Luke is at least competent at flying. 2. He wants to fight the Empire.

So, when the main story shifts over to a starship fight against the Empire, points 1 and 2 converge on screen, and the audience goes. "Well yeah, of course he would want to fly in the attack, given the way he's been presented so far. And they're a 'ragtag bunch of rebels, using whoever they can against an implacable, unstoppable foe'. Of course they'll take any warm body that they can fit into a cockpit. Makes sense he would be part of the group. Plus he'd just busted out one of their most influential political figures from the heart of the very base they are trying to destroy, and lived to tell about it, so he's clearly not incompetent. " Now I know you said something about 4 other characters that were better pilots, being left on the sidelines, but that's never mentioned in the film. None of those characters get more than a name tied to them at most. They were extras, their military experience isn't discussed, because it doesn't matter. They aren't the protagonist.

But it doesn't matter, because the audience doesn't need to know their full military history. They aren't the main character, they haven't spent 90 minutes becoming invested in their story, so they sit it out.

Does it make sense from a "real world, logic" standpoint? No. Does it make sense from a traditional storytelling standpoint? Yep.

Now I don't have an issue with pointing out the flaws, most of the time I agree with them. I just don't really care if they are there. For the most part, things like this, are incredibly minor things, that are 100% inconsequential to the story, and frankly, no offense, only matter to people on the internet who hyperfocus on minute details that the creators just really didn't have time to mess with.

12 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

Star Wars are B movies in a lot of ways.  From the original source material that inspired them, to the way they were structured and filmed, to the overall tone of a lot of the content. They are high camp, pulp fantasy stories, with a flashy sci-fi palette swap. The fact that they've made more money than some countries GDP doesn't mean they aren't B-movies. And let's be brutally honest, the Star Wars films have a TON of flaws in their stories, from gaping plot holes, to contradictory dialogue, to just plain bad writing. But that doesn't mean a person can't still enjoy them. No movie is perfect, and nobody should demand that of a film. Making movies has always been a messy, chaotic process, with so many variables to consider, that the fact that anything even remotely good gets made, is mindboggling.

And mic drop...

5 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

How do people keep missing the major elements here. I'm not saying it's hard to get a driver's license. But the Army isn't going to take a guy who just signed his enlistment papers, stick him in a uniform, put him behind the wheel of a humvee, and ship him to an active warzone all in the same day. Even basic training for the coast guard is 7.5 weeks. Basic training in other branches is 8-10 weeks...and that's for grunt level stuff. Training to be a tank driver takes longer, and training to be an airforce pilot is longer yet. They also don't shorten that training during active wars, or for people that have driven a semi-truck or flown a crop duster.

This is going to sound conflicted. I like the movie, I don't mind that Luke participated, It was necessary for the story. I've always enjoyed the movie. But that doesn't mean the scene makes sense.

I do want to amend one thing though. That's how *bad* storytelling works. Good storytelling makes sense. Bad storytelling is heavy handed an defies logic. That's not to say bad storytelling can't be entertaining as heck. I find bad B-movies particularly entertaining.

It wouldn't have been hard to have a throw away line that they have a spare X-wing if Luke wants to join in. Or have some sort of justification in the movie. Luke begging to join the fight, the rebel officers resisting but someone stating that he showed the highest scores in the simulator they had ever seen. Then another officer saying that they have a spare X-wing and they'd rather see it blown up in the attack then sitting on the ground. Also, don't show a bunch of pilots in flight suits standing around the command center. Now you have justification for what occurred. You can still question the decision, but you can see why it makes sense. Bad decisions in movies/shows can be good, and as long as the reason for the decision makes sense, even if it's the wrong choice, it's fine for storytelling. Non-nonsensical decisions however are just bad storytelling. If nobody with a lick of sense would make the same decision, then it's a heavy handed attempt to force the story because the writers were incompetent or lazy.

I think you missed my point. First, Basic Training, (or AIT, Jump School, etc) has no bearing on whether or not an individual is put behind the wheel of a humvee. Those the standard training for any soldier.

I'm only referring to actual driver's training . That is the only training that is relevant here. And, military driver's training for standard wheeled vehicles is not that extensive. If you can drive a car, you can drive a humvee. They road test you and that's it. It's maybe a day or two of training per vehicle. A Duece and a half or other more complex and specialized vehicle, might require more extensive driver training, but a humvee (or the older Cuck-Vees) didn't require much, if any, actual training.

10 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

I think you missed my point. First, Basic Training, (or AIT, Jump School, etc) has no bearing on whether or not an individual is put behind the wheel of a humvee. Those the standard training for any soldier.

I'm only referring to actual driver's training . That is the only training that is relevant here. And, military driver's training for standard wheeled vehicles is not that extensive. If you can drive a car, you can drive a humvee. They road test you and that's it. It's maybe a day or two of training per vehicle. A Duece and a half or other more complex and specialized vehicle, might require more extensive driver training, but a humvee (or the older Cuck-Vees) didn't require much, if any, actual training.

I think a better comparison would be to ask if the Air Force, upon learning that you've flown a prop plane for a few years, would give you just a cursory level of training before flying a jet fighter. Since that is the real world comparison most often used for these star wars vehicles.

1 minute ago, KungFuFerret said:

I think a better comparison would be to ask if the Air Force, upon learning that you've flown a prop plane for a few years, would give you just a cursory level of training before flying a jet fighter. Since that is the real world comparison most often used for these star wars vehicles.

Let's ask Russel K from Independence Day.

Or the neo-cavemen from Battlefield Earth that learned to fly Harriers in no time.