Printable View
The breif background info on the disruptor is that somehow the consciousness of a protoss warrior can be saved and uploaded into a robot....a more advanced means than even the dragoon to preserve protoss. Recent science fiction has been reusing this idea: halo 4, ghost in shell (not recent really, but one of the first popular films to play with this concept), transcendence, chappi.
Is this a technology that may help protoss overcome their dependency of the khala?
So Artanis used the Composer on ancient human to forge an army of Promethean Disruptors. Got it.Quote:
The breif background info on the disruptor is that somehow the consciousness of a protoss warrior can be saved and uploaded into a robot
Seriously, though, where does it say or imply this?
Considering the Khala gets corrupted in Legacy of the Void, and involves the Protoss with Artanis being forced into severing their Nerve Chords, I don't think they have a problem overcoming their dependency of the Khala.
As for the mind uploading, where does that come from?
Someone streaming beta looked at the game guide interface and read the lore background as well as the costs and stats of the unit. That plus the mention of sentient protoss robots @ blizzcon, that is probably where the disruptor is coming from lorewise.
its odd that the blizzard site right now features the new units, but isnt consistent with descriptions. Disruptor has merely a description of its role while they are more elaborate on the background of the cyclone, ravager, and adept.
The Khala involves sharing some minor sense of emotion, but its mostly just what we consider straightforward telepathy. There's basically no difference between the Khala, and leaving a telephone line open indefinitely. The Khala is simply a conference call.
Thus, Ghost In The Shell is the important point here. Cyberbrains and wireless communication are possible while maintaining a biological body (ex: Togusa). Basically, the Protoss haven't needed the Khala ever since they invented integrated cyborg biotechnology.
Yes, but cyborg technology merely hooks up a protoss body with a machine; if they could have otherwise, why put the body into a capsule inside the dragoon? They would needed to have somehow establish a link telepathicly, which is similar but not quite...; compare hardwire connection to the internet vs the wireless network. I was thinking in general with cyborg implants, the protoss may be able to regulate their link to the khala.
I don't think you understood me. I'm saying that the Khala, nigh - telepathy itself, is made obsolete by brain-integrated wi-fi. If everyone had a cyberbrain like GITS, there would literally be no reason to ever use spoken language again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jconant
My assumption is Protoss place critically wounded cyborg warriors into Dragoons because those warriors don't want to lose their organic parts. As long as they can keep Protoss reproductive organs functioning in a body that no longer has consciousness using stasis preservation, there's actually no reason to not upload dying Protoss consciousness into a fully machine body if they can.
Ok, thus embracing "technically" the philosophy of the dark templar, telepathic idividuality, but still have the benefits of khala through technology.
- - - Updated - - -
Ok, thus embracing "technically" the philosophy of the dark templar, telepathic idividuality, but still have the benefits of khala through technology.
This might explain the inclusion of the Purifier race. It's an interesting idea because such integration will allow the Dark Templar to join in the Khala but still retain their independence giving the Protoss as a whole a cultural revolution. I wonder how everyone will take to the idea of Protoss becoming cyborgs though...
I would like to point out that this concept only exists because of the Dark Templar Trilogy. The Khala was never defined for canon Starcraft -- that is, SC/BW. Man, the more people talk about the Khala, the more it pisses me off. The Khala and Nerazim beliefs were supposed to be two sides of the Protoss coin...Quote:
Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid
That, and I don't see how sentient robots have anything to do with sentient 'bots. Sentient bots are just one more fiction trope Blizzard's throwing in the plot. On the other hand, it does seem like something the Protoss would do. If a body is too broken to go on, then really there's not a huge amount of difference between putting a person in a fluid tank and simply putting them into a robot shell.
That may just be that Blizzard hasn't really clarified what the void is other than a place/thing in which one can draw psionic energy from. Protoss have the khala, which is merely a collective of protoss' own energy and the void is alien, but how exactly its "opposite" to khala seems rather vague.
- - - Updated - - -
That may just be that Blizzard hasn't really clarified what the void is other than a place/thing in which one can draw psionic energy from. Protoss have the khala, which is merely a collective of protoss' own energy and the void is alien, but how exactly its "opposite" to khala seems rather vague.
It's not opposite so much as "opposite" -- you have the Protoss of the light, and the Protoss of the dark. It's more thematic than functional.
I think its pretty obvious that "Void Energy" is dark matter.
And nobody knows what the hell dark matter actually is Demo;only what it is doing. some...."thing" in the universe other than blackholes, suns and all other visible mass is causing everything to accelerate to higher velocities. So....the void, some vague source of energy being compared to a current mystery isn't helpful in clarifying what it is.
- - - Updated - - -
And nobody knows what the hell dark matter actually is Demo;only what it is doing. some...."thing" in the universe other than blackholes, suns and all other visible mass is causing everything to accelerate to higher velocities. So....the void, some vague source of energy being compared to a current mystery isn't helpful in clarifying what it is.
The Khala is defined in the manual:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nissa
It's foundation was based on reactivation of that psychic primal link the Protoss shared (unless they cut off their nerve cords), so Demo's description of the Khala "involving sharing some minor sense of emotion" is correct, it's just that it being straightforward telepathy is incorrect. The Khala is not the primal psychic link specifically but a system and reason to use and maintain it.Quote:
Originally Posted by manual
I never thought the Khala was an energy source for psionic powers specifically since, according to the manual, those proto-Nerazim Adun sought to help still had their nerve cords (they only cut them after they were exiled as a symbolic gesture) but did not embrace the Khala could still exhibit psionic powers. If those that cut-their nerve cords off have to draw from elsewhere, this hints that the nerve cords themselves are the source of innate Protoss psionic power not the Khala (which is just a philosophy/doctrine that came after the Protoss having psionic powers). Course, the books then had to go and change everything, I suppose?
Eh, given that the Khala is not some physical attribute but some esoteric phenomena that only beings of sentience (we only have the Protoss specifically but who knows...) can access and feel, the remedy for losing it may require something more than just a plain synthetic replacement. So, why not the conceit of a sentient synthetic replacement? Sure, it's troperific but it would make sense in context.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nissa
Not really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turalyon
The manual and the Dark Templar Saga's description of the events go together fine. You would have to specifically interpret it in odd ways to make any contradiction.
There is the added significance of Khas (re)discovering Khaydarin Crystals which helped him come up with the idea when his telepathy was boosted by it, but that's about it.
Also, the Khala is a bit more complicated than Demo states. It isn't just telepathy, as it also involves a quasi-hive-mind. The Dark Templar send their thoughts and feelings every time they "speak."
A Protoss that follows the Khala "immerses" themselves within the Khala link at certain times of the day, in an act that's kind of like prayer. While they are connected to it 24/7, they don't receive any input unless they actively accept it, and "immerse" themselves in it.
The only Protoss that have a constant tap on the input are Preservers.
Anyways, The deeper you go into the Khala, the less you are just yourself and the more you experience from all those connected to the Khala around you, with you feeling their sensations and memories as your own. This is the big thing that the Dark Templar are afraid of. While Nerve Chords are necessary to be a part of the Khala, there were Dark Templar before cutting the Nerve Chords became a big deal. It's how the Templars by order of the Judicators could actually find them at the beginning of the Dark Templar persecution since they could go after the Protoss who stopped immersing themselves in the link.
The more you learn about the Khala, the more horrifying the Protoss Civil War becomes given how you had groups of Protoss devoted to the Khala killing each other. Anyone immersing themselves would feel tons of horrible memories if they were anywhere near the combat zone.
Say what you will about Golden's writing, but she did a great job with the Protoss in the DTS.
There is the added bit that the Khala, unlike the Zerg Hive mind, has a limited range. The stronger at psionics you are, the more range you can naturally have with it. A Zealot on his own can't contact his battle fleet's CO in the same solar system if they are a few thousand KMs away from the moon he is on, but a single High Templar can communicate beyond the range of a solar system, and three High Templar together with a specific technological device can communicate a distance of many many light years. If you're out of range, you can't "immerse" yourself since there's nothing to tap into. On the other hand, the Zerg's hive mind doesn't have any issues with range, along as there's a Zerg that can pick up on it.
Then again, a Psi Disrutpor can work on the Zerg's Hive Mind, but not the Protoss' Khala, so there's that. There are Psi-Inhibitors in-canon that do work against it, but its something that has to be physically implanted in the Protoss skull.
As for power, the Protoss can use the Khala as a well of psionic energy, pulling from the greater whole of Protoss for assistance. So, not only can they transmit telepathy, they can also transmit psi energy for all their sci-fi magic.
Although the Khala is only relevant with the Protoss' primal psychic link, it is not the Protoss primal psychic link (as I mentioned in my previous post). I think that's where the books started confusing those two things as being synonymous when they are just related.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
This is case-in-point of what I just said above. What you mean when you say "Khala" is actually the "Protoss primal psychic link". As the manual suggests, they are both related to each other but they are not synonymous/the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
The Khala did not exist during the Aeon of Strife, it only came at (by Khas) and precipitated it's end. The Protoss primal psyhic link existed, but the reason why the Xel'Naga left them and the Aeon of Strife started is because the Protoss could choose to disconnect from this primal psychic link and become corrupted by ego and all the bad stuff associated with being individualistic. Because of this deviation, the Protoss eventually forgot how to access this primal psychic link and it became the only reason why they were able to commit such atrocities against each other during the Aeon of Strife..Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Once again, you must mean the psychic link has limited range. The Khala is just a discipline in order to use that psychic link more efficiently and effectively.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Given that the Khala, as originally envisaged, is just a metaphysical system of thought and therefore unquantifiable, I can't see how it can also be a reservoir/well of energy (which would then make it quantifiable...). As I said in my previous post, the energy for psionic powers is most likely created by their nerve cords since Dark Templar, who have no cords, have to draw their energy from elsewhere. In the manual, the Protoss that Adun tried to teach (and would eventually become the Dark Templar) did not have the Khala but still had their nerve cords and yet "their powers equaled those of the mighty Templar".Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Except, that every single Protoss never uses the words Communal Link. They refer to the psychic link as the Khala. If we were talking about an inconsistency, the manual doesn't get to "trump" anything here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turalyon
But it never once says the Khala "is not" the link, so there is no problem, so there is nothing to trump.
The books alone don't do that. There's also the manga, the short stories, and the games themselves which treat the Khala as the psychic link.
If multiple sources state one thing, they're right.
The manual itself mentions the Khala is a religion and a philosophy. That doesn't mean it can't also refer to the psychic link itself, which many Protoss do talk about by calling it the Khala.
No, I mean the Khala. They are synonymous.Quote:
This is case-in-point of what I just said above. What you mean when you say "Khala" is actually the "Protoss primal psychic link". As the manual suggests, they are both related to each other but they are not synonymous/the same thing.
It doesn't outright say the link is the Khala, but it doesn't have to since tons of other sources do and nothing contradicts that. This is neither a retcon or an inconsistency. While the Khala is not simply the psychic link, the psychic link in the modern day is called the Khala.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manual
The beauty about words is that they can have multiple definitions.
Also, according to the manual, the Khala is not just a religion or philosophy, but a psychic progression. So, it's not merely metaphorical and has practical application.
And honestly, this statement makes much more sense if you assume Khala = psychic link.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manual
Who said anything about the Aeon of Strife?Quote:
The Khala did not exist during the Aeon of Strife, it only came at (by Khas) and precipitated it's end. The Protoss primal psyhic link existed, but the reason why the Xel'Naga left them and the Aeon of Strife started is because the Protoss could choose to disconnect from this primal psychic link and become corrupted by ego and all the bad stuff associated with being individualistic. Because of this deviation, the Protoss eventually forgot how to access this primal psychic link and it became the only reason why they were able to commit such atrocities against each other during the Aeon of Strife..
I'm talking about the Starcraft 3rd campaign where the Templar following Tassadar and the Templar following the Conclave fought.
No, I mean the Khala.Quote:
Once again, you must mean the psychic link has limited range. The Khala is just a discipline in order to use that psychic link more efficiently and effectively.
The Khala and the modern link are one in the same.
If Protoss can use the word Khala to mean "Psychic Link," so can I.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cold Symmetry
Except, even the manual mentions that the Khala is a place where energy can be drawn from.Quote:
Given that the Khala, as originally envisaged, is just a metaphysical system of thought and therefore unquantifiable, I can't see how it can also be a reservoir/well of energy (which would then make it quantifiable...). As I said in my previous post, the energy for psionic powers is most likely created by their nerve cords since Dark Templar, who have no cords, have to draw their energy from elsewhere. In the manual, the Protoss that Adun tried to teach (and would eventually become the Dark Templar) did not have the Khala but still had their nerve cords and yet "their powers equaled those of the mighty Templar".
And this is what the writers have to say:Quote:
Originally Posted by Starcraft Manual
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q&A
Okay, I think I misspoke a bit. The Khala is somewhat defined, but it's not well defined. It was purposely left vague and poetic in definition so that people could imagine its power, and imagine why the DTs would reject it. Also note that DT belief is similarly vague and undefined, probably so that the developers could at any time extend or add to DT power without the players being able to accuse them of being inconsistent. Blizzard could, at any time, add to either the Khala or Nerazim beliefs/power, whenever they felt the lead of inspiration.
But then, in the transition from the SC/BW period to now, employee turnover happened, and the Dark Templar trilogy came out. This is the series of books that tried to describe the Khala as a gigantic psionic link. It gave no religious or political implications to the Khala, only that if the 'Toss touched a special stone, their brains would grow (or somesuch magical bullcrap). If it weren't for the fact Blizzard declared the books canon, I wouldn't pay any attention at all to it. After all, this the series that claimed DTs couldn't experience the Khala, but then suddenly expected us to believe that a human with a 'Toss in his mind could suddenly create a mini-Khala with other humans, with not a single nerve cord in the bunch. A story that careless with Starcraft lore isn't worthy of discussion.
Let's be frank here. The idea that the Khala is nothing more than a psychic link is SC2 era oversimplification. It's rather like the mysterious Duran becoming a typical shapeshifter, or Stukov becoming a generic meat puppet with half a face. Something that was once mysterious and open to the imagination has become a typical, boring trope.
Shadow Archon, how long have you been a fan of the series? If you had been an original fan, you would know that the manual was never meant to bluntly state that the Khala is a psychic link. In fact, that part of the manual you quote has nothing at all to do with calling the Khala a link.
This sentence directly implies that the Khala is NOT a psychic link, but rather some sort of discipline or study ability, like a powerful mental endeavor that helps the Protoss understand Xel'Naga work.Quote:
The Judicator hope that the Shelak can unravel the mysteries of the Xel’Naga and thus expand their knowledge through the Khala.
The key word here is channel. The amulets themselves appear to be a source of power. While the Khala itself has energies, there is no evidence of where these energies come from. It's entirely possible that the power of the Khala is a Protoss' own power, or the collected power generated by everyone in the Khala. Which would explain why the DT unleashed powerful storms before their exile -- their energy was still unchannelled and uncontrolled. Without the Khala, they'd have to come up with some way to control their power. Hence, Nerazim ways.Quote:
Khaydarin Amulet. By equipping themselves with amulets carved from Khaydarin crystal, the High Templar are able to channel the energies of the Khala with greater efficiency.
What?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nissa
It totally still has religious and political implications. It goes over the events with the Judicators and the original Dark Templar, along with the political and religious issues that contains.
Uh, that was in the manual too.Quote:
only that if the 'Toss touched a special stone, their brains would grow (or somesuch magical bullcrap). If it weren't for the fact Blizzard declared the books canon, I wouldn't pay any attention at all to it.
You can't blame the books about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starcraft manual
Because they cut their nerve chords. That's been a staple since the original Starcraft.Quote:
After all, this the series that claimed DTs couldn't experience the Khala,
What?Quote:
but then suddenly expected us to believe that a human with a 'Toss in his mind could suddenly create a mini-Khala with other humans, with not a single nerve cord in the bunch. A story that careless with Starcraft lore isn't worthy of discussion.
Terrans don't have nerve chords neither do they use the Void, and they still have psionic individuals that can do crap.
Their biology's requirements for psionics is completely different, so there is no reason to assume they need nerve chords at all.
Jake was doing all the work there anyways. The mini-Khala was him broadcasting everyone's memories and feelings to those around him.
And remember, doing that is part of what contributed to him getting a brain tumor. So it definitely had consequences.
That instance is completely believable.
Since the beginning. I remember when Brood War itself was sold in the giant square boxes bigger than the modern day battle-chests.Quote:
Shadow Archon, how long have you been a fan of the series?
And unlike a lot of the people on this site, I enjoy SC2's story and all but one of the books.
Eh?Quote:
If you had been an original fan, you would know that the manual was never meant to bluntly state that the Khala is a psychic link. In fact, that part of the manual you quote has nothing at all to do with calling the Khala a link.
It doesn't bluntly state it.
But it doesn't bluntly state the opposite either.
To me, it directly implies that it is a psychic link in which the Shelak can expand the Judicator's knowledge on the Xel'naga by sharing what they learned. I don't get anything about it being a discipline from this statement.Quote:
This sentence directly implies that the Khala is NOT a psychic link, but rather some sort of discipline or study ability, like a powerful mental endeavor that helps the Protoss understand Xel'Naga work.
If it's the second one, then the manual supports the Khala being a psychic link.Quote:
The key word here is channel. The amulets themselves appear to be a source of power. While the Khala itself has energies, there is no evidence of where these energies come from. It's entirely possible that the power of the Khala is a Protoss' own power, or the collected power generated by everyone in the Khala.
If it's the first one, it still is the manual supporting that the Khala is not just a discipline or philosophy, but an actual tangible physical thing which can be directly quantified.
By the DTS and WoG, both of these separate conclusions are confirmed to be true.
Wrong. It went over the time period, yes, but not any political/religious issues. I think it may have included one or two mentions of the Xel'Naga being god-like, and a reference to some animal they sacrificed to, but that's it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
They did not mention --
- What gods the 'Toss believe in
- What Dark Templar beliefs are
- Why the Protoss caste system came into play
- Who decided what tribe gets to be which caste
- Why the Dark Templar decided that the Khala was so bad they had to amputate part of their body.
- Why the other Protoss listened to the Judicator if they were such idiots (seriously, their portrayal sucked).
- What sort of religious services existed post-Khala.
All the DT saga did describe was how Protoss were dumber than cavemen, and all the parts of the DT/Khala split that we already knew before. The crystals were not political or religious in nature. They were stones that did stuff. That's all.
So? The problem wasn't the introduction of the crystals. The problem was that the crystals were nothing more than magical macguffins that just made 'Toss smarter. They alone cannot explain what the Khala is, what it means to the Protoss, or why the deep set cultural divide between the two versions of 'Toss came about. The DT Saga was badly written, particularly when it came to Protoss backstory.Quote:
Uh, that was in the manual too.
Proof positive you didn't read my post. The fact that DT can't join the Khala was my entire point. The DT Saga allowed humans to experience the Khala, despite humans not having nerve cords either. It's a contradiction.Quote:
Because they cut their nerve chords. That's been a staple since the original Starcraft.
I didn't say humans couldn't do psionics. I said they couldn't join the Khala.Quote:
they still have psionic individuals that can do crap.
Their biology's requirements for psionics is completely different, so there is no reason to assume they need nerve chords at all.
Jake was doing all the work there anyways. The mini-Khala was him broadcasting everyone's memories and feelings to those around him.
DT have no nerve cords.
Humans have no nerve cords.
DT cannot join Khala
Humans can join Khala?
Logical failure. The fact that a Protoss was in Jake's mind makes no difference whatsoever. Because the 'Toss in his head had no body, and therefore no nerve cords.
All but one? Which one was that?Quote:
And unlike a lot of the people on this site, I enjoy SC2's story and all but one of the books.
THAT'S my entire point. You cannot say that the Khala is only a psionic link, because the manual doesn't say it's only a psionic link. Thus, you cannot quote the manual to prove to everyone your point.Quote:
Eh?
It doesn't bluntly state it.
But it doesn't bluntly state the opposite either.
If you say so. The word "through" implies discipline, however. Like -- "Through his years of technical experience, he could recognize what was wrong with the car."Quote:
To me, it directly implies that it is a psychic link in which the Shelak can expand the Judicator's knowledge on the Xel'naga by sharing what they learned. I don't get anything about it being a discipline from this statement.
If it comes from a novel, I don't listen to it. The novels were terribly written, and often ignored or mishandled canon characters and ideas.Quote:
If it's the second one, then the manual supports the Khala being a psychic link.
If it's the first one, it still is the manual supporting that the Khala is not just a discipline or philosophy, but an actual tangible physical thing which can be directly quantified.
By the DTS and WoG, both of these separate conclusions are confirmed to be true.
So, the Khala being a religious movement, Khas being the Khala's prophet, the Khala leading to the creation of the Castes, leading to the political rule of the Judicators...and so on and so forth...don't count?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nissa
The Xel'naga were their gods, and they even got their own Protoss name: Ihan-rii.Quote:
They did not mention --
- What gods the 'Toss believe in
Individuality. That's pretty clear in the chapter with the talk between Adun and Razsagal.Quote:
- Why the Dark Templar decided that the Khala was so bad they had to amputate part of their body.
We're talking about the religious implications of the Khala, not the Void though, and we look at the origin of the Dark Templar on Aiur through the eyes of a Preserver. We don't know what the first years on Shakuras were like because none of the main characters were privy to that knowledge, so as consequence, that was beyond the confines of the novel's plot.Quote:
- What Dark Templar beliefs are
The focus is on the Dark Templars' origin, why the gulf between them and the rest of the Protoss exist, and how they are currently co-existing.
Quote:
- Why the Protoss caste system came into play
Khas did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
It seems to vary on the individual. While some tribes have a majority within one caste, it seems that you chosen to be in a caste based on your skills and talents.Quote:
- Who decided what tribe gets to be which caste
The quote was provided above.
I don't see how.Quote:
- Why the other Protoss listened to the Judicator if they were such idiots (seriously, their portrayal sucked).
While they are portrayed as arrogant, they aren't idiots.
Their fears justify their plan of action against the Dark Templar, because they fear it could possibly bring back the Aeon of Strife.
The Road of Remembrance for one.Quote:
- What sort of religious services existed post-Khala.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
Because the first book showed us the equivalent of Protoss cavemen who had innate psionic abilities they could rely on without the need to develop technology like humans did.Quote:
All the DT saga did describe was how Protoss were dumber than cavemen,
Hardly a big deal.
The rest of the novels talk about the Protoss after they have developed FTL and colonized multiple planets.
They aren't stupid, they're smarter than normal humans.
It gives it more details and focuses on Adun's involvement.Quote:
and all the parts of the DT/Khala split that we already knew before.
So? The crystals are not the sum of what the Books go over.Quote:
The crystals were not political or religious in nature. They were stones that did stuff. That's all.
They don't make them smarter...Quote:
So? The problem wasn't the introduction of the crystals. The problem was that the crystals were nothing more than magical macguffins that just made 'Toss smarter.
They got them past their old vendettas through racial empathy.
And they don't.Quote:
They alone cannot explain what the Khala is, what it means to the Protoss, or why the deep set cultural divide between the two versions of 'Toss came about.
The books do that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8cQuote:
The DT Saga was badly written, particularly when it came to Protoss backstory.
I did read it, and no it isn't a contradiction.Quote:
Proof positive you didn't read my post. The fact that DT can't join the Khala was my entire point. The DT Saga allowed humans to experience the Khala, despite humans not having nerve cords either. It's a contradiction.
It wasn't the Khala. It was a mini-Khala that worked only over a short range.
Humans don't have nerve chords in the first place which is one of the biological parts of a Toss that lets them do their psionics. Humans can still do psionics.
Ergo, nothing is contradicted. The unique aspect of their biologies has to be taken into an account, and we have no idea what that entails with human psionics and Protoss psionics.
Well, they didn't.Quote:
I didn't say humans couldn't do psionics. I said they couldn't join the Khala.
Jake's mini-Khala isn't the same as the Khala. The scale is such smaller and was being maintained only by him.
No, you're having a logical failure.Quote:
DT have no nerve cords.
Humans have no nerve cords.
DT cannot join Khala
Humans can join Khala?
Logical failure.
You're assuming Dark Templar are equivalent with Humans here.
Human =/= Protoss.
Human psionics =/= Protoss Psionics.
Human Mini-Khala =/= Protoss Khala.
Thus, Human requirements for joining their "Khala" =/= Protoss requirements for joining their Khala.
There are so many different factors involved to point your generalizing has no basis.
The hell it does.Quote:
The fact that a Protoss was in Jake's mind makes no difference whatsoever.
Nerve cords are a requirement for Protoss. Not for humans.Quote:
Because the 'Toss in his head had no body, and therefore no nerve cords.
Shadow of the Xel'naga.Quote:
All but one? Which one was that?
Is this a strawman?Quote:
THAT'S my entire point. You cannot say that the Khala is only a psionic link, because the manual doesn't say it's only a psionic link. Thus, you cannot quote the manual to prove to everyone your point.
I never said the Khala is only a psychic link.
It's a philosophy, a religion, a mind-set, and a psychic link.
I'm quoting the manual to show that it doesn't contradict the books by what it calls the Khala.
Agree to disagree.Quote:
If you say so. The word "through" implies discipline, however. Like -- "Through his years of technical experience, he could recognize what was wrong with the car."
Both interpretations seem valid to me.
Hell, both can be valid at the same time as well.
There's no reason to discuss what's in the novels if you just ignore it.Quote:
If it comes from a novel, I don't listen to it. The novels were terribly written, and often ignored or mishandled canon characters and ideas.
And given I will quote the novels alot...
Of course not. Because they weren't in the book. In what way is a shiny stone "religious" if there is no god, no spirituality, or any form of ceremony? The book failed to explain any religious connotations. Therefore the stones are not religious in nature, or if they are, they are from other sources, not the DT Saga.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
That, and the book NEVER explains how shiny crystals lead to the formation of the Judicator. Homeboy finds the crystal, touches it, then fast forward ~2000 years later and the Judicator are there. It's not in the book, so it doesn't count.
Doesn't mean the book adequately described it. The Khaydarin crystals were discovered, and from that point on there is no reference to the Xel'Naga being gods. That, and a fancy name does not a god make.Quote:
The Xel'naga were their gods, and they even got their own Protoss name: Ihan-rii.
But that's just a label, isn't it? The Khala is never shown to eliminate individuality. Not in the DT Saga, nor in Starcraft itself (Legacy of the Void aside, depending on where they go with it). That, and the DT's motives are never explained. Why did they feel the need to sever their nerve cords? In the books, only the Conclave ever gives a mention for why the DT did what they did, and their perspective hardly counts. No Dark Templar character ever once explained why they felt the need to hurt themselves over it, or if they had any other options.Quote:
Individuality. That's pretty clear in the chapter with the talk between Adun and Razsagal.
In other words, we only know the decision was over individuality because other sources confirmed this. The DT Saga only explains the motivations of the DT through people who were not themselves DT, and it wasn't much of an explanation at that.
Well and good, but this is supposedly the Dark Templar Saga, yet the book is completely focused on Khala Protoss. It does not adequately explain the group it was labelled to describe. There are only two DTs of significance in the entire dang trilogy (Zeratul, Mohander) as Raszagal's appearance was little better than a cameo. No Dark Templar appears at all in the first book, either in person or in flashback.Quote:
We're talking about the religious implications of the Khala, not the Void though, and we look at the origin of the Dark Templar on Aiur through the eyes of a Preserver. We don't know what the first years on Shakuras were like because none of the main characters were privy to that knowledge, so as consequence, that was beyond the confines of the novel's plot.
The focus is on the Dark Templars' origin, why the gulf between them and the rest of the Protoss exist, and how they are currently co-existing.
You speak of "void" -- something the book never ONCE mentions. The book doesn't explain anything about the Nerazim. The only unique detail given in the book was the fact that DTs use crystals to store memory. That is the sum total of new information garnered on the Dark Templar.
Yes, Khas did. But he's not Christie Golden. Khas is here summarizing what happened -- he is not showing it. We don't see the tribes coming to agreements, or deciding on who will become a leader. This is insignificant information, particularly since it comes from Khas, and not a preserver. In any case, we are getting a terse summary from a person who wasn't there, not a deep, interesting flashback from Christie Golden herself.Quote:
Khas did.
Besides, the Judicator are clearly given higher authority than the other 'Toss. You can call them the eldest and wisest, if you like, but the book goes out of its way to describe the Ara tribe (a Judicator one) as unnecessarily violent. If this is the case, they should have become Templar. And if they somehow got the Judicator job, why wouldn't the other tribes object to their violence, or even just the idea of one tribe leading all the rest? Particularly since they'd been warring for an eon? Wouldn't it be wiser if a Conclave of all tribes were set to rule? After all, in family based divisions (that is, tribes), there's no particular reason why any one tribe would be smarter than the rest.
The only rational explanation, which I'd assumed before reading the book, is that the Khala was a set of writings passed down through the Xel'Naga which explained to the Protoss how they were meant to live. Now, if the tribes were convinced with the Xel'Naga's power, they could be convinced to let a couple specific tribes become the Judicator. If the crystals are simply things that make your brains get bigger (or whatever) there's no particular reason for one or two tribes to get all the authority.
The third and final caste, the judicators, were the elders and statesmen, the governing body of the protoss. Their highest members were known as the Conclave.Quote:
It seems to vary on the individual. While some tribes have a majority within one caste, it seems that you chosen to be in a caste based on your skills and talents.
Gee, sure sounds like individual skills and talents to me....
In the games, the Judicator always were the leaders of the Protoss. Tassadar stated, "The Judicator have long since steered the actions of the Templar to their own ends." The Judicator could not do this if they lacked the authority. That, and the Ara/Shelak tribes have always been portrayed as Judicator.
*laughs* Yes they are. They attacked the Dark Templar right as they'd finally managed to exile the bunch, jeopardizing their own plans to pretend the DT never existed. Retarded. Besides, arrogance becomes ignorance over time.Quote:
I don't see how.
While they are portrayed as arrogant, they aren't idiots.
Oh, pffft, only that one. It's simply a funeral rite anyway, with no bearing on the function of Protoss religion or anything that happens later in the story. It's a setpiece, hardly a cultural description.Quote:
The Road of Remembrance for one.
....A person excited over a drawing in the dirt is not smarter than a normal human. While the novels might have mentioned what happened to the 'Toss afterwards, they didn't show them developing FTL or colonizing multiple planets. And that doesn't change the fact that the caveman parts were stupid.Quote:
Because the first book showed us the equivalent of Protoss cavemen who had innate psionic abilities they could rely on without the need to develop technology like humans did.
Hardly a big deal.
The rest of the novels talk about the Protoss after they have developed FTL and colonized multiple planets.
They aren't stupid, they're smarter than normal humans.
My original point was that the crystals are a cheap macguffin explanation for the Khala. They are simple a thing that does something, not a political system, a religion, or some kind of lifestyle guide from the Xel'Naga. They fail to explain sufficiently what the Khala is and why it resulted in the society we see in Starcraft.Quote:
So? The crystals are not the sum of what the Books go over.
When Savassan touched the crystals, he was given a mental boost from the experience. Clearly the crystals did something to his mind which resulted in him being more intelligent.Quote:
They don't make them smarter...
They got them past their old vendettas through racial empathy.
No they don't. They just rehash what we already know about the 'Toss, without adding much in the way of new detail.Quote:
And they don't.
The books do that.
*facepalms* By that logic, the Dark Templar can't do psionics at all. Either that, or they can create their own mini-Khala at will.Quote:
I did read it, and no it isn't a contradiction.
It wasn't the Khala. It was a mini-Khala that worked only over a short range.
Humans don't have nerve chords in the first place which is one of the biological parts of a Toss that lets them do their psionics. Humans can still do psionics.
Ergo, nothing is contradicted. The unique aspect of their biologies has to be taken into an account, and we have no idea what that entails with human psionics and Protoss psionics.
Look, let me put it this way. Psionic humans and Dark Templar are in the same boat, so far as the Khala is concerned. Both groups have psionic power, but neither have nerve cords. Thus, neither of them can create a Khala, mini- or otherwise, without the proper appendages.
*facepalms* My "generalization" is based on the logical fact that the Khala requires nerve appendages. Your assumption that human psionics does not equal Protoss psionics is just that -- an assumption. It is stated nowhere in the book or Starcraft lore that there is a difference. Neither humans nor Dark Templar have what it takes to join a Khala.Quote:
There are so many different factors involved to point your generalizing has no basis.
Says who?Quote:
Nerve cords are a requirement for Protoss. Not for humans.
Oh good, if you liked that book, I was going to be sorely disappointed.Quote:
Shadow of the Xel'naga.
True, but only cemented in the EU. My original position was based on the source game and manual where it's quite clear that they are not the same thing. Hence my questioning of the definition of the Khala being changed later in the books/EU.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
This is an argument from ignorance especially considering when one is restricted to only having the source manual (which describes it definitively already) to rely on. I've gone through the transcripts and the games (Sc1 and BW) never refer to the Khala as being the communal link directly so therefore I have to rely on the manual's description of it. Sure, you can interpret and infer that they've always been the same all you like but you have to realise that's hindsight bias based on the knowledge that all the recent stuff say they are the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
I know the later EU trumps it because all of it says they're the same thing and its considered canon - that's not my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Back to your usual tricks, I see... Every time you make these type of arguments, I'm always reminded of Orwell's 1984 and doublethink. To not think that's there some degree of retroactive continuity going on here is borderline insane troll logic, so there's nothing that I can really do but just nod my head and agree with you to avoid a headache. I'll think I'll leave this quote from the book, so that the people who can, will enjoy the irony:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Quote:
"Oceania was at war with Eurasia and in alliance with Eastasia. In no public or private utterance was it ever admitted that the three powers had at any time been grouped along different lines. Actually, as Winston well knew, it was only four years since Oceania had been at war with Eastasia and in alliance with Eurasia. But that was merely a piece of furtive knowledge, which he happened to possess because his memory was not satisfactorily under control. Officially the change of partners had never happened. Oceania was at war with Eurasia: therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia."
To you that's like saying good is bad and bad is good, right? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Who said that philosophies don't have practical applications? I certainly didn't. It's a moot point to make regardless since I already said that the Khala is a means to use and maintain the psychic link. This does not necessarily mean they are the same. I'm not denying your right to reinterpret that it actually is though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
There's a bit of confirmation bias on your part here since it could also still make sense if you replaced "the Khala" (in that quote) with "their religion" or "Khas' philosophy". Because, you know, the Khala is "primarily meant to define a rigid system of behaviour".Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Never said you couldn't - especially given that's how they want us to interpret it now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Given that you're a fan of re-interpretation, one can say that the Khala "gives" energy by a form of catalysis and therefore, may not technically be the source of the energy. See, people can have other interpretations, too! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
...Well, obviously you didn't read them then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nissa
Who said Khaydarin Crystals were religious again?Quote:
In what way is a shiny stone "religious" if there is no god, no spirituality, or any form of ceremony?
Because I sure didn't.
...Sure, thinking on it, the Khaydarin Crystals are the equivalent of Rosaries in Protoss society...
Of course, their Rosaries have practical applications in terms of energy generation and space/time manipulation.
It pretty much shows that the Khala is a religion.Quote:
The book failed to explain any religious connotations.
So, yeah it did.
...Yes it does.Quote:
That, and the book NEVER explains how shiny crystals lead to the formation of the Judicator.
The books tell us Khas formed the Khala and one of the social reforms it created was the caste.Quote:
Homeboy finds the crystal, touches it, then fast forward ~2000 years later and the Judicator are there. It's not in the book, so it doesn't count.
It does completely count.
Books are not movies. There is no rule about "Show, don't tell."
...Says you. That's an opinion, not an objective fact.Quote:
Doesn't mean the book adequately described it.
The books did a great job in my opinion.
*sigh*Quote:
The Khaydarin crystals were discovered, and from that point on there is no reference to the Xel'Naga being gods. That, and a fancy name does not a god make.
You really didn't pay attention did you?
Every single time the Protoss say gods, they are talking about the Xel'naga, and there is plenty of talk about the Xel'naga, from what they did to the Protoss, to those that revered them, to those that were so distraught from them leaving which is where the Tal'Darim come from, and so on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
They mention them throughout all three novels frequently, and it is very clear the Protoss see them as gods.
No.Quote:
But that's just a label, isn't it?
It doesn't.Quote:
The Khala is never shown to eliminate individuality. Not in the DT Saga, nor in Starcraft itself (Legacy of the Void aside, depending on where they go with it).
The Dark Templar fear that it does, but from our omniscient PoV we know that it doesn't.
*sigh*Quote:
That, and the DT's motives are never explained. Why did they feel the need to sever their nerve cords? In the books, only the Conclave ever gives a mention for why the DT did what they did, and their perspective hardly counts. No Dark Templar character ever once explained why they felt the need to hurt themselves over it, or if they had any other options.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twilight
It explains it just fine in my opinion.Quote:
In other words, we only know the decision was over individuality because other sources confirmed this. The DT Saga only explains the motivations of the DT through people who were not themselves DT, and it wasn't much of an explanation at that.
The way a Preserver works means we do not have a Dark Templar PoV character.
Does a series called the Dark Templar Saga need a Dark Templar as one of the main protagonists?
No. I don't think so.
No they aren't.Quote:
Well and good, but this is supposedly the Dark Templar Saga, yet the book is completely focused on Khala Protoss.
The second and the third book focus a lot on the Dark Templar.
That is your opinion.Quote:
It does not adequately explain the group it was labelled to describe.
One, that again, I don't share.
So, Ulrezaj doesn't count?Quote:
There are only two DTs of significance in the entire dang trilogy (Zeratul, Mohander) as Raszagal's appearance was little better than a cameo. No Dark Templar appears at all in the first book, either in person or in flashback.
Wrong again.Quote:
You speak of "void" -- something the book never ONCE mentions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twilight
No, they perfectly well do.Quote:
The book doesn't explain anything about the Nerazim.
There's really no point to quote entire chapters worth here, is there?
Wrong.Quote:
The only unique detail given in the book was the fact that DTs use crystals to store memory. That is the sum total of new information garnered on the Dark Templar.
We know that the Dark Templar as a whole are a group of scholars, wanderers, and explorers.
We know that the Dark Templar still use Khaydarin crystals for their technology and don't merely rely on Argus stones.
We know that the creation of a Dark Archon with seven individuals is possible.
We know Adun used Dark Templar energies.
We know the Dark Templar give the same reverence to the Void that the other Protoss give to the Khala.
We know that Dark Templar meditate using the Void as a guide.
We know the Dark Templar have colonies beyond Shakuras.
And on and on and on.
Khas is dead. This is the current PoV character thinking back on Khas, the One Who Brings Order.Quote:
Yes, Khas did. But he's not Christie Golden. Khas is here summarizing what happened -- he is not showing it. We don't see the tribes coming to agreements, or deciding on who will become a leader. This is insignificant information, particularly since it comes from Khas, and not a preserver. In any case, we are getting a terse summary from a person who wasn't there, not a deep, interesting flashback from Christie Golden herself.
We do not need to see all that crap done. It's not fully fleshed out in the novel, but the information is given, even though you said it was not.
Stop changing the goal posts.
What are you talking about?Quote:
Besides, the Judicator are clearly given higher authority than the other 'Toss. You can call them the eldest and wisest, if you like, but the book goes out of its way to describe the Ara tribe (a Judicator one) as unnecessarily violent. If this is the case, they should have become Templar. And if they somehow got the Judicator job, why wouldn't the other tribes object to their violence, or even just the idea of one tribe leading all the rest? Particularly since they'd been warring for an eon? Wouldn't it be wiser if a Conclave of all tribes were set to rule? After all, in family based divisions (that is, tribes), there's no particular reason why any one tribe would be smarter than the rest.
What unnecessary violence?
This is what happened involving the tribes and the castes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
Do you know how pretentious this sounds?Quote:
The only rational explanation,
The book's explanation is perfectly rational.
That's completely at odds with both the books and the manual which tell us that Khas created the Khala. The Xel'naga did not create the Khala.Quote:
which I'd assumed before reading the book, is that the Khala was a set of writings passed down through the Xel'Naga which explained to the Protoss how they were meant to live. Now, if the tribes were convinced with the Xel'Naga's power, they could be convinced to let a couple specific tribes become the Judicator.
You keep saying this over and over again.Quote:
If the crystals are simply things that make your brains get bigger (or whatever)
This did not happen.
No one's intelligence was heightened by the crystals.
It jumpstarted the psychic bond.
That is it.
The tribes were put into the caste in which their skills would be put best to work.Quote:
there's no particular reason for one or two tribes to get all the authority.
...Yeah. It does.Quote:
The third and final caste, the judicators, were the elders and statesmen, the governing body of the protoss. Their highest members were known as the Conclave.
Gee, sure sounds like individual skills and talents to me....
I say this without sarcasm.
Which they don't.Quote:
In the games, the Judicator always were the leaders of the Protoss. Tassadar stated, "The Judicator have long since steered the actions of the Templar to their own ends." The Judicator could not do this if they lacked the authority.
[quote That, and the Ara/Shelak tribes have always been portrayed as Judicator. [/quote]
Okay?
So?
Man, you are flat out misremembering what happened.Quote:
*laughs* Yes they are. They attacked the Dark Templar right as they'd finally managed to exile the bunch, jeopardizing their own plans to pretend the DT never existed. Retarded. Besides, arrogance becomes ignorance over time.
The attack was started by Kortanul being a jackass and the Dark Templar defending themselves. It was a riot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
The Conclave didn't plan to slaughter them all, so it has nothing to do with stupidity.
Look at that Goalpost shifting.Quote:
Oh, pffft, only that one.
Oh, look!Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
Protoss equivalent of prayer!
That's totally not religious at all.
>.< Geez...
And I disagree. How they perform their rituals in burials is a part of their culture and religion, especially given how it involves a Xel'naga temple, the very structure built by their gods and represents the entire Protoss way of life.Quote:
It's simply a funeral rite anyway, with no bearing on the function of Protoss religion or anything that happens later in the story. It's a setpiece, hardly a cultural description.
It is not something to belittle as just one small reference when you dared to say the book doesn't look at the Protoss religion.
Wow. Way to damn the very beginnings of literature and art.Quote:
....A person excited over a drawing in the dirt is not smarter than a normal human.
They are Protoss Tribals.
They aren't meant to be as smart as modern day humans or their game selves.
Their civilization completely collapsed into chaos, so yes, there had to be someone who eventually drew pictures in the dirt, and escalated their knowledge from there.
Irrelevent.Quote:
While the novels might have mentioned what happened to the 'Toss afterwards, they didn't show them developing FTL or colonizing multiple planets.
They mention it.
Hell, they show that in the modern age, the Protoss equivalent of a car is a reactionless drive equipped golden shuttle.
Given that proves the Conservation of Momentum is wrong...
Well this means that in the Starcraft universe, the Protoss were right, where as Newton and Einstein were wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8cQuote:
And that doesn't change the fact that the caveman parts were stupid.
Okay.Quote:
My original point was that the crystals are a cheap macguffin explanation for the Khala.
Yes. Because the Khala is the religion, the political system, and is a lifestyle made by Khas.Quote:
They are simple a thing that does something, not a political system, a religion, or some kind of lifestyle guide from the Xel'Naga.
Just because the cyrstals are important in rediscovering that link doesn't mean the link and the philosophy is any less potent.
Again.Quote:
They fail to explain sufficiently what the Khala is and why it resulted in the society we see in Starcraft.
No, this did not happen.Quote:
When Savassan touched the crystals, he was given a mental boost from the experience. Clearly the crystals did something to his mind which resulted in him being more intelligent.
Savassan did not gain a mental boost and was portrayed as intelligent throughout the whole dang book. Not from any magic crystal giving him extra IQ points. He was naturally inquisitive. He did the whole drawings in the dirt long before he touched the crystal. He wanted to know more about the Xel'naga. He collected Xel'naga artifacts.
All before he touched the crystal.
All it did was give him empathy.
So, no. They did not magically macguffin the Protoss to be smart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Firstborn
They magically macguffined them to regain the old psychic bond.
They also were the key to translating Xel'naga artifacts.
There was no "instantly smarter" thing here.
And I think I've already proved that you are completely wrong here.Quote:
No they don't. They just rehash what we already know about the 'Toss, without adding much in the way of new detail.
You've misremembered way too much about this book to state any "facts" about it.
Wrong.Quote:
*facepalms* By that logic, the Dark Templar can't do psionics at all. Either that, or they can create their own mini-Khala at will.
Human biology =/= Protoss biology.
No they aren't.Quote:
Look, let me put it this way. Psionic humans and Dark Templar are in the same boat, so far as the Khala is concerned.
Dark Templar only have psionic power through the Void. Without the nerve appendages, that's the only psionics they have.Quote:
Both groups have psionic power, but neither have nerve cords. Thus, neither of them can create a Khala, mini- or otherwise, without the proper appendages.
Terrans don't use the Void, don't have nerve appendages, and use psionic powers more similar to normal Protoss psionics than Void Psioinics.
For protoss.Quote:
*facepalms* My "generalization" is based on the logical fact that the Khala requires nerve appendages.
The fact is that Protoss need Nerve Appendages.
Nothing says human biology has the same limitation.
It isn't an assumption.Quote:
Your assumption that human psionics does not equal Protoss psionics is just that -- an assumption.
The book, a canon source, agrees with me. :p
Yet, clearly the Firstborn novel has a small group of humans unwillingly join a mini-Khala.Quote:
It is stated nowhere in the book or Starcraft lore that there is a difference. Neither humans nor Dark Templar have what it takes to join a Khala.
So, you're wrong.
Christie Golden and Jacob Ramsey apparently.Quote:
Says who?
That's good enough for me.
Yeah, KJA turns everything he writes into shit.Quote:
Oh good, if you liked that book, I was going to be sorely disappointed.
The Dune Novels and the Star Wars Novels he wrote are pretty bad too.
He's just not a good writer.
There are some...sentences that have some good lore info, but for the most part?
The book is a bad summary of a SC1 edition of a Bronze League Heroes match taken seriously.
*sigh*Quote:
Originally Posted by Turalyon
Are we really doing this whole EU crap vs the original lore thing again?
I treat the whole canon as one single universe.
I get really tired of having to think of them as separate every single time I get on this site.
I'm not relying on just one source though.Quote:
This is an argument from ignorance especially considering when one is restricted to only having the source manual (which describes it definitively already) to rely on.
I'm relying on everything.
That is my position.
The books and the manual do not contradict each other.
Sure, whatever.Quote:
I've gone through the transcripts and the games (Sc1 and BW) never refer to the Khala as being the communal link directly so therefore I have to rely on the manual's description of it. Sure, you can interpret and infer that they've always been the same all you like but you have to realise that's hindsight bias based on the knowledge that all the recent stuff say they are the same.
Stating there's a contradiction when you can easily rationalize the problems away with a good explanation just rustles my jimmies.
You can call it hind-sight bias and be silly all you want. :p
Then your point must have escaped me.Quote:
I know the later EU trumps it because all of it says they're the same thing and its considered canon - that's not my point.
Har Har.Quote:
Back to your usual tricks, I see... Every time you make these type of arguments, I'm always reminded of Orwell's 1984 and doublethink. To not think that's there some degree of retroactive continuity going on here is borderline insane troll logic, so there's nothing that I can really do but just nod my head and agree with you to avoid a headache. I'll think I'll leave this quote from the book, so that the people who can, will enjoy the irony:
You know my PoV.
It isn't a retcon if the previous facts are still correct.
Addition-type Retcons are very plentiful.
Alteration-type Retcons are not. When I generally say retcon, I most definitely am referring to the Alteration kind.
I have no idea what you are insinuating.Quote:
To you that's like saying good is bad and bad is good, right? :p
Eh, should have quoted the Dragoon segment here:Quote:
Who said that philosophies don't have practical applications? I certainly didn't. It's a moot point to make regardless since I already said that the Khala is a means to use and maintain the psychic link. This does not necessarily mean they are the same. I'm not denying your right to reinterpret that it actually is though.
Sure, you'll probably say its just how they discipline their psionics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manual
Sure.Quote:
There's a bit of confirmation bias on your part here since it could also still make sense if you replaced "the Khala" (in that quote) with "their religion" or "Khas' philosophy". Because, you know, the Khala is "primarily meant to define a rigid system of behaviour".
It also makes more sense to me if you assume its a psychic link.
Besides, everyone on this planet has confirmation bias.
You did say so.Quote:
Never said you couldn't - especially given that's how they want us to interpret it now.
Every time you corrected me with "I must mean the psychic link and not the Khala."
[quote]
Given that you're a fan of re-interpretation,[/quote}
Is there a tone of derision I sense here?
Sure, go ahead.Quote:
one can say that the Khala "gives" energy by a form of catalysis and therefore, may not technically be the source of the energy. See, people can have other interpretations, too! :D
Wow...Shadow Archon, talking with you is making my head spin. In other words, TL;DR.
Actually, I did start to read it, but then lost the will to finish when you said this:
"Show, don't tell." is the number one principle about books. Christie Golden is a huge violator of this principle, though to be fair her worst example wasn't the Dark Templar trilogy. It's still an example, however. Like the bit about Khas you mention. It doesn't show how Khas created the Khala, it just has a few lines stating that it happened, before going on to Adun's life. So many things that would have been better explained out get one or two lines of mention, and that's supposed to count as backstory.Quote:
The books tell us Khas formed the Khala and one of the social reforms it created was the caste.
It does completely count.
Books are not movies. There is no rule about "Show, don't tell."
That, and you completely contradicted yourself.
Quote:
Who said Khaydarin Crystals were religious again?
Okay, so if the Khala is based on khaydarin crystals, as the book shows, then aren't you saying the crystals are religious? And if the crystals aren't religious, how does the book show that the Khala is a religion?Quote:
It pretty much shows that the Khala is a religion.
Alrighty then. Less work for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nissa
And I disagree about the importance of seeing the Caste system being formed as being important enough to be shown.Quote:
Actually, I did start to read it, but then lost the will to finish when you said this:
"Show, don't tell." is the number one principle about books.
Not everything will be shown in a book, and somethings you're just going to have leave in the exposition.
Uh, I didn't quote the whole thing with Khas though. There's a good bit more with him and the tribes later on, but I'm not going to start posting full chapters here.Quote:
Christie Golden is a huge violator of this principle, though to be fair her worst example wasn't the Dark Templar trilogy. It's still an example, however. Like the bit about Khas you mention. It doesn't show how Khas created the Khala, it just has a few lines stating that it happened, before going on to Adun's life. So many things that would have been better explained out get one or two lines of mention, and that's supposed to count as backstory.
With what?Quote:
That, and you completely contradicted yourself.
...You should really stop talking now.Quote:
Okay, so if the Khala is based on khaydarin crystals, as the book shows,
The. Khala. Is. Not. Based. On. Khaydarin. Crystals.
The Khala is based on the communal link, and they have become so intertwined, the very term "Path of Ascension" which in Khalani is Khala, refers to the link itself.
The crystals just jump-started the link. That's their role in the story. The entire belief is not centered on the crystals.
Just because it jump-started the link doesn't mean the link's very cornerstone is "PRAISE THE CRYSTAL!"
Nope.Quote:
then aren't you saying the crystals are religious?
Quote:
And if the crystals aren't religious, how does the book show that the Khala is a religion?
The religious connotations are all over the place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
Religous persecution for not following it. It being the meaning of life and the most important thing ever. It having certain times of the day where you meditate/pray.
And so on and so forth.
Also, about the whole human Khala thing:
So, the "mini-Khala" is very much diluted and weak compared to the real deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
Don't know what you're sighing about since the post that you initially responded to (#15) made it very clear that my position was based on the original/manual. Wasn't my fault if you couldn't comprehend it in the first place and went off on your own tangent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Oh, but they do. If we are to make steadfast arguments based on straight up facts and not relying on vague inferences, the original source clearly states the Khala is a religion/philosophy that relies on but is a separate thing from the psychic link. The later stuff say they are synonymous, therefore there is a contradiction. I know you can't see this but any other layman would.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Classic sign of denial right here. Rationalising a contradiction away does not make it not a contradiction. Someone saying that something was red when later they say it's green is still a contradiction even after you "rationalise" (or hopefully better, realise) they were red-green colour-blind in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Retcons are all the same to me in that they are all about reframing past events. They are neither good/bad inherently, only well/poorly implemented. It doesn't have to involve contradiction but those that do stick out more. The fact that an additive retcon does not actually change the previous facts does not mean it's still not a retcon (hence it's name....).Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Was just making a joke about when you say a word has multiple definitions, to you it would probably mean that the definition of one word could very well include its opposite. Hence, good is bad and bad is good. Eh, it's not good when I have to start explaining my jokes...Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
I have no reason not to given that the quote comes from the same manual that states the Khala is just a discipline/philosophy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
You would have no deductive reason to assume so until you got to the EU stuff (or started their first) that said otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
That was when I wasn't sure what your position was because you didn't categorically say they were synonymous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Do you want to interpret it that way? If so, then by all means, feel free to be offended. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Only, the formation of the castes is the most important detail. We already know that Adun helped the Dark Templar. What we don't know is why the Dark Templar felt the need to go to the extreme of severing themselves, or what the Khala did to provoke them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
This is a huge problem mainly because the book shows ~2000 years passing from the time the Khala was started to the Dark Templar's rebellion. If this rebellion did not happen immediately after widespread acceptance of the Khala, then some incident must have taken place for the Dark Templar to want to split off. Either the Conclave did something horrible, or a DT brought back older ways, or Nerazim, void-based belief emerged at this point. The DT Saga did not state that any of these things had happened, making it look like the Dark Templar just outright rebelled out of the blue.
Thus, the formation of the Khala is an important plot point, so that we understand (a) why the Khala needed to be guarded and (b) what specifically about the Khala made certain Protoss uncomfortable with it. You can say the Khala lacked individually all you like, but that is never shown in the book, and neither does Raszagal explain it to Adun, either.
I've read the books. Khas does not go into cultural detail. He's there to display his present-day (by his perspective) actions, not explain the workings of the Khala or the reason of the DT. He's therefore irrelevant to our discussion.Quote:
Uh, I didn't quote the whole thing with Khas though. There's a good bit more with him and the tribes later on, but I'm not going to start posting full chapters here.
*sigh* Please try to understand what I am saying.Quote:
The. Khala. Is. Not. Based. On. Khaydarin. Crystals.
The Khala is based on the communal link, and they have become so intertwined, the very term "Path of Ascension" which in Khalani is Khala, refers to the link itself.
The crystals just jump-started the link. That's their role in the story. The entire belief is not centered on the crystals.
Just because it jump-started the link doesn't mean the link's very cornerstone is "PRAISE THE CRYSTAL!"
I did at no point say that the crystals were objects of worship. The Khala came about because of these crystals, and is therefore based on them. Or was jumpstarted by them, if you feel my vocabulary was wrong.
I mentioned it because you claimed that the book explained the Khala. It did not. It explained how the crystals jumpstarted the Khala, and then jumped forward to Adun's time.
Now, if the Khala itself is religious, then the crystals themselves have a religious function, whether they are religious in origin or not. You can't separate the two and say one is religious and the other isn't.
I at no point denied religious connotations. I did deny that the ways of the Khala and Dark Templar were adequately described. The narrative can say "pray," "heretic," or so forth, but that doesn't mean they explain actual, concrete information about a religious belief.Quote:
The religious connotations are all over the place.
What I'm saying is, scale doesn't matter. The Khala can be small or large, but since it is dependent on the nerve cords, and no canon information has stated otherwise, we cannot conclude that whatever happened to Jake was the real Khala.Quote:
So, the "mini-Khala" is very much diluted and weak compared to the real deal.
Besides, your argument is based on the assumption that the Khala is merely a psychic link. Because your assumption is based on EU retconning, I cannot accept this argument. You haven't convinced Turalyon, and you haven't convinced me.
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turalyon
Your post wasn't clear.
I didn't know you were going by the manual, and only by the manual, and nothing but the manual.
Your complete intention to ignore all other canon was lost by me.
My mistake.
No it doesn'tQuote:
Oh, but they do. If we are to make steadfast arguments based on straight up facts and not relying on vague inferences, the original source clearly states the Khala is a religion/philosophy that relies on but is a separate thing from the psychic link.
It in no way states it is a separate thing from the psychic link.
That is what it would take for there to be a contradiction.
Luckily, the Khala being a religion/philosophy and the name for the psychic link itself are not mutually exclusive terminology.
Oh, look more insults.Quote:
The later stuff say they are synonymous, therefore there is a contradiction. I know you can't see this but any other layman would.
I would think any layman would see that the manual in no way states that the Khala is not a psychic link.
The books show us that the Khala is indeed the philosophy and religion from the manual, and that overtime it became synonymous with the mental and emotional link.
This does not contradict the manual at all.
...Of course it does.Quote:
Classic sign of denial right here. Rationalising a contradiction away does not make it not a contradiction.
If you can rationalize the "apparent" contradiction into a scenario where there is no contradiction, it is no contradiction.
I'm not denying anything.
Non-sequitur.Quote:
Someone saying that something was red when later they say it's green is still a contradiction even after you "rationalise" (or hopefully better, realise) they were red-green colour-blind in the first place.
That analogy has no relevance to this discussion.
It's more like this.
Martial arts is a way of life and a philosophy. This is correct.
Martial arts is a way to defend yourself. This too is correct.
These are not mutually exclusive definitions. They can be both.
Well, to me, contradictions are a bad thing that weakens my connection to the story while additions are not.Quote:
Retcons are all the same to me in that they are all about reframing past events. They are neither good/bad inherently, only well/poorly implemented. It doesn't have to involve contradiction but those that do stick out more. The fact that an additive retcon does not actually change the previous facts does not mean it's still not a retcon (hence it's name....).
So, from now on, I'll just say contradictions to be more precise.
Well, when your jokes are stupid and don't make sense...Quote:
Was just making a joke about when you say a word has multiple definitions, to you it would probably mean that the definition of one word could very well include its opposite. Hence, good is bad and bad is good. Eh, it's not good when I have to start explaining my jokes...
Whatever.Quote:
I have no reason not to given that the quote comes from the same manual that states the Khala is just a discipline/philosophy.
And nothing is stopping me from using the EU in every and all my debates. Nothing in your original post dictated I couldn't use it...so...Quote:
You would have no deductive reason to assume so until you got to the EU stuff (or started their first) that said otherwise.
<.<
My position is that all canon is evidence, and that they all are a collective one whole.Quote:
That was when I wasn't sure what your position was because you didn't categorically say they were synonymous.
Therefore, I don't ignore the EU and go strictly by the Manual. I don't even see the EU as an outsider to the games. They are of equal importance as far as I'm concerned.
I go by all canon everywhere.
As such, "correcting me" seems pretty gosh darn silly.
Oh, you don't have to be an aloof ass already.Quote:
Do you want to interpret it that way? If so, then by all means, feel free to be offended. :p
That's, again, your opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nissa
Individuality.Quote:
We already know that Adun helped the Dark Templar. What we don't know is why the Dark Templar felt the need to go to the extreme of severing themselves, or what the Khala did to provoke them.
It's gone over a few times in both Shadow Hunters and Twilight.
If you can't understand that, this is not my fault.
What an odd conclusion.Quote:
This is a huge problem mainly because the book shows ~2000 years passing from the time the Khala was started to the Dark Templar's rebellion. If this rebellion did not happen immediately after widespread acceptance of the Khala, then some incident must have taken place for the Dark Templar to want to split off.
No incident occurred.
Those that wanted to distance themselves from the Khala did so on their own for their own reasons.
The Dark Templar simply didn't immerse themselves from the Khala. If the Conclave never forced the issue, there never would have been any mass exodus.Quote:
Either the Conclave did something horrible, or a DT brought back older ways, or Nerazim, void-based belief emerged at this point. The DT Saga did not state that any of these things had happened, making it look like the Dark Templar just outright rebelled out of the blue.
They could have co-existed then as they do now.
So, it's not what I would call a "rebellion." There was no armed resistance designed to destroy the Khala. Of course, the Conclave jumped to that conclusion...but that's neither here or there.
[quote]
Thus, the formation of the Khala is an important plot point, so that we understand (a) why the Khala needed to be guarded and (b) what specifically about the Khala made certain Protoss uncomfortable with it.[/qutoe]
Which we already both know.
Actually, she does.Quote:
You can say the Khala lacked individually all you like, but that is never shown in the book, and neither does Raszagal explain it to Adun, either.
We just aren't privy to the conversation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
As for statements about individuality:
That's it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Hunters
They didn't wish to immerse themselves in the Khala as other Protoss do daily.
If you don't think this is an adequate explanation...well, that would be, again, just your opinion.
I'm pretty sure we see Protoss culture pre-Khala and post-Khala just fine.Quote:
I've read the books. Khas does not go into cultural detail.
That's not what you stated.Quote:
He's there to display his present-day (by his perspective) actions, not explain the workings of the Khala or the reason of the DT. He's therefore irrelevant to our discussion.
You stated, "It does not show Khas create the Khala."
But it does.
Now, you're talking about him explaining the Khala.
The Khala is thoroughly explained my multiple Protoss in all three damn books.
So, again, I've come to the conclusion that you didn't read the books, or simply didn't pay attention.
Wrong.Quote:
*sigh* Please try to understand what I am saying.
I did at no point say that the crystals were objects of worship. The Khala came about because of these crystals, and is therefore based on them.
The Khala as a philosophy and religion is not based on the crystals.
Yes.Quote:
Or was jumpstarted by them, if you feel my vocabulary was wrong.
That is where you were wrong.Quote:
I mentioned it because you claimed that the book explained the Khala. It did not. It explained how the crystals jumpstarted the Khala, and then jumped forward to Adun's time.
I quoted a whole spiel about how the Khala worked up above before Adun's time.
And in Adun's time, the expand on how the Khala works as well.
Of course you totally can.Quote:
Now, if the Khala itself is religious, then the crystals themselves have a religious function, whether they are religious in origin or not. You can't separate the two and say one is religious and the other isn't.
The Crystals are no longer necessary in maintaining the Khala. After they used the Crystal in the beginning, Protoss were naturally born into the Khala. They stated this.
The Crystals are mostly used for practical applications, and as we saw with Stetmann in SC2, those applications are extremely insane.
*sigh*Quote:
I at no point denied religious connotations. I did deny that the ways of the Khala and Dark Templar were adequately described. The narrative can say "pray," "heretic," or so forth, but that doesn't mean they explain actual, concrete information about a religious belief.
We'll just have to agree to disagree here.
I felt that they were adequately explained in the novel's length.
You don't.
Well...I never called it a real Khala...so?Quote:
What I'm saying is, scale doesn't matter. The Khala can be small or large, but since it is dependent on the nerve cords, and no canon information has stated otherwise, we cannot conclude that whatever happened to Jake was the real Khala.
Attachment 2396Quote:
Besides, your argument is based on the assumption that the Khala is merely a psychic link.
So, you're flat out ignoring canon you don't like?Quote:
Because your assumption is based on EU retconning, I cannot accept this argument. You haven't convinced Turalyon, and you haven't convinced me.
That's fine.
This conversation is over then.
There's no point in arguing if you get to arbitrarily ignore canon info you don't like.
No, it is fact. The entire basis of the second book's flashbacks was to explain the rift between the DTs and Khala 'Toss. If there is no clear definition of either group's beliefs, there is no sound basis for the split between the two.Quote:
That's, again, your opinion.
Wow, no wonder you misinterpret the manual. It's not whether or not I understand why the DTs split, it's whether or not the split was adequately shown. It was not, and your denial of the term "show, don't tell" is proof enough that the books did not show much of anything.Quote:
Individuality.
It's gone over a few times in both Shadow Hunters and Twilight.
If you can't understand that, this is not my fault.
...The "for their own reasons" part is the problem. If the DT really were a huge threat to the Khala, what makes them a threat? If they are not a threat, then why does the Conclave believe they are? There clearly has to be some sort of motivating factor for the DT to choose severance. If the book is about the split, then DT motivation is highly important to the book. No competent writer can allow "for their own reasons" as an excuse.Quote:
What an odd conclusion.
No incident occurred.
Those that wanted to distance themselves from the Khala did so on their own for their own reasons.
Eh, I just refer to it as a rebellion because that's a simple term. Either it was a rebellion, or the Conclave thought it was one.Quote:
The Dark Templar simply didn't immerse themselves from the Khala. If the Conclave never forced the issue, there never would have been any mass exodus.
They could have co-existed then as they do now.
So, it's not what I would call a "rebellion." There was no armed resistance designed to destroy the Khala. Of course, the Conclave jumped to that conclusion...but that's neither here or there.
Quote:
Thus, the formation of the Khala is an important plot point, so that we understand (a) why the Khala needed to be guarded and (b) what specifically about the Khala made certain Protoss uncomfortable with it.
We only know the general basics of what happened. That is, whatever the manual described plus any information included in Starcraft. Given that we already know Adun helped the Dark Templar, and Christie Golden felt the need to create a more detailed account of this part of Starcraft lore, then she needed to create a proper basis for the split, and at bare minimum explain the original spark of how the Khala/DT conflict came into being.Quote:
Which we already both know.
She does not explain it to the reader. Christie instead, as your quote indicates, does not allow the reader to see important motivations that would not only heighten the tension of the book, but explain from the perspective of a non-Conclave member why the DT are doing what they're doing. In other words, this was a really stupid choice on Christie Golden's part.Quote:
Actually, she does.
We just aren't privy to the conversation.
You should stop quoting the book. None of these are helping your point. LOOK at what's there. Christie is simply saying that their opinions "had merit." She not actually allowing these characters to state their meritious opinions. It's also odd that she's not showing the Judicator going after the DT in the first place, and how they acquired their info on the DT.Quote:
That's it.
They didn't wish to immerse themselves in the Khala as other Protoss do daily.
If you don't think this is an adequate explanation...well, that would be, again, just your opinion.
This is not storytelling. This is summary.
EXACTLY. We aren't seeing how the Khala's political system came into being, and how it gave the Judicator the right to rule the others.Quote:
I'm pretty sure we see Protoss culture pre-Khala and post-Khala just fine.
You're definitely not a writer. Please pay attention to what I am actually saying. The DT Saga flashbacks show Khas touching the crystal. He is apparently enlightened, and this somehow creates the modern Protoss political system. We never see this process, because the flashbacks then skip ahead to Adun's time, when the Khala is fully formed and accepted by the general populace. The flashbacks went from A to Z, without touching on any of the letters in-between.Quote:
That's not what you stated.
You stated, "It does not show Khas create the Khala."
But it does.
Now, you're talking about him explaining the Khala.
The Khala is thoroughly explained my multiple Protoss in all three damn books.
So, again, I've come to the conclusion that you didn't read the books, or simply didn't pay attention.
The crystals caused the Khala, according to the DT Saga. How is it not based on the crystals? You can't expect me to listen to you when you fail in basic logic. Calling me wrong does not make me so. That, and stop splitting up my quotes when they were in the same paragraph, because when ideas are in the same paragraph, they are meant to be taken together. If you object to my using "based on" as a descriptor, then accept "sparked by" instead. The crystals are inherently connected to the Khala, because the Khala came about by Savassan touching them.Quote:
Wrong.
The Khala as a philosophy and religion is not based on the crystals.
Did you even read the books? Khas' actions brought about the start of the Khala. Therefore, there was no Khala before Khas.Quote:
That is where you were wrong.
I quoted a whole spiel about how the Khala worked up above before Adun's time.
And in Adun's time, the expand on how the Khala works as well.
Your opinion is beside the point. The book called it the Khala, so it was presuming that humans were capable of the Khala. This therefore weakens the credibility of the entire book, because humans are not capable of the Khala.Quote:
Well...I never called it a real Khala...so?
"invalid attachment specified"Quote:
So, you're flat out ignoring canon you don't like?
You bet I am. When a foolish book writes that humans can obtain the Khala, there's no reason for me to take it seriously. Blizzard contradicts itself when it allows books to become canon that directly contradict previous lore. You yourself dislike Shadow of the Xel'Naga, which is a piece of crap book. It shows a Judicator and his crew demonizing the DT after a time when most of their people at the time of the setting have already accepted shelter on Shakuras. It has Kerrigan being distracted by triviality when she, at that time, would have been on Shakuras trying to interfere with the Protoss. How can I take "canon" seriously when Blizzard so readily publishes nonsense?
Yeah, I'm done arguing this.
I'll just wrap this up a bit on what I consider important enough to comment on.
...I said Adun, not Khas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nissa
We see the very beginning of the Khala with Khas.
Way to miss the quote that outright says what happened was not the real deal.Quote:
Your opinion is beside the point. The book called it the Khala, so it was presuming that humans were capable of the Khala. This therefore weakens the credibility of the entire book, because humans are not capable of the Khala.
We'll just have to agree to disagree.Quote:
You bet I am. When a foolish book writes that humans can obtain the Khala, there's no reason for me to take it seriously. Blizzard contradicts itself when it allows books to become canon that directly contradict previous lore. You yourself dislike Shadow of the Xel'Naga, which is a piece of crap book. It shows a Judicator and his crew demonizing the DT after a time when most of their people at the time of the setting have already accepted shelter on Shakuras. It has Kerrigan being distracted by triviality when she, at that time, would have been on Shakuras trying to interfere with the Protoss. How can I take "canon" seriously when Blizzard so readily publishes nonsense?
I'm not carrying this on anymore because clearly our preferences are different in how we approached the novel what we wanted from it.
That, and the novel sucked. :D
Well, some people got some enjoyment out of it, but it was pretty loose with both lore and character building. Zeratul was particularly whiny.
To be clear(er) - I'm only writing the following in defense of being implied as a liar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
This was followed with a quote from the manual and then my thoughts on the matter (where I also happened to "according to the manual" in there).Quote:
Originally Posted by Turalyon
I then finished with a query: "then the books changed everything, I suppose?" with the implication that I don't know about the influence of what the books and that, yes, indeed my opinion was based on the manual. Which I prefaced with the my own quote provided. Can't see why it's not clear that I wasn't basing my position by the manual.
Now I know you're trolling. When something is defined, say in a dictionary, part of a given words definition does not have to include what it is not. For example, the word "heat" is defined as the quality of being hot; high temperature. According to your logic, because it did not state that "heat" is not "fire" (or any other word really), then they're not separate things. Because those two words are also not mutually exclusive because they are related, then I can use those terms interchangeably every time, right? "Fire before serving" and "Heat truck" won't be catching on anytime soon...Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Strange, that wasn't an insult or an attempt at me being funny. Merely stating that a complete SC neophyte (a layman) can see that the Khala and the psychic link are related but not the same thing based on the manual. As to the part of you "not seeing it", it's an observation based on your presented position.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Correct, but this does not also mean the Khala is the psychic link.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Therefore, they were not synonymous to begin with. Finally, we're getting somewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
I'm not denying anything.[/QUOTE]Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Now it's my turn... Le sigh.... I see you failed to understand the why I gave that example.
I can do this, too! Non-sequitur. That analogy has no relevance to this discussion. The quote you are replying to is talking about the nature and definition of a contradiction, which was in reply to your quote about being angry that people notice contradictions even when there's a handwave for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
I would think that if you use the logic that you've presented here and in the past, you would never have had to suffer a contradiction ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
...says the guy with warped logic. Yay! Insult meets insult!Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Non-sequitur (ooh, a second one). I was stating that part of why there's confusion is because the current accepted theory of the Khala being synonymous with the psychic link only came after the initial definition explained it already. Before this stuff came about, you would have no evidence to support the claim that they are synonymous beyond speculation. I'm trying to explain the continuum/time-line of though in regards to that position.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
What can I say? I'm a pretty silly guy....Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
I'll have to make a mental note that ShadowArchon should always be assumed to be correct at all times.
Yes, I do. It's my profession.... Seriously, it says so in my profile.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
*sigh* And it's also clear that you'll interpret both the book and what I'm saying the way you want to hear it, not what either actually are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
I never implied you were liar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turalyon
I implied you weren't being very clear.
Right.Quote:
This was followed with a quote from the manual and then my thoughts on the matter (where I also happened to "according to the manual" in there).
Because nothing was contradicted.Quote:
I then finished with a query: "then the books changed everything, I suppose?" with the implication that I don't know about the influence of what the books and that, yes, indeed my opinion was based on the manual. Which I prefaced with the my own quote provided. Can't see why it's not clear that I wasn't basing my position by the manual.
This is why I jumped on it.
The books hardly changed everything.
And the rest of this post is irrelevant because this is not in a dictionary that shows a full definition and this is not a common term being defined.Quote:
Now I know you're trolling. When something is defined, say in a dictionary,
It is a brief summary of a made-up word that defines a religion and philosophy.
If another piece of lore states it has more than one meaning, it totally has that right to do so, and in no way contradicts the original definition if it is also true.
Yeah, no.Quote:
part of a given words definition does not have to include what it is not. For example, the word "heat" is defined as the quality of being hot; high temperature. According to your logic, because it did not state that "heat" is not "fire" (or any other word really), then they're not separate things. Because those two words are also not mutually exclusive because they are related, then I can use those terms interchangeably every time, right? "Fire before serving" and "Heat truck" won't be catching on anytime soon...
Way to completely straw-man my argument into something completely stupid.
Heat is a term that has an explicit definition based on natural phenomenon. It is not any kind of philosophy/religion that was created by a mortal person to define a way of life and grew and evolved over time into psionic discipline and became a term for the psychic link itself.
Honestly, the only reason I feel you want to even argue this is so you can just complain "They changed it, and now it sucks."
Yes, because the books explicitly state that "Yes, it is the psychic link."Quote:
Strange, that wasn't an insult or an attempt at me being funny. Merely stating that a complete SC neophyte (a layman) can see that the Khala and the psychic link are related but not the same thing based on the manual. As to the part of you "not seeing it", it's an observation based on your presented position.
That's what the EU books are for.Quote:
Correct, but this does not also mean the Khala is the psychic link.
Ergo, no contradiction in the end.
We don't have to know every single little detail in the Khala in the first source that talks about it.
...But they are synonymous in the modern time...which is what we are talking about from the OP before we got on this horrible off-topic spiel.Quote:
Therefore, they were not synonymous to begin with. Finally, we're getting somewhere.
I never stated that "At the very beginning with Khas the Khala was the psychic link."
I stated that the Khala is synonymous with the link. Which it is now in modern Starcraft, and has been so since the time of Adun.
Well, when your example is wrong...Quote:
Now it's my turn... Le sigh.... I see you failed to understand the why I gave that example.
It's not a non-sequitur. It has completely more relevance than your analogy.Quote:
I can do this, too! Non-sequitur. That analogy has no relevance to this discussion.
The Khala is a complex social construct that evolved and grew over time in something beyond what it originally was. Not a color.
It's not a handwave.Quote:
The quote you are replying to is talking about the nature and definition of a contradiction, which was in reply to your quote about being angry that people notice contradictions even when there's a handwave for them.
There is a perfectly good reason to explain it.
...Man, if you want me to point out Starcraft contradictions that I admit are flat-out unexplainable contradictions, I can do that all day.Quote:
I would think that if you use the logic that you've presented here and in the past, you would never have had to suffer a contradiction ever.
The Queen of Blades book and the Zerg campaign are at complete odds in how they portray events in pretty much every single level.
The manual/I'Mengsk/Liberty's Crusades have Tarsonis launch nukes at Korhal form planet-to-planet, while Uprising has them bombard the planet from orbit with Battle Cruisers.
Liberty's Crusade never mentions the Magistrate at all.
Uprising has Wraiths and Battlecruisers equipped with shields, and states Battlecruisers can't fire with their guns side-ways...
The use of Warp Space Engines in both Queen of Blades and Uprising contradict.
And so on and so forth.
These are issues that are much more blatant than something so tame as an additional definition.
Why are you talking to yourself?Quote:
...says the guy with warped logic.
You keep using that word.Quote:
Non-sequitur (ooh, a second one).
I don't think it means what you think it means.
Well that was never clear in any of your posts. Just saying "According to the manual" and "Then the books changed everything, huh?" doesn't convey this at all.Quote:
I was stating that part of why there's confusion is because the current accepted theory of the Khala being synonymous with the psychic link only came after the initial definition explained it already. Before this stuff came about, you would have no evidence to support the claim that they are synonymous beyond speculation. I'm trying to explain the continuum/time-line of though in regards to that position.
Do you intentionally interpret my statements into something they're not?Quote:
What can I say? I'm a pretty silly guy....
I'll have to make a mental note that ShadowArchon should always be assumed to be correct at all times.
The EU states they are the same. Ergo, you can't correct me using just the manual.
It has nothing to do with you assuming I must be an arrogant ass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sen8Tn8CBA4Quote:
Yes, I do. It's my profession.... Seriously, it says so in my profile.
There is no one correct above-all interpretation of any work of fiction, so, there is no "what the book actually is." Death of the author and all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nissa
If I misunderstood what you were saying, however, I'm sorry.
I like the book very much, and felt it fits with the canon fine. It is a great book.
This is my opinion. I'm not going to argue on its validity anymore, because we seem to keep clashing opinions, which is ultimately fruitless.
So, I'm not carrying on the argument over something I have to keep quoting again and again, when ultimately, you've already have your mind set on what you think about it.
Sooo... does anyone have a link to that video that states the lore behind the Disruptors?
Make up your mind. "Nothing contradicted" implies no change and "hardly changed" acknowledges something becoming different from before and therefore contradiction can exist. And I'm the one that's unclear...Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
It's only irrelevant because you fail at seeing the point. Examples are meant to illustrate the point I was making - they are not the literal argument. I can't believe I even have to make that clarification....Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
"Whoosh" goes the point as it flies clean over Shadow Archon's head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Nice way to self-demonstrate a straw-man argument in the same comment you accuse me of doing it. Just because you fail to understand another persons opinion doesn't mean you just attribute it to something else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
I never said "it sucked". I actually don't mind the Khala now being synonymous with the psychic link. The original post from which all this stemmed was to highlight a difference between then and now. All I'm doing is trying to explain that position and here you are kicking up a stink and accusing me of just saying "oh, it's really just you saying it sucks".
That's part of the point of I'm making. Someone starting out with SC in the proper order doesn't have this privileged knowledge yet so can therefore only assume they're different things in the beginning. If they fail to go on to books and then all of sudden see it as being the same in the next game, a contradiction will exist. Such people are not wrong in thinking this if they don't know they have to read the books to get information that, while more conclusive, is not entirely necessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Exactly. What we are given initially in the manual seems conclusive such that one is not aware of the detail that they are actually synonymous. A detail only confirmed later, if at all, by a SC neophyte. Saying "you should of read the books" is pointless because if one is presented with the original explanation with no further questions, why go seeking for another answer to a question (is the Khala really a separate thing from the psychic link?) that doesn't exist?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
I was initially responding to Nissa's comment that the Khala was not defined for the original Sc/BW. It was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Wrong? The example was demonstrating my point of someone/thing stating one thing first and another thing later as still being a contradiction despite a reason why the contradiction happened in the first place, exists. Are you willfully misunderstanding that concept in order to troll me? If so, bravo!Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
You were ignoring the example given to demonstrate the point I was making initially (see above) to then illogically shift it to an irrelevent example to a point you only just ended up making now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Way to miss the point again!Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
I didn't want you to. Just surprised that you can't just use the combined canon to fanon it a way like most other things. Using your logic, newer lore trumps older law such that since the books come later and give new information, they should always take precedent. Such that even if they are talking about the original campaigns, the book is really just fleshing out what wasn't really said or correcting what was said in the original game itself. I could easily whitewash anything any of those examples you gave using the very same "logic" that you use. I won't because it will give me a severe case of cognitive dissonance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Did you mean to say "Why are you talking about yourself?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Oh noes everyone! I've gone and done it again! I'm trying to correct Shadow Archon. Oh, woe is me and the wrath he shall bring upon me!
*In robot voice* Does not compute! (Ka-Boom)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Eh, I was just making fun with that reply. Surprised you didn't tag me for mocking you this time. You seemed so astute before.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Archon
Okay. Okay. Okay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turalyon
Let's take a step back here. No more insults on my part, for which I apologize.
This argument is completely beyond the scope of this thread and horribly off topic. I really shouldn't have ever opened my mouth about what the Khala is if I knew it would drag out like this, but, you live and learn.
You keep telling me that I'm missing the point of whatever it is your saying. So, let's fix that.
What was your original point?
Because mine, which I feel is unclear to you in relation to your point, is this:
I just felt like talking about the Khala having abilities beyond what Demo simply stated about it. He said it was just a telepathic link open all the time. I wanted to talk about it in a bit more detail going by several sources, such as Cold Symmetry, Queen of Blades, and the Dark Templar Saga.
And then attributed that whole bit as a direct reply to your quoted comment.
This, obviously, was a mistake.
I should have quoted Demo first-off, and stated what I wanted there.
I probably should have just put your quote at the end of the post to not confuse, because it apparently did. I was explicitly mentioning what Demo called the Khala, and Demo was going off of the Khala = psychic link too.
In no part of my mind was I considering "Only going by the manual" in your post, only "the changed everything bit."
That's why I only quoted your part. I didn't need to comment you on correcting Nissa about the Khala being defined there.
All I was telling to you directly was this:
"Not really.
The manual and the Dark Templar Saga's description of the events go together fine. You would have to specifically interpret it in odd ways to make any contradiction.
There is the added significance of Khas (re)discovering Khaydarin Crystals which helped him come up with the idea when his telepathy was boosted by it, but that's about it."
And after looking through the manual again, my last comment is wrong, since the Khaydarin Crystal bit is in the there as well.
The rest of my post was not directed at you specifically, but to anyone in general.
As for the only thing I did quote you about:
"Course, the books then had to go and change everything, I suppose?"
Which, I still think this is a false statement, considering the manual's Khala definition applies specifically to when Khas created it. It is not defined again after this point. The Book's definition where it defines it as a psyhic link is going by the time of Adun's definition of it where it specifically states the definition changed over time.
This is a retcon of the addition kind but not of the contradicting kind.
The manual describes it as a philosophy and a religion.
The books say the same thing and expand on it later chronologically by saying the name became synonymous with the psychic link.
I never intended any challenge over "You can totally get the definition of it being the psychic link from the Manual alone."
I merely was saying, the current lore's definition of the Khala doesn't change what the manual states about it in any significant way since that definition is kept as well.
Is this more clear?
Edited.
Tura, did you read one of my later posts? I corrected myself to say that the Khala wasn't well defined in the beginning, it was kept intentionally vague, without explaining why the castes formed, or what specific ceremonies/daily philosophies were involved.
Ah, okay, it's much easier to talk now that it's just a description of opinions rather than trying to one up each other with corrections. That being said, I'm still going to be annoying. It's what I do.
Okay, so Shadow, you're saying that the Khala went from a political/religious philosophy to a psychic link, yes? Uh, it kinda seemed like the opposite to me. That is, when Savassan touched the Khaydarin crystals, his mind was opened in a way that allowed the psychic link to happen, and then the philosophy of unity through this psychic link formed over time. Or so the book makes it look, absent of anything the manual says. I need to read the manual again, because the story seemed somewhat different there.
*goes to look.*