LucasForums

LucasForums (http://www.lucasforums.com/index.php)
-   Origin Worlds (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=764)
-   -   Why lose Guardian? (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=202628)

Gurges-Ahter 02-02-2010 04:17 PM

Why lose Guardian?
 
I'm a little confused by the class title "Jedi Knight" - aren't Consulars also Knights? I thought "Knight" was a distinction between fully-trained Jedi and Padawans, not a class of Jedi like Consular, Guardian, etc.

I don't really care all that much - the aspects of the character will be the same - but I am curious to know why BioWare abandoned the "Guardian" class to muddy the water with a "Knight" class.

Hallucination 02-02-2010 09:37 PM

I think they did it because 'Knight' is a bit more iconic sounding than 'Guardian', and it catches the idea that they're the guys in front. Alternatively, maybe they're doing it to distance themselves from the Star Wars D&D game.

Prime 02-05-2010 09:12 AM

I haven't looked at the details of the classes, but the old guardian/consular was pretty artificial, and doesn't really reflect too well what we see in the films, etc.

Gurges-Ahter 02-05-2010 10:01 AM

That might be true, but they kept the Consular class, and just renamed the Guardian class to "Knight". IMO, both Guardians and Consulars should be Knights, just focused on different aspects of the force.

Jan Gaarni 02-06-2010 12:00 PM

Well, I guess it was done so the not-so-hugely-into-Star Wars fans don't go "Where are the Jedi Knights?!?" :)
Seriously, I have no idea why they changed it. Personally, I think they should have kept it.

Jeff 02-06-2010 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prime (Post 2705315)
I haven't looked at the details of the classes, but the old guardian/consular was pretty artificial, and doesn't really reflect too well what we see in the films, etc.

I agree, I don't think BioWare has done a great job saying which of the classes the movie characters were when discussing their classes. Like they give Obi-Wan as an example of a Consular, which makes sense with the diplomacy stuff, but I would not say he is stronger with Force powers than he is with a lightsaber. On the other hand, Mace Windu is the perfect example of a Knight in TOR.

Hallucination 02-06-2010 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff (Post 2705502)
I agree, I don't think BioWare has done a great job saying which of the classes the movie characters were when discussing their classes. Like they give Obi-Wan as an example of a Consular, which makes sense with the diplomacy stuff, but I would not say he is stronger with Force powers than he is with a lightsaber. On the other hand, Mace Windu is the perfect example of a Knight in TOR.

I don't think it's Bioware's fault they aren't doing a good job of explaining movie characters' classes, people just aren't supposed to summarised in a word or two, and some of these characters have entire series of books that try to explain who they are.

Prime 02-07-2010 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff (Post 2705502)
Like they give Obi-Wan as an example of a Consular, which makes sense with the diplomacy stuff, but I would not say he is stronger with Force powers than he is with a lightsaber. On the other hand, Mace Windu is the perfect example of a Knight in TOR.

And in both cases their are stong in both lightsaber skills and force Ability. Each is a master in their respective lightsaber forms. It seems in the films being strong in the Force lends itself to being strong with a lightsaber, which kind of makes sense.

Darth Avlectus 02-07-2010 03:56 PM

In the ROTS novel, even as good at his invented form (Vapaad) as Mace was (to compensate for the near millennia deterioration of the 7th form Juyo due to impracticality after the ruusan reformation), he couldn't help but to admire Obi-Wan at his mastery of soresu.

The convo went something like this:

"You, Kenobi, are the master of Soresu. I have every faith you can counter General Greivous with your technique."

"Well I thank you for your praise calling me a master--"

"Not a master, the master--its philosophy, is so like you, Obi-Wan. It is who you are."

Personal comment: do not misinterpret Soresu's defensive philosophy. As a real life swordsman I give the caveat of Miyamoto Musashi: "If you wait for the attack, defend against it, and only then go in for an attack by parrying and striking, you are making extra work for yourself. Moreover there is always the possibility of missing the 'block'." He goes on to come to: "When you are returning the attack to the enemy after he has attacked you, you are permitting your rhythm and timing to be controlled by him. Regardless how well you fight, you are on the defensive. You should strive to be neither offensive nor defensive. These ideas can force the mind to stop its flow of consciousness and get you killed in a fight."
(Musashi's book of five rings: Book of wind, incorrect carriage and warrior attitudes).

Just a bit of "strategy" from one of Japan's greatest swordsmen.

I say knowing which 'forms' are practical for a situation and knowing how to "shift gears" and rise to the occasion when the situation changes is best. I see a lot in EU that is potentially very misleading.

But back to the point about what "roles" accurately described movie characters...
Mace was undeniably a knight, Obi-Wan may have had the attitude of a consular but had the skill of a knight so in his own way a sentinel. Yoda I'd say much the same b/c in AOTC he is regarded as a great swordsman as his dueling skills could outdo Dooku and (A Younger) Windu.

Anakin Skywalker, well, mostly a knight but not shy to use his powers where he could not beat his opponents with his blade.

I dunno. Categorizing like this can often times be more of a limitation, a label. Not accurately describing anyone. Besides, in TSL you get forms depending on what class you are and, from whom depends on what order you visit them. I.E. Kavar knowing Juyo is to be expected, but in reality you could learn it from Vrook or Zez-Kai Ell. (If playing dark sided, Zez-Kai Ell actually benefits most from using Juyo, as his critical strike is even deadlier now. Against Vrook, no real difference, actually I think it made him easier.)

Gurges-Ahter 02-08-2010 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity (Post 2705719)
But back to the point about what "roles" accurately described movie characters...
Mace was undeniably a knight, Obi-Wan may have had the attitude of a consular but had the skill of a knight so in his own way a sentinel. Yoda I'd say much the same b/c in AOTC he is regarded as a great swordsman as his dueling skills could outdo Dooku and (A Younger) Windu.

Anakin Skywalker, well, mostly a knight but not shy to use his powers where he could not beat his opponents with his blade.

I dunno. Categorizing like this can often times be more of a limitation, a label.

I agree with all of this. I'm not sure how I feel about creating boundaries between the different Jedi. My main question was why they changed the "Guardian" title to "Knight". I think it confuses the issue even more.

In my mind, a Jedi Knight is not any type of Jedi at all, just a graduated Padawan. If then we decide to classify the Jedi Knights, I believe the titles "Consular", "Guardian", and "Sentinel" are somewhat appropriate, but they should all be Jedi Knights.

logan23 02-08-2010 03:56 PM

Hey everyone,

The developers built the Jedi classes around their class story. I agree if you look at the Jedi knight it is a general term.

Since the foundation of all classes are their stories. So a Jedi knight class will have story which will be geared for more combat for example tracking down a Sith Lord. A Jedi consular would have a story where they track down the corruption in the Republic or try to help negotiate with neutral or a planet in a civil to help build influence so the planet will aid the Republic.

As for Jedi classes ...a Jedi knight is the Jedi who we see normally ....a Jedi consular is the Jedi who study at the Jedi temple and usually are the teachers on historian sect of the Jedi. By the develpers saying the consular is like Obi wan is their way to give the players an idea how the class will play.....but this leads to confusion...

The confusion between develper and player is basically miss-communication....the developers just need to be a little more clear...on examples for these classes...

Logan

Gurges-Ahter 02-09-2010 10:53 AM

I agree with everything you said logan. I get the distinctions between the Consulars and Knights as they are intended in TOR. I just think they shouldn't call them "Knights" - they should be called "Guardians" like they were in KotOR. The reason is because both Consulars and Guardians are Knights (as are Sentinels) in the traditional sense of the term (a graduated Padawan).

For example, Obi-Wan is the archetypal example of a Consular, which makes sense to me, and Mace Windu is the archetypal example of a Guardian. They are both Jedi Knights, however.

Like I said in my OP, it's not a big deal and I don't really care, I just think it was a poor decision to change the name since really all graduated Padawans are Jedi Knights.

logan23 02-09-2010 05:54 PM

The changing of the name is due to guardian is a rank that can be given to a padawan, ex kotor 1. The other reason is for people who are not familiar with kotor series but know the movies will see Jedi knight and say oh i know what that is while guardian might make a person scratch thier heads.

Again when they create some of these names its to help future interested players understand what they are.

A game developer has 2 main target audiences,...one is the players of the genre like us kotor players and the 2nd is the person who might have little knowledge of the game but know the movies, etc.

Logan

RogueJedi86 02-09-2010 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by logan23 (Post 2706041)
The changing of the name is due to guardian is a rank that can be given to a padawan, ex kotor 1. The other reason is for people who are not familiar with kotor series but know the movies will see Jedi knight and say oh i know what that is while guardian might make a person scratch thier heads.

But those same movie fans won't know what a Jedi Consular is either, so why aren't they named something similar, like "Jedi Master"? Any argument over familiarity to movie fans is killed when you see the similarly obscure Jedi Consulars in the game just fine. Casual fans would recognize Jedi Consulars but not Jedi Guardians?

Gurges-Ahter 02-09-2010 09:38 PM

^^^^ I agree.

Also, the term "Jedi" alone is recognizable enough for casual fans. The classifications that follow are to be learned by the player. We all had to learn Guardian, Consular, and Sentinel for K1 and K2, and I haven't really heard of any confusion there.

Jae Onasi 02-09-2010 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by logan23 (Post 2705842)
The confusion between develper and player is basically miss-communication....the developers just need to be a little more clear...on examples for these classes...

Logan

I imagine that at the character creation screen, they'll have a solid description of what every class does, so that there's no confusion.

Prime 02-10-2010 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gurges-Ahter (Post 2705974)
For example, Obi-Wan is the archetypal example of a Consular, which makes sense to me, and Mace Windu is the archetypal example of a Guardian. They are both Jedi Knights, however.

But I think these example exemplify the problem (which isn't really a problem, and I understand the gameplay reasons). In most cases it seems there really isn't a delineation between most Jedi, simply different ranges of power.

Let's take the four examples of Obi-wan, Qui-gon, Mace, and Yoda. They all fit the description of both guardian and consulars. Obi-wan is the master of Form III. Qui-gon is described as one of the greatest lightsaber masters in the Order in TPM novelization. Mace we know about, and Yoda is the best lightsaber master of all.

Conversely Obi-wan is the "negotiator". Qui-gon usually used negotation and mind tricks to achieve his goals. Mace is in the elite of Force users, and of course Yoda is the old mage.

The fact is they are all both guardians and consulars, as the Jedi's role is pretty much defined that way.

But, that doesn't necessarily make a better game. :)

Gurges-Ahter 02-10-2010 11:32 AM

^^^^ I agree. The characters we've all grown to know and love do not clearly fit into a Guardian or Consular archetype, with the most notable examples being Yoda and Obi-Wan. But I also understand the decision to have players choose a "type" of Jedi for gameplay purposes.

My question is why change the title of "Guardian" to "Knight" when all it does is make the issue even more unclear, since technically they are all Knights.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.