Thoughts news

Perspective and the Numbers Game

An attempt on a objective point of view in regard to the conflicts and arguments that arise.

Most arguments and conflicts seem to arise due to different perspectives and point of views. Does one tactic effectively counter another? Do 6000 troops always beat 5000 troops? Logic cannot provide an answer to such questions without any background or additional details because of the many different circumstances or variables that could influence it. If we force the logic, then the answer to both is Yes, and thus it would tend serve as a basis for the immediate line of thought in a conflict. Especially for the one who counters the tactic, or the one with the most troops. Why shouldn't he win?

It could perhaps be considered the Achilles Heel of the Roleplay. A Roleplay, set in a universe as large as Star Wars, is not only powered by the roleplayers imagination, but also by the wealth of thoughts, "Facts" and ideas of many others, whom created the universe, that all contribute to the roleplayers own view of that universe. But not all see things the same way.

Someone who reads about the canon Star Wars space tactic, one of the few actually explained, called the Ackbar Slash might come to the conclusion that it is something that is impossible, or at the very least very hard to counter. An enemy, may devise a tactic that he fully believes makes the Ackbar Slash null, or inefficient. Even if that tactic was truly a stroke of brilliance, odds are that the opponent would see it as a "cheap" move to make a canon, solid and proven tactic useless, as to undermine the move. The reason itself is valid enough, after all, the goal is to win from an In Character perspective. However the opponent might see it as a bad excuse made up on the spot as to not lose the battle, instead of a realistic and logically sound tactic and because, depending on the tactic, his own tactic with which he thought he was gonna turn the tide of battle in his favor, now may end up costing him the battle instead, causing him to protest against the effect of the counter-tactic. While it may seem as mere arrogance, stubbornness or however you would describe it, or even if it is somewhat based on truth. It all is still connected to mere perspective. Both thinks their tactic is superior, not as a result of any form of Ego or similar, but simply because the way they see it. Their tactic is reasonable, the others is not.

Another scenario pits one roleplayer with 5000 men against another with 6000 men. The roleplayer with the lowest amount of men is depending a city and have been preparing for its defense. In this roleplayers mind, he or she cannot imagine that any kind of invading force below 8000 men could take the city without resorting to extreme measures, which for the sake of the argument, is not relevant in this case. The opponent roleplayer, prepares for an invasion with his 6000 men. He is aware that the defender have the most favorable conditions, yet he believes that his extra 1000 men is enough to even the odds. Both are confident that they will win with the troops they have and the tactics they have at their disposal. At one point or another, they will start to disagree, first one uses a defensive tactic that kills many of the others attacking men. The attacking roleplayer disagrees and shows this by suggesting an alternative event to what the defender "suggested" would have happened. In a way, these initial steps is actually a positive thing, as it makes the opponent aware that he is taking it a bit to far and often enough he might even realize that perhaps his move took things a step to far. The issue often arises if the attacking roleplayer believes that the defenders move, not only was large inefficient, in contrast to what the defender believes and thus takes advantage of this "Flaw" be causing extensive casualties on the defender instead. This liberty, as one could call it, comes from the perspective and opinion that "You screwed up, and now I am gonna take advantage of it" line of thought. Why not? Obviously the defender must agree on this.

If only that were the case one could easily think, and that it went both ways, but whenever both roleplayers believes themselves the obvious, and eventual winners. Something that may change these self-made "facts" or assumptions based on for example the; "6000 beats 5000 almost no matter what" line of thought, causes a conflict of perspective that only absolves if a compromise is made, or if one of the players objectively makes the conclusion that defeat is actually possible.

As long as both subjects maintain the idea that they will win, or that their tactics are either infallible or largely superior. The battle will drag on in two ways, either constantly abrupt by arguments, which may or may not lead to compromises, or a continuous series of counters, and counters, and counters where neither will yield to the fact that maybe they are the ones losing. From their perspective, the opponent is being stubborn, unrealistic and illogical and therefor sees the need to continue the fight and through a multitude of more and more complex lines of thoughts that are supposed to convince the other that they are winning. In reality, or from an outside perspective, things will quickly seems like they become, what the players would accuse each other of being; "Cheap" as one would say.

The Jamming of communications

A hypothesis have been made that, when jamming an enemy's communications, you in effectively jamming all if them. Literally reducing communication to word of mouth...

Out of writing juice. Stay tuned for the next episode of Headhunters brain go nuts!

On the balance of the force, a hypothesis/perspective based off the story of the Chosen One

First a little background, the Galactic Republic, or after the creation of Palpatines Galactic Empire, known as "The Old Republic", was protected mostly by the Jedi Order which served as galactic peacekeepers, not to mention keeping the entity known as "The force" in balance. Not long before the Clone wars, some Jedi began to feel as if the force was becoming unbalanced, and a prophesy came that there were to be a Chosen One, whom would bring balance to the force. During the Trade Federations blockade of Naboo, a prelude conflict to the Clone wars, a child named Anakin Skywalker and force sensitive was discovered. The man who found him came to believe that this child would be the chosen one. Thus the child was taken in by the Jedi order and trained to become a Jedi.

At the time of the Clone wars, the Jedi began to realize that their own power in the galaxy was diminishing, and that their ability to see/sense the future was shrouded by the dark side of the force. A strange occurrence since the Jedi Order numbered around ten thousand, yet their force user counterparts were far fewer in numbers. If Dark Jedi and dark side novices are included, perhaps a only dozen dark side aligned existed in the known galaxy. While the most prominent of these dark siders, Palpatine, was considered one of the most powerful Sith of all time, he was not the first extremely powerful Sith that the Jedi order had combated in since the creation of the Order, and those ancient Lords had legions of Sith fighting for them, the Jedi order yet prevailed.

Credence should be lent to Palpatine, for realizing how the direct approach had often failed the Sith in the past and choosing to destroy the Jedi order by shrouded means (See what I did there!?! huh huh? No? Okay.). Yet despite his power and ability to use the dark side to shroud the future from the Jedi, doing so for Ten thousand Jedi, some of them quite powerful in their own right, should be somewhat impossible. And it was. Some Jedi did realize, some saw through the shroud, but never warned the Jedi, or never managed to. In one instance, the Jedi simply joined Palpatine's cause, another and more famous example is that of Syfo-Dias, the Jedi which had the Kaminoan's create the Clone army, because he managed to foresee the Jedi Orders destruction, or at least the Jedi/republic's need for an army. Unfortunately for the Jedi and Syfo-Dias, his plan for an army was discovered and usurped by Palpatine.

This brings us to the Jedi philosophy of bringing the force in balance and the chosen one who were to do it. From my perspective, there is no reason as to why the Jedi should not, long before they did, have broken free of the dark side shroud around them. They outnumbered the dark side force users 1000:1. The very notion seems ridiculous and there is certainly a plot armor aspect to this, unless... that the force somehow WANTED the Jedi's power to wane. If we look at the force objectively, many would argue that the force in itself is neither light nor dark. It is here the jedi would claim that the dark side is the unnatural and corrupted manifestation and intention of the force and thus its usage brings the force out of balance. Objectively however, would balance not then be equal measures of light and dark?

If we move on the prophesy of a chosen one that were to bring balance to the force (You have probably already guessed where this is going), then I would say the Jedi were right, just not the way they thought. Its is commonly accepted that Anakin (As Darth vader) achieved the prophesy by killing Palpatine in the battle of Endor and I would agree, but I would claim that it is the SECOND time he had brought balance to the force. With the jedi being the overwhelming dominant force user base during the clone wars, Anakin, arguably brought balance to the force when he prevented Palpatines death at the hands of the Jedi.

Now, I'm not gonna claim that the almost total destruction of the Jedi Order all was the intent of the force, but still even after Order 66, an estimate 100-200 Jedi survived. While far from as many as ten thousand, its still many more than the Sith. If we regard the force as an subconscious entity based off all life in the galaxy, which does not adhere, nor consider political, emotional and similar aspects, the destruction of most of the Jedi Order as a balance measure by the force using Anakin as its instrument becomes a plausible perspective.

My thoughts on this are somewhat unrefined and based almost entirely off my memory of Star Wars canon, so some inconsistencies are bound to be there. I could probably go much more in depth and find further sources to support my argument, however this entire article is juts here for me to vent my thoughts once in a while, so can't be bothered really xD

There is no emotion, there is peace.

Perhaps a misunderstood sentiment when it comes to the Jedi order. I sometimes get angry when I hear people "hating" on the Jedi teachings regarding emotions. I always feel that the Jedi in this regard is severely misunderstood. And its easy to do. "What? so falling in love can lead to falling to the dark side? Plenty of things can lead to that." people say. And I agree, but while that is often the excuse we hear, I doubt that is the true reason. Or at least it wasn't in the beginning.

Is emotion discouraged? Yes. Is it forbidden? No. In things emotional, the only thing outright forbidden is the indulgence and expression of emotions like love. Not because Jedi fear love, but what may spring of it. While many would say is because Jedi do not allow one to have emotions, I say this is a VERY simple way of putting it, I think the true basis for the Jedi philosophies, is based of political and moral guidelines regarding dynasties and the fact that the Jedi order is an order devoted to selflessness. Acting upon emotions and thus letting them control you is considered a selfish thing to do.

As a measure to distance themselves from the Sith, the Jedi attempt to avoid "dynasties". Even calculated breeding is forbidden, as it is perceived, from a philosophical perspective, to be disharmonious to the general Jedi teachings and beliefs that the Jedi serve others and not themselves.

Jedi generally also serves in a judicial role, where even by real world standards, emotions have no place. Or are rarely considered. However just like a Jury may be swayed by emotional arguments, so can a Jedi. As cold as it may sound though, Jedi encourage their own to look beyond their emotions in matters as justice. The Jedi having accepted these judicial roles within say, the Republic, may also have had some influence as to why the Jedi Code has changed somewhat from the original which says; Emotion, yet peace.

Jedi upholding the standard of "No emotions" is no more cruel or evil than say a law, that prevents you from murder. Even if that someone deserve it from an emotional/moral perspective. Furthermore, the idea that most Jedi follow the code strictly and suppress a part of what makes them human (Or whatever species they may be), is IMO unreasonable and somewhat a prejudiced/ignorant perspective , as the Jedi do not teach the Suppression, of emotion, but to know when to act on them, and when not to. This is not so much differently from how the Sith teaches to control ones emotions.

It is perhaps worthy to note that the point in history where Jedi was the most strict, and if you insist on arguing these things it as cruelty or even evil, it was during the 1000 year period before and up to the rise of Palpatines Empire. In the following centuries, emotions were still discouraged, yet famous examples such as the Skywalkers and Solo's suggests that procreation and the indulging of emotions like love was accepted and things like friendship and attachments to other people even encouraged. However, as feared by earlier generations these "Dynasties" also proved somewhat near catastrophic on the account of one Jacen Solo.

Its easy to agree/prefer Luke Skywalkers New Jedi order, but the Old Jedi order had thousands of years to refine their teachings, philosophies and systems. On that account, I cannot objectively, and do not think you can, claim the New Jedi order is better because of their more broad acceptance of emotions, only subjectively agree that if I were a Jedi (And for selfish reasons) then for better or worse, I would prefer the New Jedi Order.

I have severely sidetracked myself, but to finish and return to my starting point above. In the Old Jedi order, yes, emotions are somewhat frowned upon, and perhaps I stand alone in my perceptive and the reasons behind the Jedi Orders philosophies in this regard, but the bottom line is. The Jedi Order is an order dedicated to selflessness, if you are a selfish person (And compared to the Jedi Order, that's okay because they set the bar so high in that regard, that few ordinary people could truly compete.) then leave the order. Fact is, you don't have what it takes to be a Jedi.

Suck it fool.