2 minutes ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

I'm also trying to get better at sculpting so I can make some miniatures, and related objects.

Awesome! I have Mudbox and Zbrush but, to be honest, I like 3D Coat better as a sculpting pipeline tool and it’s way cheaper. I’m mostly a character guy but it does well for hardbody projects too. Works a treat for UV mapping into a Lightwave pipeline and I’m all about that. 😎 🍺

39 minutes ago, kris40k said:

The CIS could have been good guys. The idea of planets breaking away from a corrupt, inefficient government that is not able to provide for them adequately and going their own way under a new coalition is not a bad idea. Then The Clone Wars TV series comes along and shows the CIS conquering worlds, acting oppressive and their leadership generally being mustache twirling bad guys and ruins the idea.

They were bad guys.

I respectfully disagree. The Jedi were supposed to be neutral, keepers of order. But they became generals of the republic, hardly neutral. It could be argued that the CIS were manipulated by Palpatine to do such things, as they were with the blockade of Naboo. They were told to do it, so they did.

Maybe the Republic weren’t the bad guys, but that would mean the Jedi definitely were for not doing their job.

You point to things that happened after the Clone Wars has started, they were at war, of course they are going to try and reduce resources etc to win.

1 hour ago, Spinland said:

Awesome! I have Mudbox and Zbrush but, to be honest, I like 3D Coat better as a sculpting pipeline tool and it’s way cheaper. I’m mostly a character guy but it does well for hardbody projects too. Works a treat for UV mapping into a Lightwave pipeline and I’m all about that. 😎 🍺

I fully appreciate my 3d coat licence. Wish my laptop was a bit beefier, but does well enough. Never liked mudbox, and zbrush was out of my price range.

3 hours ago, kris40k said:

The CIS could have been good guys. The idea of planets breaking away from a corrupt, inefficient government that is not able to provide for them adequately and going their own way under a new coalition is not a bad idea. Then The Clone Wars TV series comes along and shows the CIS conquering worlds, acting oppressive and their leadership generally being mustache twirling bad guys and ruins the idea.

They were bad guys.

The CIS millitary was canonically acting pretty much entirely independently from the CIS government, which saw the Clone Wars for what it was: Ultimately pointless, stupid, and a confusing atrocity. The Republic's millitary was far more heroic, but its government actively was the force that pushed the CIS out (Along with, you know, again, an evil space wizard controlling both sides).

The entire 'point' of the Clone Wars, especially when the cartoon's later seasons stop being 'straight' kid show and become 'dimensional' kids show, is that the Clone Wars were entirely pointless and terrible and not the solution either side's 'true believers' wanted. A major plot point was that the CIS was open to a peace treaty at any time but Palpatine framed an assassination on himself and used the fact that the CIS millitary operated without oversight to ensure that the Republic would never take it, and that the average CIS citizen had absolutely no idea why the Jedi weren't helping resolve the conflict like diplomats rather than warriors.

It was overall a more 'nuanced' war and was way less of a heroic one to wage than Republic vs Empire, which was a pretty unambigous war with a good guy and a bad guy: The CIS were still narratively the antagonists, and the millitary had to be stopped, but the situation was a lot more tragic and gray.

Quote

Maybe the Republic weren’t the bad guys, but that would mean the Jedi definitely were for not doing their job.

This is a bit more complicated in the EU: The Republic was basically 'framed' for making a first trike on Genosis, when in reality there was the whole 'multiple kidnappings and planned executions' thing going on. Then, the CIS millitary was commiting loads of atrocities, and the Jedi cared their ancient enemies were returned because Dooku was, to the Jedi, openly a Sith. So they couldn't exactly let him run a country and nakedly attack the Republic.

But most people in the CIS were unaware of this.

Both sides fought nearly entirely with a proxy army of people they didn't care about, and the war was far from the 'core' republic. The CIS weren't committing atrocities on worlds they were defending, and everyone trusted Dooku, who was, after all, a highly respected Jedi Master who tooootallly backed the desire of the CIS to free themselves from oppression, to represent the activities of the millitary honestly, so it just looked like the Jedi were siding with the Republic and trying to keep these downtrodden systems in the Republic at all costs. Without the critical knowledge that say... the CIS army engineered and attempted to deploy a deadly plague on Naboo, the idea of the Jedi instantly taking up arms rather than talking to both sides like they traditionally did seemed bonkers.

Also, some Jedi DID stay neutral, though they were rare.

And Count Dooku and the the Chief Librarian of the Jedi archives used to be an item. This isn't relevant to the Clone Wars thematics, its just the best invention of the entire EU/behind the scenes, and I can't ever not bring it up whenever talking about the Prequel Era's deep lore.

@dezzmont thank you for what you wrote. You expressed what I couldn’t, very well written and expressed.

I boulder be way off base, but I believe that people think the Republic are the good guys because they like them, and surely you can’t like the bad guys?

9 hours ago, Archangelspiv said:

I respectfully disagree. The Jedi were supposed to be neutral, keepers of order. But they became generals of the republic, hardly neutral.

Sorry, what?

Where are you getting that from.

The Jedi always served the Republic. They were always aligned and affiliated. Sure, you can argue that maybe being full fledged generals and fighting a war went a bit above their mandate as peacekeepers, diplomats and investigators, but the Jedi were never supposed to be neutral . There would never have been any question about them siding with the Republic in the Clone Wars.

Like, whenever people bring this up I'm always forced to ask: do you guys not remember literally the very first thing we were ever told about the Jedi, back in Ben's hut in ANH? "You fought in the Clone Wars?" "Yes, I was once a Jedi Knight".

And then very shortly after:

"For over a thousand generations the Jedi were guardians of peace and justice in the Republic "

" General Kenobi, years ago you served my father [Senator Organa] in the Clone Wars".

The Jedi were always written as Knights fighting the Republic's wars. If anything, it's the material that suggests they were completely non-violent spiritualists who strove to stay out of the Republic's affairs that got things completely wrong. Sure, the later movies added a bit of nuance to all this with Yoda, and the prequels suggested the Jedi were a little out of their depth ("I can only protect you, I can't fight a war for you", "We are keepers of the peace, not soldiers"), but the idea that they were somehow completely failing their duty and their job by fighting with the Republic's army has been borne out of misguided EU material and misinformed fan commentary. It isn't supported by what we're told in any of George's films. And what shift does exist in the prequels is an amusing look at the shift in George's personal politics and creative inspiration over 20 years. In '77, Obi-Wan Kenobi was just your standard retired military officer / samurai trope. Why do you think he's so quick to bust out the lightsaber in that film?

Point me to any part of the films were Jedi are described as ideally neutral parties. I'll wait.

27 minutes ago, GuacCousteau said:

Sorry, what?

Where are you getting that from.

The Jedi always served the Republic. They were always aligned and affiliated. Sure, you can argue that maybe being full fledged generals and fighting a war went a bit above their mandate as peacekeepers, diplomats and investigators, but the Jedi were never supposed to be neutral . There would never have been any question about them siding with the Republic in the Clone Wars.

Like, whenever people bring this up I'm always forced to ask: do you guys not remember literally the very first thing we were ever told about the Jedi, back in Ben's hut in ANH? "You fought in the Clone Wars?" "Yes, I was once a Jedi Knight".

And then very shortly after:

"For over a thousand generations the Jedi were guardians of peace and justice in the Republic "

" General Kenobi, years ago you served my father [Senator Organa] in the Clone Wars".

The Jedi were always written as Knights fighting the Republic's wars. If anything, it's the material that suggests they were completely non-violent spiritualists who strove to stay out of the Republic's affairs that got things completely wrong. Sure, the later movies added a bit of nuance to all this with Yoda, and the prequels suggested the Jedi were a little out of their depth ("I can only protect you, I can't fight a war for you", "We are keepers of the peace, not soldiers"), but the idea that they were somehow completely failing their duty and their job by fighting with the Republic's army has been borne out of misguided EU material and misinformed fan commentary. It isn't supported by what we're told in any of George's films. And what shift does exist in the prequels is an amusing look at the shift in George's personal politics and creative inspiration over 20 years. In '77, Obi-Wan Kenobi was just your standard retired military officer / samurai trope. Why do you think he's so quick to bust out the lightsaber in that film?

Point me to any part of the films were Jedi are described as ideally neutral parties. I'll wait.

Given Mace Windu said this...

“...there aren't enough Jedi to protect the Republic. We are keepers of the peace, not soldiers“

1 hour ago, Archangelspiv said:

Given Mace Windu said this...

“...there aren't enough Jedi to protect the Republic. We are keepers of the peace, not soldiers“

Literally already referenced that quote and addressed it.

So cheers for clearly taking the time to read my whole post, I guess.

13 minutes ago, GuacCousteau said:

Literally already referenced that quote and addressed it.

So cheers for clearly taking the time to read my whole post, I guess.

I guess It must have meant that I thought you were wrong, so anytime mate.
I pointed out a bit as you asked. You referenced it incorrectly imo. But you are power nerding this to level 9000 and taking it to a place I cannot go. It’s not real 😳 .

4 hours ago, Archangelspiv said:

I guess It must have meant that I thought you were wrong, so anytime mate.
I pointed out a bit as you asked. You referenced it incorrectly imo. But you are power nerding this to level 9000 and taking it to a place I cannot go. It’s not real 😳 .

I think what you are leaving out is that peace does not mean avoiding conflict and not taking a side. The CIS tried to commit genocide on Naboo. It is not taking the side of peace to step aside and not take a stand against that sort of thing.

If you value peace you do not get to be weak and step aside and never take a side. Pretty soon the rapacious will come for you too. Si vis pachem, parabellum.

At what point in the prequels did the Jedi say they were a neutral party? Peace keeping does not mean neutral unaffiliated.

1 hour ago, dsul413 said:

At what point in the prequels did the Jedi say they were a neutral party? Peace keeping does not mean neutral unaffiliated.

Exactly. That we are peacekeepers line seems to keep getting read as we are pacifists who do not stand for anything. It seems like a willful misrepresentation to justify the Jedi having gotten played and betrayed. And that is my charitable characterization of the stance.

Stormtroopers are the peace keepers in Imperial space. They perform that by keeping everyone under the boot. Peace keepers are not neutral or unaffiliated. If anything Mace was just pointing out that the Jedi were not numerous enough to fight wars on a galactic scale, hence, "not soldiers". They ended up being pressed into service being generals.

Jedi "keep the peace" under significant threat of violence like Stormtroopers as well. ****, Obi-Wan hacked someone's arm off in a bar and, Anakin just glared at everyone and said "Jedi business, go back to your drinks" and everyone shrugged and minded their own **** business. How the **** was that an acceptable explanation? Somehow, I think Jedi should have been wearing bodycams. Executing field amputations on criminal suspects without proper oversight should be reigned in.

Did the Jedi do something like burn an entire village to flush out some criminals? How about blow up one of their own officials because they weren't good enough at their job? Do the Jedi summarily executed subordinates who fail their superiors. Did they perform amputations on a fleeing assassin who was not about to shoot them in the back? Did the amputation quickly end the fight and prevent a blaster fight in a crowded bar full of innocents who might have been harmed in the crossfire?

The logic progression for a lot of you running down the Jedi seems to be violence is bad, the Jedi employ violence, thus the Jedi are bad. There are some seriously flawed first premises at work in all of this. These flawed premises seem motivated by an attitude that the Jedi had it coming and deserved to be betrayed.

14 hours ago, kris40k said:

Jedi "keep the peace" under significant threat of violence like Stormtroopers as well. ****, Obi-Wan hacked someone's arm off in a bar and, Anakin just glared at everyone and said "Jedi business, go back to your drinks" and everyone shrugged and minded their own **** business. How the **** was that an acceptable explanation? Somehow, I think Jedi should have been wearing bodycams. Executing field amputations on criminal suspects without proper oversight should be reigned in.

Not a bad point, tbf.

Although Zam did actually pull a gun on Obi-Wan. I think most police services in the world would have seen outright shooting Zam as justified self defence in that case, so taking a hand to disarm her is actually pretty lenient and arguably preferable. I'm not even talking about the US, there. Bodycam footage would have exonerated Obi-Wan in that case. Of course, it's kinda hard to set up a bodycam that can record extrasensory perception, so taking what the Jedi can see through the Force in as evidence would be very tricky. In this instance, 360 degree hologram recording (which seems to exist) would have shown her advancing with the gun even with Obi-Wan's back to her, so again Obi's probably in the right here. But when they make a move just because they've sensed someone's intent? That's a very tricky one to document.

Of course, after the incident, they still did a terrible job securing the scene. Rather than telling everyone to go back to their drinks, Anakin should have kept the patrons around and questioned them for witness testimony that would have corroborated the story that Zam was about to kill Obi-Wan. They also should have read Zam her rights, and secured proper medical attention and transport to an official facility, and definitely not tried to interrogate her in an open back alley. Having your suspect assassinated before she can talk by her boss is obviously one example of why this is bad practice, but it's not even the primary concern. The last thing you want is some random member of the public overhearing things, leaking the information and compromising the case. Or giving the suspect any chance to escape.

Its not even a question if Obi-Wan was justified in disarming maiming Zam. He was. Its that he did it and Anakin's response was to tell everyone to piss off and everyone's response was to piss off. As if this sort of behavior, hacking up people in public areas, is expected from the Jedi, is normalized and not questioned. I could see it in more "Wild West" areas such as Tatooine where justice is determined by whomever is faster on the draw, but in a bar in Coruscant the center of the Republic? Sure, it has some bad areas and an underworld, but that didn't seem like such a rough neighborhood at the time.

Anyways, my post was half tongue in cheek.