Darths & Droids IV: Not in Numerical Order

[Rogar Demonblud]

The question being, does he realize he's being truthful?

[Kantaki]

The question being, does he realize he's being truthful?

I think he might be. At the very least he seems torealize the implication of Poe being the only one with a blaster*.
Nah, the real question is if Finn finds out, will he care?

*I guess Jim's still banned from lightsabers?

[Morquard]

Good news then! I already wasn't planning on watching any of them until the comic's done with IX. (haven't seen Rogue One yet either)

I think you can watch Rogue One, there's nothing in there that spoils the sequel trilogy, and it's in my opinion a really good movie.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Yeah, if it really ground your gears in the prequels to just watch armies wade into each other at a slow walk while blazing away, You'll like Rogue One. People there understand that this thing called cover exists.

[SirKazum]

Rogue One and Solo are both rather stand-alone in terms of story, for what it's worth. And if they're connected to anything (more so Rogue One, but Solo too), it's to the Original Trilogy, with one small call-back to the Prequel Trilogy. They're not going to spoil anything about the Sequel Trilogy.

As for their merits as movies, I thought Rogue One is a pretty interesting little story, definitely worth a watch. As for Solo... it's the most lambasted SW movie by far I think, and for good reason, and it's got pretty hefty competition in that regard (including in the Sequel Trilogy). There are some parts of it that actually work as a sci-fi heist movie, but then it veers completely off the rails for a number of different reasons. The fact that it tries to give Han Solo a backstory and miserably fails at that being one of the major offenders, but not really the only one. Come to think of it, I'm just remembering the heist part of the movie as being something good, something that probably belongs in a better movie.

[Rodin]

Rogue One and Solo are both rather stand-alone in terms of story, for what it's worth. And if they're connected to anything (more so Rogue One, but Solo too), it's to the Original Trilogy, with one small call-back to the Prequel Trilogy. They're not going to spoil anything about the Sequel Trilogy.

As for their merits as movies, I thought Rogue One is a pretty interesting little story, definitely worth a watch. As for Solo... it's the most lambasted SW movie by far I think, and for good reason, and it's got pretty hefty competition in that regard (including in the Sequel Trilogy). There are some parts of it that actually work as a sci-fi heist movie, but then it veers completely off the rails for a number of different reasons. The fact that it tries to give Han Solo a backstory and miserably fails at that being one of the major offenders, but not really the only one. Come to think of it, I'm just remembering the heist part of the movie as being something good, something that probably belongs in a better movie.

I quite enjoyed Solo personally. It wasn't anything special, but it didn't leave me scratching my head afterwards about what the heck I just watched. It was a fun little heist movie and I'll probably go back and catch it again at some point.

Where it fails is being a tie-in movie to Star Wars. It's not a good backstory for the Han Solo we see in the OT. It doesn't work as a nostalgia vehicle for the references to stuff Han mentions in the OT. It's just kind of "there".

I almost feel like Solo would have been better without the license. That would have freed up the writing and allowed them to remove the worst parts of the movie. Unfortunately I can't see a Sci-Fi heist movie making it big without the name recognition.

And even then we're finding out that the Star Wars brand doesn't mean what it used to.

[SirKazum]

I almost feel like Solo would have been better without the license. That would have freed up the writing and allowed them to remove the worst parts of the movie. Unfortunately I can't see a Sci-Fi heist movie making it big without the name recognition.

Yeah, I think that really hits the nail on the head. Being not only a SW movie but specifically a Han Solo backstory movie definitely dragged it down. It's fine when it tries to be just a sci-fi heist movie.

[Squire Doodad]

I quite enjoyed Solo personally. It wasn't anything special, but it didn't leave me scratching my head afterwards about what the heck I just watched. It was a fun little heist movie and I'll probably go back and catch it again at some point.

Where it fails is being a tie-in movie to Star Wars. It's not a good backstory for the Han Solo we see in the OT. It doesn't work as a nostalgia vehicle for the references to stuff Han mentions in the OT. It's just kind of "there".

I almost feel like Solo would have been better without the license. That would have freed up the writing and allowed them to remove the worst parts of the movie. Unfortunately I can't see a Sci-Fi heist movie making it big without the name recognition.

And even then we're finding out that the Star Wars brand doesn't mean what it used to.

Solo as a heist movie, with Star Wars license, but focusing around Lando or some other guy living in the Empire with no overly specific context needed.

[Kantaki]

That's a very big explosion.
I think they might've hit something important.

Also, that exchange between BB-8 and the DM.
I'm inclined to agree with Corey here.

[keybounce]

Why do you think Kylo Ren is male?

[Kantaki]

Why do you think Kylo Ren is male?

Because that armour makes Kylo look like a guy.
You know, like Samus.

[TaRix]

Why do you think Kylo Ren is male?

I haven't seen any of the later movies, don't know the synopses, etc., but I have seen several of the main characters on cereal boxes and stuff. And even though my memory is pretty fuzzy on the details, I wonder what in blazes was going on in the casters' heads.

[Morquard]

Why do you think Kylo Ren is male?

Spoiler: Ok, I'll answer this, but only read if you really want the answer

Show

He's played by a male actor and after a point you see him without his helmet more often than not. I don't see how they can make him female in the comic

[Rogar Demonblud]

Spoiler

Show

Either Ren's really good with disguises, or just looks like that. The figure isn't much of an issue, given the variety of the female form.

[Rodin]

Spoiler

Show

With this webcomic there's also the option of shapeshifters and opposite-sex clones. For all we know it's Nute Gunray under there.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Spoiler

Show

Only if he's figured out that r/l thing.

[Kantaki]

Never change Jim, never change.
I mean, wether he's honestly joining or improvising the worst infiltration since Worm* repeatedly making clear your new "allies" can't trust you is just counterproductive.

*Although Taylor's "plan" was more thought-out and coherent than what Jim's characters typically cook up.

[keybounce]

I did not read any of those spoilers.

I'm still hoping that under the mask, under the cape and cowl, is some sort of genius hero reborn.

[Morquard]

I'll be honest, I kinda hate it when I ask the GM a question and he answers it through an NPC. Because often its about something that my character would know, but I don't. Often that's done to use some IC knowledge to help the party, shed some light on something they didn't notice, and have that warm fuzzy "I did something" feeling. But by treating it as a question my character actually asked and then gets answered by an NPC, it automatically makes it that my character didn't know something that he should know, making him look like an idiot, because apparently RandomNPC McDummy who was just randomly in the room can explain it in detail.
The same goes for statement made to the GM, describing what my character is doing. Because how else would I do that, except saying it out loud and describing it, and suddenly its an IC topic as if my character is an anime character that has to comment every action.

I just feel its dumb and unfair of a GM to do this.

Is it funny to read? Sure. Not so funny if its done to you

[SirKazum]

I'll be honest, I kinda hate it when I ask the GM a question and he answers it through an NPC. Because often its about something that my character would know, but I don't. Often that's done to use some IC knowledge to help the party, shed some light on something they didn't notice, and have that warm fuzzy "I did something" feeling. But by treating it as a question my character actually asked and then gets answered by an NPC, it automatically makes it that my character didn't know something that he should know, making him look like an idiot, because apparently RandomNPC McDummy who was just randomly in the room can explain it in detail.
The same goes for statement made to the GM, describing what my character is doing. Because how else would I do that, except saying it out loud and describing it, and suddenly its an IC topic as if my character is an anime character that has to comment every action.

I just feel its dumb and unfair of a GM to do this.

Is it funny to read? Sure. Not so funny if its done to you

To be fair, both of these things are common behavior in books, TV etc., as a form of getting the audience up to speed with what the characters supposedly know. Maybe that's why a GM might be tempted to do it, because it just feels like the natural thing to do.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I did not read any of those spoilers.

I'm still hoping that under the mask, under the cape and cowl, is some sort of genius hero reborn.

Would you settle for a week in Seoul?

[Rockphed]

I did not read any of those spoilers.

I'm still hoping that under the mask, under the cape and cowl, is some sort of genius hero reborn.

Wait, are you hoping that Kylo is a Qui-gon Jinn clone?

[Morquard]

Wait, are you hoping that Kylo is a Qui-gon Jinn clone?

No, the Genius was Jar-Jar

[Fincher]

No, the Genius was Jar-Jar

Qui-Gon was the hero, though. He bravely gave his life trying to defeat Bubble.

[137beth]

Thanks memnarch for reminding me about Corey's campaign. Like you, I also don't watch a lot of big-studio movies, and I don't think I recognize the description so far.

[Kantaki]

Rereading parts of Phantasmal Malevolence I noticed that the group (minus Ben) kinda being evil isn't exactly new.

Not that it should be that surprising after how Revelation of the Sith turned out.
But I kinda forgot Annie played the character as psychotic from the start.
"I'll kill you." indeed.

[keybounce]

Ok, quickie time: Without any spoilers, without any reference to the dialog, what was your reaction to the visuals of Finn's helmet coming off?

[Keltest]

Ok, quickie time: Without any spoilers, without any reference to the dialog, what was your reaction to the visuals of Finn's helmet coming off?

"Huh, they have faces now."

[Fincher]

Thanks memnarch for reminding me about Corey's campaign. Like you, I also don't watch a lot of big-studio movies, and I don't think I recognize the description so far.

I do, but I'm drawing a blank. It sounds like the "huge guns" are more along the lines of cannons rather than handheld guns, but I don't know what that might be.

[The Glyphstone]

Don't we already know what Corey's campaign was?

Spoiler

Show

Rogue One?