Stormtroopers vs. Redshirts

[Yora]

So...

Who would lose?

[Lord Raziere]

Red Shirts.

its a fundamental law of fiction. The only thing weaker than Stormtroopers is Red Shirts, otherwise the Red Shirts would be strong enough to defend people by themselves and there would be no need for the protagonist, and thats stormtroopers are threats at all: because Red Shirts are even less of a threat than them.

or if your talking about the ones from the specific shows.....

well stormtroopers are better armored, are trained by a conquering empire and have various ships both in the sky and on the ground, while Red Shirts.....are wearing red shirts, and I don't remember them ever having good weaponry, but then again I've watched Star Trek slightly more than never, but the Red Shirts lose because they are wearing red shirts instead of armor, are trained by a peaceful intergalactic diplomacy organization, and I don't recall them having much access to ships aside from the ones they ride on.

but yeah. any you cut it, the Red Shirts lose.

[BWR]

Storm Troopers do pretty well against anyone who isn't the protagonist. I can't recall the same being true for redshirts.

[Man on Fire]

Which Stormtroopers? If it's 501 or Stormtroopers from the begining on New Hope, they win. Otherwise they'll have to settle it with their fists.

On more realistic approach Red Shirts have advantage in having their faces exposed - it is proven that humans have much easier time shooting at and actually hitting targets ith their faces covered than ones with them exposed.

On unrelated note - Stormtroopers vs Redshirts is pretty much like how all my Only War games went so far.

[Mauve Shirt]

Redshirts would lose most definitely. They may have faces, but they don't have body armor. :smallfrown:

[BWR]

Which Stormtroopers? If it's 501 or Stormtroopers from the begining on New Hope, they win. Otherwise they'll have to settle it with their fists.

On more realistic approach Red Shirts have advantage in having their faces exposed - it is proven that humans have much easier time shooting at and actually hitting targets ith their faces covered than ones with them exposed.

On unrelated note - Stormtroopers vs Redshirts is pretty much like how all my Only War games went so far.

Or the STs from ESB that whupped the Rebels good on Hoth? and Drove the heroes back on Bespin?
Or the STs from RotJ that, after being taken with their pants down, rallied and were in the process of beating the Ewoks until the Heroes saved the day?

[Hyena]

Stormtroopers. The only times they actually lose is when a jedi or a guy called Han Solo is on the battlefield.

[TheOldCrow]

Stormtroopers would win-- because the function of being Redshirts is to be the guys that always get it. The purpose of Stormtroopers is to be efficient except in the case where the protagonists are present, and then they need to miss. The Redshirt is to take the bullet so the protagonist doesn't have to. It's like chocolate and peanut butter.

On the upside for Redshirts, they have faces and names and even sometimes a few lines, so they get more in the way of personality to mark their brief lives. I mean, for all we know that guy encased in the white armor could just the same guy over and over again, right?

[Ebon_Drake]

Which Stormtroopers? If it's 501 or Stormtroopers from the begining on New Hope, they win. Otherwise they'll have to settle it with their fists.
.

I love that idea. I'm now imagining a stormtrooper and a redshirt spending about 20 minutes constantly missing while trying to shoot each other, before giving up and resorting to duking it out instead. At that point, the redshirt would of course win by using the classic double-fisted punch with interlocking fingers.

[Tengu_temp]

Stormtroopers always miss, but each shot hits some nearby piece of equipment instead, which blows up and sends one or more Redshirts flying.

[Devonix]

Stormtroopers Because when you actually look at their record in battle They've only ever lost once. Every single damn other time they are on screen they take out their target.

Hell even the thing about not hitting main characters is a lie. Han Solo and Chewie are the only ones of the main cast who never get shot by Storm Troopers.

[lord_khaine]

And a lot of times when they were ineffectively missing the heroes then its very likely they were under orders to let them escape alive with their tracking device.

[Zrak]

Redshirts would lose most definitely. They may have faces, but they don't have body armor. :smallfrown:

Does the body armor actually matter? Given that blaster shots seem pretty much invariably lethal to armored and unarmored targets, I figured the stormtroopers wore the armor more for intimidation and/or some sort of unified "face of the empire" fascist aesthetic.

That aside, I agree with the general consensus, here. The narrative function of red shirts is to be killed by stormtroopers so the protagonists look more hardcore when they easily take out the stormtroopers. On the other hand, if we go the other pop culture angle and consider them both as groups defined by abysmal accuracy, I think the redshirts would win if it comes to settling matters with their fists. Star Trek is much heavier on fisticuffs; think of how many fights Kirk ended not with a phaser, but with a Polish Hammer.

[BWR]

Does the body armor actually matter? Given that blaster shots seem pretty much invariably lethal to armored and unarmored targets, I figured the stormtroopers wore the armor more for intimidation and/or some sort of unified "face of the empire" fascist aesthetic.

That aside, I agree with the general consensus, here. The narrative function of red shirts is to be killed by stormtroopers so the protagonists look more hardcore when they easily take out the stormtroopers. On the other hand, if we go the other pop culture angle and consider them both as groups defined by abysmal accuracy, I think the redshirts would win if it comes to settling matters with their fists. Star Trek is much heavier on fisticuffs; think of how many fights Kirk ended not with a phaser, but with a Polish Hammer.

Kirk =/= redshirts

using that sort of logic we should assume STs win because Luke and Vader.

[Gnoman]

Does the body armor actually matter? Given that blaster shots seem pretty much invariably lethal to armored and unarmored targets, I figured the stormtroopers wore the armor more for intimidation and/or some sort of unified "face of the empire" fascist aesthetic.


If you watch the opening scene of A New Hope closely, the stormtroopers only go down from direct hits, while shots anywhere in the vicinity take down the rebel troops via blast. Their armor is actually pretty effective.

[MLai]

At that point, the redshirt would of course win by using the classic double-fisted punch with interlocking fingers.
I tried that "technique" and my fingers hurt from hitting anything harder than a pillow. I tried various angles and nothing works; it seems to be a great way to break my fingers.
Is it just my hands being peculiar? Does the double-hammerfist work remotely for anyone else?

[The Glyphstone]

I tried that "technique" and my fingers hurt from hitting anything harder than a pillow. I tried various angles and nothing works; it seems to be a great way to break my fingers.
Is it just my hands being peculiar? Does the double-hammerfist work remotely for anyone else?

Did you try screaming at the top of your lungs while doing it? Sufficient over-acting can project a protective force field around your hands.

[BWR]

There's a reason that no fighting system I know of teach hitting things with interlocking fingers. Grasping one hand with the other is a much better option if you insist on making a double-fisted strike.

[Zrak]

Kirk =/= redshirts

using that sort of logic we should assume STs win because Luke and Vader.

I just meant that Star Trek is kin to the western where Star Wars is kin to fantasy; it has fist-fights where Star Wars has sword fights. As such, I'd bet on Star Trek winning at fisticuffs, mook-to-mook.


I tried that "technique" and my fingers hurt from hitting anything harder than a pillow. I tried various angles and nothing works; it seems to be a great way to break my fingers.
Is it just my hands being peculiar? Does the double-hammerfist work remotely for anyone else?

No, it's not just you, it's a pretty bad idea all around. If you hit with the heel of your hands instead of your fingers you probably won't break your fingers and if you grasp one hand with the other you definitely won't, but even then all you'll have really achieved is wasting an opportunity to elbow somebody.

[Ravens_cry]

Storm Troopers do pretty well against anyone who isn't the protagonist. I can't recall the same being true for redshirts.
On the other hand, in this conflict, the redshirts are the good guys, barring other protagonists, so they win. They still die, but that's what they do.

[Cespenar]

Stormtroopers fire at the air, and the Redshirts jump around to catch the lasers with their faces.

Or,

The unnatural force guiding the Stormtroopers' shots away from their targets is negated by the unnatural force that puts the Redshirts in the way of fire. The end result becomes purely mundane: guys with guns against guys with guns. I guess Stormtroopers' equipment is a little better, so they would probably win.

[Yora]

Stormtroopers Because when you actually look at their record in battle They've only ever lost once. Every single damn other time they are on screen they take out their target.

Hell even the thing about not hitting main characters is a lie. Han Solo and Chewie are the only ones of the main cast who never get shot by Storm Troopers.

But even if they hit, they don't do any damage against main characters.

[Maxios]

The stormtroopers would miss every shot, but the redshirts would die anyway.

[Cikomyr]

There's 2 ways of looking at it:

- First of all, there's the classic "Stormtroopers miss all their shots, but somehow accidently kill the Redshirt with their missfires"

But if you look at the Redshirt's role to be some sort of entropic canari; ergo, as a "Bad-thing Magnet" meant to protect the main characters and alert them that something bad is afoot..

Well, in that case, the Red Shirts won't get killed, since the Stormtroopers are not a menace to the main characters. There is no "danger" to attract.

[Lord Raziere]

or, you can look at it a third way: red shirts exist to lose. if they don't lose, they aren't red shirts, and thus by definition if they're red shirts, they die to the storm troopers.

[TheThan]

I love that idea. I'm now imagining a stormtrooper and a redshirt spending about 20 minutes constantly missing while trying to shoot each other, before giving up and resorting to duking it out instead. At that point, the redshirt would of course win by using the classic double-fisted punch with interlocking fingers.

It’s call the double axe handle people.


On the other hand, in this conflict, the redshirts are the good guys, barring other protagonists, so they win. They still die, but that's what they do.
Nope, it’s a stalemate until the protagonists arrive and clean up.

Anyway I think the stormtroopers win by simple virtue of numbers. They may lose on the attrition scale, but they’ll win the battle.

[Mando Knight]

Nope, it’s a stalemate until the protagonists arrive and clean up.

At which point, all the Redshirts die from shots that are missing the protagonists.

[Man on Fire]

or, you can look at it a third way: red shirts exist to lose. if they don't lose, they aren't red shirts, and thus by definition if they're red shirts, they die to the storm troopers.

But Stormtroopers are mooks, and mooks exist to loose.

Now I want a game where two groups of players play as group of redshirts and a group of stormtroopers duking it out. Prefferably in Only War.

[Lord Raziere]

But Stormtroopers are mooks, and mooks exist to loose.

Now I want a game where two groups of players play as group of redshirts and a group of stormtroopers duking it out. Prefferably in Only War.

yes, lose. to the PROTAGONISTS. to everyone else, they're death. and Red shirts are meant to lose to the Villain, the antagonist, and the stormtroopers are the antagonist. by definition, they aren't a red shirt until they're dead on the floor because of the villain, only a potential red shirt that is there for scenery until he dies, in which he becomes a red shirt.

[TheOldCrow]

I think Redshirts would come in handy in a battle with the heroes against the villains, where the heroes have Redshirts on their side and the villains have stormtroopers. The heroes could target the villains even if there were stormtroopers all around, but the villains would miss the heroes and hit a Redshirt instead as long as any Redshirts still survived on the heroes' side.

[Legato Endless]

If it's only red shirts versus storm troopers, the red shirts have no hope.

However, if there is any unknown life form or monster nearby, and the storm troopers are established enemies, the red shirts will win. That way they can demonstrate how much more lethal the new organism is.

[MLai]

So in a TBS game, Stormtroopers are pawns with better stats than Redshirts, but Redshirts come with TAUNT and BODYGUARD?
Basically that means Stormtroopers would win, unless the Redshirts also have a DPS hero piece on their side. Then the Redshirts could apply their special abilities to tank for the hero. Even if the Stormtroopers have an identical hero for their army, that player would still lose the battle.

[Bulldog Psion]

But if you look at the Redshirt's role to be some sort of entropic canari

This line had me rolling on the floor in stitches almost literally for a good five minutes. :smallbiggrin: Thank you!

Personally, I think the stormtrooper would mow down the redshirts, then be slaughtered like red-headed step-targets two second later by a random wookiee.

[Socratov]

Well, I think the only persons winning here are weapons manufactureres and ammo makers for the rest it's a battle between the Storm Trooper's magical powers of missing their targets and the Redshirt's ability to be hit by stray bullets...

[Man on Fire]

I think Stormtroopers would hit Redshirts. Just not the ones they were aiming at.

[Wardog]

There's 2 ways of looking at it:

- First of all, there's the classic "Stormtroopers miss all their shots, but somehow accidently kill the Redshirt with their missfires"

But if you look at the Redshirt's role to be some sort of entropic canari; ergo, as a "Bad-thing Magnet" meant to protect the main characters and alert them that something bad is afoot..

Well, in that case, the Red Shirts won't get killed, since the Stormtroopers are not a menace to the main characters. There is no "danger" to attract.

The Stormtroopers miss all their shots.

The poison-dart-spitting flowers don't.


remember: redshirts don't need hostile enemies to die. They can did to the environment just as easily.


(Alternatively: The Stormtroopers shoot. The redshirts dive out of the way - and land on an explosive rock).

[Cikomyr]

The Stormtroopers miss all their shots.

The poison-dart-spitting flowers don't.


remember: redshirts don't need hostile enemies to die. They can did to the environment just as easily.


(Alternatively: The Stormtroopers shoot. The redshirts dive out of the way - and land on an explosive rock).

I didn't say you needed ENNEMIES to kill redshirts. I said you need DANGER to kill redshirts.

Stormtroopers aren't a danger. Ergo, Redshirts won't be killed by them.

[Lord Raziere]

Stormtroopers aren't a danger. Ergo, Redshirts won't be killed by them.

Correction: not a danger to PROTAGONISTS.

the stormtroopers took out the soldiers (clearly red shirts) at the beginning in A New Hope when they boarded the ship remember? and killed those jawas.

[Cikomyr]

Correction: not a danger to PROTAGONISTS.

the stormtroopers took out the soldiers (clearly red shirts) at the beginning in A New Hope when they boarded the ship remember? and killed those jawas.

We have no evidence that the Stormtroopers did kill the Jawas. For all we know, the Jawas badly pimped their ride, and Obi-Wan was just telling one of those "jedi truth"

Also, Stromtroopers took out sacrificial soldiers, and they were led by Darth Vader.

[Mando Knight]

Also, Stromtroopers took out sacrificial soldiers,Which is what redshirts are.

and they were led by Darth Vader.
Who only stepped into the picture after the troopers took out the rebels in the hallway.

[Lord Raziere]

We have no evidence that the Stormtroopers did kill the Jawas. For all we know, the Jawas badly pimped their ride, and Obi-Wan was just telling one of those "jedi truth"

Also, Stromtroopers took out sacrificial soldiers, and they were led by Darth Vader.

sacrificial soldiers: see Red Shirt.

and Darth Vader didn't even do anything, those were laser blasts, and not any force powers.

and your justification for the Jawas death is so stretched and implausible that I can hear the logic snapping from here. 1. why would Obi-Wan tell an untruth/lie about this? there is no reason to 2. why would the Jawas be so bad at modifying the home they seem to live in 3. the stormtroopers also killed Luke's parents. 4. Obi-Wan specifically said it wasn't the pack raiders because they travel in a single line to hide their numbers 5. if this is a joke, its the worst one I ever heard.

[Cikomyr]

Redshirts aren't sacrificial soldiers. They are entropic canaris meant to alert man characters to the possibility of danger.

[MLai]

I don't understand what "entropic canari" means.
Please, someone explain and kill the joke for me.

[Tectonic Robot]

But Stormtroopers are mooks, and mooks exist to loose.

Now I want a game where two groups of players play as group of redshirts and a group of stormtroopers duking it out. Prefferably in Only War.

Storm Troopers sorta won every fight they were in, though, 'cept for the one with the ewoks. Every other time they won, or they very probably were under orders to let the protagonists escape, so they could be tracked to another rebel base.

[Cikomyr]

I don't understand what "entropic canari" means.
Please, someone explain and kill the joke for me.

Err... well. Okay. Have you seen "Final Destination"? an entropic death basically means that huge amount of badluck will coordinate to kill someone.

In my idea, an entropic canari is basically someone that will attract whatever bad that might occur. Think of it as a "bad luck magnet". It's not meant to attract bad luck that wouldn't have happened, but instead to attract to HIM whatever bad luck would have happened elsewhere.

It's a rather abstract concept. If I don't make sense, please tell me and I will try again

[Lord Raziere]

Redshirts aren't sacrificial soldiers. They are entropic canaris meant to alert man characters to the possibility of danger.

yea, which they can do more than once and without needing an element of surprise. I'd say people constantly dying around you every few seconds is a good indicator of a possibility of danger.

also, urban dictionary disagrees (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=red+shirt) and wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirt_(character)) and tvtropes (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Laconic/RedShirt)

[Cikomyr]

yea, which they can do more than once and without needing an element of surprise. I'd say people constantly dying around you every few seconds is a good indicator of a possibility of danger.

also, urban dictionary disagrees (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=red+shirt) and wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirt_(character)) and tvtropes (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Laconic/RedShirt)

Are you somehow arguing that Wikipedia, Urban dictionary and TvTropes are the supreme decider what is?

Come on. Bring up some genuine arguments to the table. I presented a point of view, do more than just throw links at me.

[Sith_Happens]

I think Stormtroopers would hit Redshirts. Just not the ones they were aiming at.

This. Good thread everybody.:smalltongue:

[Lord Raziere]

Are you somehow arguing that Wikipedia, Urban dictionary and TvTropes are the supreme decider what is?

Come on. Bring up some genuine arguments to the table. I presented a point of view, do more than just throw links at me.

its called "sources" used to present a thing called "evidence" I believe. I just presented that far more people think differently than you, as three different sources where you can find information upon the term has told you a different definition than the one you used, which means, as all three are maintained by a wide community of people, that all these people have saw fit to make this the definition of red shirt within this context, and saw no need to change it. I present evidence that many people disagree with you on this, and agree with my definition. these people are likely to use this definition in this certain way, and thus give rise to fiction that uses this definition, and it only exists based upon what a wide variety people have observed about fiction, and what they agreed upon it. and this, was the result.

fiction and media is inherently a thing thats all about what we decided about it, a far more people decided differently than you, agreeing on a common definition for a term, which as a society is needed to communicate clearly. I think its obvious which definition is more accurate.

[Cikomyr]

its called "sources" used to present a thing called "evidence" I believe. I just presented that far more people think differently than you, as three different sources where you can find information upon the term has told you a different definition than the one you used, which means, as all three are maintained by a wide community of people, that all these people have saw fit to make this the definition of red shirt within this context, and saw no need to change it. I present evidence that many people disagree with you on this, and agree with my definition. these people are likely to use this definition in this certain way, and thus give rise to fiction that uses this definition, and it only exists based upon what a wide variety people have observed about fiction, and what they agreed upon it. and this, was the result.

fiction and media is inherently a thing thats all about what we decided about it, a far more people decided differently than you, agreeing on a common definition for a term, which as a society is needed to communicate clearly. I think its obvious which definition is more accurate.

which is why I present my theory, and my point of view regarding it. Just because something is supposed to be generally accepted, I thought the point of a discussion was, you know, DEBATE AND DISCUSS opposing points of views?

Oh. I am sorry. you wanted an homogeneous world where everybody just agree with the majority and cannot propose new ideas, concepts and interpretations?

[Lord Raziere]

which is why I present my theory, and my point of view regarding it. Just because something is supposed to be generally accepted, I thought the point of a discussion was, you know, DEBATE AND DISCUSS opposing points of views?

Oh. I am sorry. you wanted an homogeneous world where everybody just agree with the majority and cannot propose new ideas, concepts and interpretations?

1. your interpretation falls quite neatly into the wider, more general one, there is no need for change, its true, in that there is also a lot more things a red shirt can do than just your interpretation.

2. your loaded questions are doing you no credit.

[Cikomyr]

1. your interpretation falls quite neatly into the wider, more general one, there is no need for change, its true, in that there is also a lot more things a red shirt can do than just your interpretation.

2. your loaded questions are doing you no credit.

My interpretation assumes a different paradigm regarding the point of Redshirts in the work of fiction that the one previously assumed to be. And I do mean the redshirts originating in Star Trek, not the application of the term "Redshirts". Otherwise, we'll have to start looking at other meanings of the term Stormtrooper than the Star Wars one.

You just seemed hell-bent on re-imposing the previous Redshirt paradigm that I suggested an alternative to, despite me offering an alternative.

It's like I came up with an alternative to String Theory, but then you start picking my argument appart using aspects of the String Theory, and quoting me eminent proponents of the String Theroy. It's silly, useless, and detrimental to the actual conversation. You seem to lack any measure of creativity to go outside the norms of generally accepted consensus.

[Lord Raziere]

its not an alternative when your definition is only a narrower version of the wider one. your not offering anything different, your only offering a less flexible more specific version that the current one already fills quite nicely. don't fix what ain't broken. your definition is the current definition but in a specific situation. why narrow it when the term works quite nicely without any change? and will in fact, work worse if you change it by being less applicable to the number of situations that it covers now.

also I'm secure in my individuality and freedom to not be bothered by your baseless accusations of conformity. rebellion is all well and good, but you gotta pick your battles, know what to oppose and what not to oppose in your rebellion. rebelling against the current definition of red shirt would serve no purpose, especially when the term works just fine.

[Cikomyr]

its not an alternative when your definition is only a narrower version of the wider one. your not offering anything different, your only offering a less flexible more specific version that the current one already fills quite nicely. don't fix what ain't broken. your definition is the current definition but in a specific situation. why narrow it when the term works quite nicely without any change? and will in fact, work worse if you change it by being less applicable to the number of situations that it covers now.

Except that I believed the previous definition was too generic in nature if you compare to the source material, and that it was not necessarily doing justice to the original incarnation of Redshirts. It's re-interpreting the evidence with new concepts in mind. Don't fix what ain't broken? Really? Could you utter more useless cliches?


also I'm secure in my individuality and freedom to not be bothered by your baseless accusations of conformity. rebellion is all well and good, but you gotta pick your battles, know what to oppose and what not to oppose in your rebellion. rebelling against the current definition of red shirt would serve no purpose, especially when the term works just fine.

Except we are not talking about the "definition of Redshirts". Just like we are not talking about the "definition of Stormtroopers".

We are talking about characters in a specific franchise, in a vacuum. It's useless to consider what broad generalization arisen out of the internet regarding them, and how it settled into pop culture. That broad generalization may be wrong, or imprecise.

The more precise a definition, the better it usually is. If we can better narrow down the definition of the original role of the Red Shirts in Star Trek, the better it will be. It will not change the internet's view of what the trope "Redshirt" means, but it will certainly allow us to have a better understanding of the whys and hows of the role.

Now, actually tell me what is the best definition of the role of Redshirt in Star Trek:

Is it:

A- People meant to die on screen
B- People meant to die on screen to show that the situation is in danger
C- People meant to die on screen to depict the threat faced by the main character and better grip the audience

TvTropes/etc definition will only use "A". and by the looks of the jokes regarding redshirts in this thread, this seems to be the general concensus; Redshirts are only meant to die. But it doesn't necessarily make it true.

[Lord Raziere]

well your arguing over a subjective thing of art. which means that the only truth that really matters about it is peoples reactions and what they can commonly agree upon it. your definition is more specific and more faithful to the source material, but that doesn't make it true. stuff like that gets repurposed into a better wider definition all the time, and to use your own argument, your trying to make me conform to the original depiction and therefore technically more traditional than me, if anything I'm arguing for progress, for the modern improvement of the definition upon yours. therefore your technically the old guy complaining about a change you don't like.

[SuperPanda]

As fascinating as the discussion of how one might define the trope "red shirt" is, I don't think I'm the only one wondering what relevance that trope has to the discussion.

Both factions in this debate are extras within their respective series. Both serve primarily to indicate a level of danger to the audience. As the extras on the antagonist side, the Storm-troopers purpose is to be dangerous and menacing at the beginning and then easily overcome when the protagonist faces them with their backs against the walls. They need to be efficient and dangerous at the start, but easily defeated towards the end both to emphasize the power of the true bad-guy and to emphasize the danger for the heroes.
The Red Shirts are protagonist extras. Their purpose is to show just enough personality that we believe the protagonists care about their deaths. They are meant to die in the beginning to show the level of danger the enemy possesses, but they'll become incredibly efficient at just the right moments to ensure the protagonists win (but not efficient enough to overshadow the real protagonists just like Storm-troopers are never efficient enough to overshadow the real antagonists).

I like Trek better, but I give this to the Stormtroppers. Trek's narratives tend toward hopeless situations where a small number of main characters save the day, this means having the entire "Red Shirt" team loose in the first encounter with the evil empire only for Kirk to outwit the imperial fleet while Spock mindmelds with (convenient Jedi A) to learn enough about the force to realize that multiple simultaneous phaser shots would take down Vader .... - and so on... but that is more protagonist vs protagonist.

Trek's stories work by setting the stakes through the loss of crewmen the audience doesn't know very well.


Now, I realize what I wrote above describes the Tropes in more detail than the tropes themselves, but the trope alone doesn't actually weigh into the versus thread.

The situation of the contest does.

In a prolonged struggle, the purpose of the stormtroopers is to do worse as time goes on. At the same time, the longer a red-shirt survives the more likely they get promoted to temporary protagonist.

In a single short fire-fight the Stormtroppers would curb-stomp them. In a Series of battles the red-shirts would win because they'd become the protagonists and then be immune to stormtropper inaccuracy.

In universe logic rather than Meta-textual logic I'd argue the same actually. Star Wars power levels (especially in the EU) are classes well above Trek levels. Empire victories come about through sheer brute force or through the careful political games of the emperor. Federation victories tend to be through skin of the teeth ingenuity and technological advance. Stormtroopers fighting an enemy that they've beaten in every previous encounter are unlikely to significantly change tactics even when those victories get narrower each time. A Trek team is simply more likely to get creative with their resources and learn from past encouters, given enough time they'd win that way. Without a situation expressly requiring this though, I don't see stormtroopers giving them that time.

[Socratov]

Err... well. Okay. Have you seen "Final Destination"? an entropic death basically means that huge amount of badluck will coordinate to kill someone.

In my idea, an entropic canari is basically someone that will attract whatever bad that might occur. Think of it as a "bad luck magnet". It's not meant to attract bad luck that wouldn't have happened, but instead to attract to HIM whatever bad luck would have happened elsewhere.

It's a rather abstract concept. If I don't make sense, please tell me and I will try again

I applaud your clever attempt at making an apt and funny metaphor. I got it in one if you doubt the effectiveness of your joke...

@Raziere: you know, I fully support the use of evidence and I know TvTropes often make for good reading. However, I wouldn't trust Wikipedia entirely when it comes to the deeper context of media. neither would I consider Urban Dictionary a reliable source. Out of those 3 only TvTropes can be considered good on the topic of media when it concerns the bigger and better moderated tropes. Just making an observation. For the rest please carry on. Love the Yang Avatar by the way...

[Cikomyr]

I applaud your clever attempt at making an apt and funny metaphor. I got it in one if you doubt the effectiveness of your joke...

@Raziere: you know, I fully support the use of evidence and I know TvTropes often make for good reading. However, I wouldn't trust Wikipedia entirely when it comes to the deeper context of media. neither would I consider Urban Dictionary a reliable source. Out of those 3 only TvTropes can be considered good on the topic of media when it concerns the bigger and better moderated tropes. Just making an observation. For the rest please carry on. Love the Yang Avatar by the way...

To be fair, the idea of "Redshirt as Entropic Canari" idea came back to all the way I made my first Mage : The Ascension character. I played some sort of Son of Ether/Virtual Adept meganerd, and all my trappings and spells were Sci-Fi inspired. I just needed to explain how I used by spheres to work it out.

For example, my Matter and Life 1 spheres came from a thingy I called a "Tricorder". My Correspondance-teleport car came from a DeLaurian that teleported only if it went 88 MPH and was hit by a 1.21 gigawatt electric charge. That sort of silly stuff.

the "Entropic" sphere (luck manipulation) kind of eluded me, until I got the idea of creating the magical item "Redshirt", which would act as some sort of "Badthing Magnet". So this thought process had been a long time coming.

[Devonix]

One thing I will never understand is how Stormtroopers got the bad reputation in the first place. It's not like how Superfriends messed up people's view of Aquaman.

Stormtroopers were shown Onscreen to be competent, Shown in Books to be competent. Were spoken of by the characters as competent.

It's only years later that jokes popped up with no actual evidence to back it up. So WHY did the jokes start in the first place?

[Timeras]

In a discussion like this it should first be defined wether we compare these persons as they are meant within the setting or the trope-version. If we argue that Stormtroopers are effevtive and well equippd soldiers who so far just happend not to achieve victory when facing a protagonist, we should also treat "redshirts" as trained professionals with a tendency towards bad luck when in the company of a protagonist.
Because if they weren't, the Federation would not have existed for this long.

This problem is probably caused by the fact that Stormtrooper is a term used in-universe, while Redshirt is only used as the trope.

[Gnoman]

One thing I will never understand is how Stormtroopers got the bad reputation in the first place. It's not like how Superfriends messed up people's view of Aquaman.

Stormtroopers were shown Onscreen to be competent, Shown in Books to be competent. Were spoken of by the characters as competent.

It's only years later that jokes popped up with no actual evidence to back it up. So WHY did the jokes start in the first place?

It was probably the aggregate mass of the media. Once OC book heroes and video game players were cutting down stormtroopers in mass hordes (the former because of a combination of being protagoists and the early EU novels being rather pulpy, the latter because no video game enemy can shoot particularly straight), the stormies started looking more and more buffoonish even in the original media.

Also, Ewoks.

[Legato Endless]

I think it isn't too dissimilar. Return of the Jedi was pretty analogous to Super friends. Aquaman's abilities drowned out by that singular campy cartoon. The troopers getting defeated by four foot teddy bears with stone age weaponry was pretty galling for an empire enthusiast.

[BWR]

I think it isn't too dissimilar. Return of the Jedi was pretty analogous to Super friends. Aquaman's abilities drowned out by that singular campy cartoon. The troopers getting defeated by four foot teddy bears with stone age weaponry was pretty galling for an empire enthusiast.

And people seem to forget that after being taken with their pants down by Ewoks (which despite their cute looks are bsaically Athasian halflings), they rallied and soon were routing the Ewoks. If it hadn't been for Chewie taking over that AT-ST everything would have gone to hell.

[Woodzyowl]

The stormtroopers would never hit, but the redshirts would die. Stormtroopers win.

[Mando Knight]

(which despite their cute looks are bsaically Athasian halflings)

From an EU source, The Essential Guide to Warfare, Endor from a Stormtrooper's POV:

The first wave of troopers died with arrows through the gaps in their armor. The indigenes were primitive, but later I read about the bows they'd used, how they were engineered for immense leverage. I saw troopers falling with arrows that had gone completely through their throats. They were the lucky ones--some of our men took what looked like minor wounds, and minutes later they were clawing their helmets off and gasping for air. The (Ewoks) had dipped their arrows in some kind of nerve toxin that had paralyzed every muscle in the body. Troopers who got hit suffocated because their lungs wouldn't work. I saw dying men staring into the sun, trying to blink.

Some of our men chased the indigenes into the woods and fell into hidden pits lined with stakes fixed in the ground. Scout troopers flew into trip wires that broke their necks. Elsewhere the indigenes overpowered troopers through sheer numbers, holding them down until they got their helmets off and other (Ewoks) could kill them with stone axeds and knives made of vocanic glass.

And every time one of our men fell, the indigenes had another blaster. They knew every tree and rock, and they picked us off one by one.
So, basically, they were fuzzy Athasian halflings playing like the Vietcong.

[Cikomyr]

From an EU source, The Essential Guide to Warfare, Endor from a Stormtrooper's POV:

So, basically, they were fuzzy Athasian halflings playing like the Vietcong.

You know. FOR KIDS :smallbiggrin:

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Stormtroopers always miss, but each shot hits some nearby piece of equipment instead, which blows up and sends one or more Redshirts flying.
Bingo. It's the ricochet of fate. Stormtroopers miss, but Fate itself brings death to the Redshirts.

One thing I will never understand is how Stormtroopers got the bad reputation in the first place. It's not like how Superfriends messed up people's view of Aquaman.

Stormtroopers were shown Onscreen to be competent, Shown in Books to be competent. Were spoken of by the characters as competent.

It's only years later that jokes popped up with no actual evidence to back it up. So WHY did the jokes start in the first place?
Ehhhhhhh they really aren't all that competent onscreen. Particularly in A New Hope. But that's mainly because they're minions shooting at the protagonists. I dunno why they in particular were chosen as the mascots of that specific theatrical tendency, though.

[Neftren]

I am amazed this hasn't come up yet ...

http://www.shoeboxblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/stormtrooper-trek-486x500.jpg

[Devonix]

Bingo. It's the ricochet of fate. Stormtroopers miss, but Fate itself brings death to the Redshirts.

Ehhhhhhh they really aren't all that competent onscreen. Particularly in A New Hope. But that's mainly because they're minions shooting at the protagonists. I dunno why they in particular were chosen as the mascots of that specific theatrical tendency, though.

In a New Hope they are only shown in a single combat scenario where they are actively trying to win an encounter. That is the siege of the ship at the beginning of the film. And they win that fight handedly.

The fight on the Death star we as the audience are told that they were allowed to escape. We're supposed to KNOW they weren't trying to hit anyone.

[Lentrax]

I think the entire bad rep the stormies got was from Jedi, where a legion of stormtroopers were beaten by Ewoks.

We're talking about some the best trained troops in the Galaxy, spoken of in hushed whispers and given a wide berth by everyone, and they're taken out by teddy bears with spears?

These are the guys who landed on the far side of an energy shield, marched across a subzero environment and wiped out a fortified, entrenched adversary.

The only reason they lose is because of story.

[BWR]

I think the entire bad rep the stormies got was from Jedi, where a legion of stormtroopers were beaten by Ewoks.

We're talking about some the best trained troops in the Galaxy, spoken of in hushed whispers and given a wide berth by everyone, and they're taken out by teddy bears with spears?

These are the guys who landed on the far side of an energy shield, marched across a subzero environment and wiped out a fortified, entrenched adversary.

The only reason they lose is because of story.

And I like to point out, as I did earlier this thread, that the Ewoks didn't really win.
1. The Empires was overconfident. rocks and spears and cute teddy bears vs. blasters and armor and the GE.
2. Serious planning on part of the Ewoks. They really did everything right in laying out the battle field
3. the Empire was caught with its pants down, and made the mistake of pursuing the Ewoks into the forest when they should have just turtled down in the bunker
4. A few minutes later, despite some losses, the GE was winning. They were killing Ewoks, not all the Ewoks' tactics worked (catapults and hangglider rocks and trying to trip an AT-ST)
5. Things only went the Rebels' way when Chewbacca, one of the heroes and not an Ewok, captured an AT-ST (yes he had help from Ewoks, but it was his win)

Yes, the Ewoks were underestimated and nflicted some damage, but they didn't win the engagement in spite of their best efforts, that was Chewbacca hijacking a walker and Han bluffing the base commander into opening the doors.

[Legato Endless]

And people seem to forget that after being taken with their pants down by Ewoks (which despite their cute looks are bsaically Athasian halflings), they rallied and soon were routing the Ewoks. If it hadn't been for Chewie taking over that AT-ST everything would have gone to hell.

That's sort of my point to an extent though. Aquaman has, depending on continuity, superhuman strength, toughness, hydrokinesis, can telepathically control oceanic predators, and commands a navy more advanced than the surface world's. Not quite the situational silliness of what was shown. The AT-ST turning the battle is a tad odd on it's own, but Star Wars is nothing if not a swashbuckler, so there's some justification for that. The other factor is, the Ewok's won thanks to Imperial incompetence. The shield generator being vital to the battle, there should have been more troops, who had a better sense of the land. Their easily being suckered off into enemy territory despite being tasked with guarding. The failures of Imperial logistics/intelligence tend to be scape goated onto the storm troopers, since they're the Imperials we seen most often.


1. The Empires was overconfident. rocks and spears and cute teddy bears vs. blasters and armor and the GE.


This is the other issue. While the Ewoks were very much based on evoking the imagery of the Vietcong, what's shown on screen isn't nearly as dangerous, hence the expanded materials add more legitimate tactics. What we are shown consists of hang gliders flitting openly the air and not being blasted to hell, and most egregiously of all, that frelling scene of a bunch of Ewoks on a log pelting the troopers with stones. Something which, against an ancient army versed in javelins and slings should have gotten them obliterated, much anything vaguely resembling modern firearms. I understand the justification. Primitive armies not relying on guerrilla tactics get trounced by more advanced ones in extended campaigns but can on occasion win battles, particularly against an unprepared foe. It's the visual execution of this that annoys, and turned the troopers into what they are in public consciousness, again, like Aquaman. Most people don't remember the fear that's evoked in the assault at the beginning of episode IV when they overrun the defenders.

[russdm]

The Stormtroopers win, because the only time they actually lose was due to story stupidness and that's in ROTJ. In every time they show up to fight, they win or aren't supposed to take out the enemy, or are dealing with the heroes who cannot be hit according to Hollywood logic, see the action films with bullets flying around for proof of this.

It should be noted that the ewoks actually don't win the battle at all, they do rather well, but the main point of their entire fight was keeping the Empire busy so that Han could below up the shield generator. The ewok victory vignette doesn't actually start until after Chewie took over the scout walker and then blasted the other walker. Then it plays.

The Stormtroopers don't have bad marksmanship, because that is a product of Hollywood and George Lucas's storytelling. Watch the scene in new hope when the stormtroopers board the ship, its them against something like 20-30 rebels and only 3 or 4 rebels escape from that fight; there is like 5 or 6 stormies that get shot down.

As for the redshirts, their sole function was to demonstrate danger and they are likely not going to last long at any point against the troopers, who can aim. We rarely saw redshirts shooting their phasers, but there was a lot of fisticuffs. Also, the redshirts don't have any kind of armor and so would go down to a single shot.

[BWR]

The Stormtroopers don't have bad marksmanship, because that is a product of Hollywood and George Lucas's storytelling. Watch the scene in new hope when the stormtroopers board the ship, its them against something like 20-30 rebels and only 3 or 4 rebels escape from that fight; there is like 5 or 6 stormies that get shot down.


While I agree with the sentiment, the actual scene has 10 Alderaanian troops, and only about 5 STs come through before the Tantive IV's troops fall back.

[GenericMook]

While I agree with the sentiment, the actual scene has 10 Alderaanian troops, and only about 5 STs come through before the Tantive IV's troops fall back.

That's actually kind of scary. That's more or less a 2:1 ratio, and even higher if the STs aren't moving in all at once (I don't remember the particulars of that scene, so correct me here), and the defenders are still routed.

Granted, they're fighting in close quarters, but that really doesn't change much. If anything, that's more points in the ST's favor. It's considerably harder to attack a confined area (without something to either clear out the entrance (grenades and such) or a ridiculous element of surprise (such as from a simultaneous attack from multiple entrances)) than it is to defend it. I get that the fight is largely for narrative purpose, but the fact that the rebels can't clear the Stormtroopers when they're entering from that one place (it is one door, right?) reflects really poorly on them.

Granted, they're still doomed when Vader boards, but that's an entirely different topic.

[Cikomyr]

I'd have guessed the ST came through multiple entries at the same time. There isn't JUST 6 Alderanian guards in the entire corvette.

We just happened to see a single one.

[russdm]

I'd have guessed the ST came through multiple entries at the same time. There isn't JUST 6 Alderanian guards in the entire corvette.

We just happened to see a single one.

No, its that one door. If there was another door, then I am sure that would have been mentioned somewhere in dialogue. Also, why attack two spots? If there were attacks on another spot then there should have been scenes of that or at least of rebels running into troopers coming from the other spot. Unless the rebels deployed all their best people at that spot because otherwise this whole deal is pointless. It is easy enough in a movie to inform us about entry getting achieved at other locations, like a single line of dialogue.

[Cikomyr]

No, its that one door. If there was another door, then I am sure that would have been mentioned somewhere in dialogue. Also, why attack two spots? If there were attacks on another spot then there should have been scenes of that or at least of rebels running into troopers coming from the other spot. Unless the rebels deployed all their best people at that spot because otherwise this whole deal is pointless. It is easy enough in a movie to inform us about entry getting achieved at other locations, like a single line of dialogue.

1- If there was another door, it would have been mentioned --> Why? What's the point of mentioning more attack points? The entire point of the scene was to show the Empire attacking and taking over, not get sidetracked in details.

2- Why attack 2 spots? I thought that would have been obvious. To leverage the Empire's number superiority. Multiple-pronged attack is a time-honored tactic

3- Where should there have been scenes of that? Star Wars was already on a tight budget already. It would have been a useless scene that would have added nothing to the story.

It's not logical to assume a single point of entry when you have thousands of troops, total control over the enemy ship's hull and will fight in tight corridors.

[Sapphire Guard]

Single or double, it's materially the same. Tight corridors or not, with a Star Destroyer full of Stormtroopers, there's only one way that engagement is going to end.

[Wardog]

In a New Hope they are only shown in a single combat scenario where they are actively trying to win an encounter. That is the siege of the ship at the beginning of the film. And they win that fight handedly.

The fight on the Death star we as the audience are told that they were allowed to escape. We're supposed to KNOW they weren't trying to hit anyone.

By the time Leia declares they were letting them escape, the audience will have already spent a good while watching Stormtroopers failing to hit the protagonists and will probably have already formed the opinion that "Stormtroopers can't shoot".

Also:
From what point did the do they start letting them escape?
From the start, including the ones that got ambushed on the Falcon?
Were the Troopers called to the detention block under orders to let them escape? Presumably not, because otherwise the Imperials would have shut down the garbage masher themselves.
The Troopers that Han chased and got chased by?
The ones Luke and Leia fought at the shaft?
The ones that were with Vader when they made their final getaway? Possibly, as otherwise those ones would probably be even more incompetant than the others, plus Vader would be in a position to change their orders.
Or just the persuing TIE fighters?
From what we see, we can't really answer that. Besides, does that even mean the troopers or pilots knew they wereto let the rebles escape, or just that their commanders deliberately sent too few men and ships to stop the escape?

We also have ESB, where Lando and some unarmoured guards manage to overpower Stormtroopers without a fight (taken by surprise, admittedly, but the Imperials ought to have been alert to such a double-cross), and then he, Leia and Chewbacca manage to fight their way past multiple Troopers.

Then in RotJ, we also see the scout troopers utterly fail at scouting and get taken by surprise and/or led into traps on mutiple occasions. (Seriously - who decided that scouts should be dressed in bright white armour, than would probably restrict mobility, with helmets that will restrict vision, and arm them only with short-range weapons?)


All in all, Stormtroopers loose when fighting protagonists, and we see them fight protagonists far more than anyone else. So it is quite understandable that the audience develops the impression that they are pretty rubbish. And the "they did it on purpose" explanation only applied in part of one film (and is not clear how many engagements it applied to).

[GloatingSwine]

Stormtroopers get +5 vs faceless extras.

Which means the Redshirts are in trouble. Especially if they're fighting in a room where there are command consoles to explode.

[pendell]

Redshirts exist to establish the villain as a credible threat to the heroes.

The stormtroopers ARE the threat.

'Nuff said!

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Cikomyr]

Redshirts exist to establish the villain as a credible threat to the heroes.

The stormtroopers ARE the threat.

'Nuff said!

Respectfully,

Brian P.

But ARE Stromtroopers the threat to the heroes? They never actually threatened them.

[Devonix]

But ARE Stromtroopers the threat to the heroes? They never actually threatened them.

If Stormtroopers were never a threat then Leia would never have been captured.

The Base on Hoth would never have been captured

The Rebel troops sent to take out the Shield Generator never would have been captured.

Also In all the movies only Han and Chewie were never shot by them. Luke, Leia, Artoo, and C3PO were all hit by these supposedly always missing Imperials.

[BWR]

If Stormtroopers were never a threat then Leia would never have been captured.

The Base on Hoth would never have been captured

The Rebel troops sent to take out the Shield Generator never would have been captured.

Also In all the movies only Han and Chewie were never shot by them. Luke, Leia, Artoo, and C3PO were all hit by these supposedly always missing Imperials.

I'm pretty sure Luke was never hit by a stormie. Apart from that, you've hit the nail on the head.

[Devonix]

I'm pretty sure Luke was never hit by a stormie. Apart from that, you've hit the nail on the head.

His Speederbike gets shot down in Return of the Jedi and I'm certain his cyborg hand gets shot as well in a scene somewhere. Fleshwound but still shot.

[BWR]

Ah, I wasn't counting the speederbike chase. Technically, he wasn't shot (except for that one glancing hit on his bike, which did nothing to him), the scout and Luke got their speeders entangled and Luke bailed before they hit a tree. And it was one of Jabba's goons that hit his hand, not a stormie.

[GloatingSwine]

But ARE Stromtroopers the threat to the heroes? They never actually threatened them.

The thing that eats the redshirt to show that this is Serious this week isn't ever a threat to the heroes. That doesn't stop it eating a redshirt.

[Killer Angel]

Redshirts exist to establish the villain as a credible threat to the heroes.

The stormtroopers ARE the threat.


Technically, I believe that "Redshirts exist to establish the villain as a credible threat", not necessarily a threat to the heroes.
The heroes are called in because there is a threat.

Frankly, Redshirts are a poor paragon term to determine the seriousness of a threat... :smalltongue: