Talk: Blaster/Legends

Article milestones Date Process Result February 16, 2006 Improvement drive candidate Failure June 4, 2006 Improvement drive candidate Failure September 15, 2006 Improvement drive candidate Success October 8, 2006 Improvement drive February 25, 2011 Good article nomination Failure February 27, 2011 Failed Good article nominee
Current status: Failed Good article nominee

Image

Does anyone know why this image thing isn't working. I thought I understood it, but now, who knows.--Kosure 21:55, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• The last time that I added an image it took a little bit of time for it to show up. It was rather odd. It eventually seemed to fix itself. -- Aidje 22:01, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

---

"Some of the gas used to generate the beam is energized to a plasma state and is fired with the highly energized light at supra-light velocities, perhaps partially in hyperspace." Is there a source on this? I always thought they were fairly slow, at least compared to bullets, so they could be dodged somewhat. In the movies, they take frames to get where they're going, which is way slower than light.-LtNOWIS 00:50, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

• Indeed, the books do speak of bolts being dodged, at least in the books I've read. There's also the thing you mentioned about the films. This doesn't seem accurate. – Aidje _talk 03:36, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
  • The Technical Commentaries suggest that it's near lightspeed. I'll post a link to the External Links section. --GenkiNeko 11:16, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• There are instances in the films of Jedi moving to deflect bolts after leaving the weapon, so they must be no where near lightspeed. --Fade 11:52, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• I think that because it is obvious that blaster bolts can be seen much before they actually hit their targets in the films, that the part about blasters showing damage before the bolt is seen, should be put in an aside or taken out altogether. Where does that information come from anyway? Lt santa anna 06:01, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  • Totally. The blaster bolt is a sublightspeed charged-particle bolt. It's also never mentioned that the "laser charging" technique is used as described, although it probably does occur in the laser and turbolaser cannons, giving rise to the name.--The Erl of Blastech
  • A blaster bolt would necessarily have to be comprised of more than just a laser beam. Laser beams are invisible when viewed on edge for the very reason that all the light is pointed in one direction, with as little diffusion as possible. That's why laser-communication can't be intercepted. Blaster bolts have been variously defined as consisting solely of high-energy plasma or a combination of a laser beam plus plasma. It is the heat of the plasma that radiates the visible light. Enochf 21:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC) (innit?)

---

"Because the bolt traveled at faster-than-light speeds, targets could show signs of damage before the visible portion of the bolt hit. This was because the visible portion, as well as most of the heat, was a side-effect of the actual, lethal bolt." Is there an IU source for this? I know it has been proposed by the tech commentaries, but I'm not sure if there's anything more substantial to support it. --Fade 21:26, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I can recall at least two instances where damage occurs a split second before the visual component makes contact: Luke's cybernetic hand being hit on the sail barge in RotJ, and when Yoda just barely avoids getting hit by a stray bolt on Kashyyyk in RotS.--Spanky The Dolphin 21:53, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  • Filmography like that doesn't really count. It was an error. --The Erl of Blastech
• The bolt cannot possibly travel faster than C... E=mc2
• Um- The point directly above me is completely bullock because the characters of the Star Wars saga travel faster than light on a day-to-day basis

---

Hey, i just edited the "so was the heat" portion, because the heat is what killed the person, not anything else (look at the stormtrooper's chest when Han shoots him, the armor melts, then explodes into his chest). Also, i suggest altering the "faster than light" thing as well, i am positive that they are slower than light, but whatever. Also, disruptor rifles are different from blaster's, i thought. Aren't they beams that "disrupt" the bond between atoms in a person's body, so they're effectively (and painfully, which is why theyre banned) disintegrated? - Mirage

• According to the Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology, disruptors just use brute force for their power-LtNOWIS 04:42, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • I think they meant that metaphorically; their operating principles are different according to the Arms and Equipment Guide: "A disruptor wave, on the other hand [from blasters], is a series of nonharmonic vibrations that excite the molecules of the target, causing them to lose cohesion and come apart." jSarek 04:56, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Yeah....

They're called blaster bolts, not laser beams.

---

I moved the Obi-Wan quote, because i thought it was more historical than technical. I hope that's ok, i know it's only minor really. Crazymoon 21:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

---

The bolt is just to hold the light part, except for plasma projectors, which almost completely melt and are mostly hot metal. Those are good against armor and droids, but so much against people.

In a live blaster bolt, the light rotates around the bolt. The closer the light is, the hotter the bolt is (plasma pro.^^^) I'm not sure if this was the Lucas intension, but I think that the light is charged (not sure how, but light is two electromagnetic waves, so weaken one, and it is charged). Then the bolt is the oposite charge. Then, the light is atracted to the bolt, but is moving to fast to touch the bolt, so it spin around at light speed!

A lightsaber can deflect bolts becaue the blade is the same charge as the light in the bolt-blast.

If Wiki doesn't show enough about light/and or lasers, go to howstuffworks.com. They describe light pretty good.

Neutrality

• Well, this article seems pretty biased, with the quote in the last section, the bias of blasters over lasers, and the rather poignant favoritism of Han's blaster. That's hardly NPOV. Also need serious expansion, but it's already up for I-Drive. Atarumaster88 ^{(Audience Chamber)} 19:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Appearances

Wait a minute, blasters show up in most EU stories, but not all of them? I didn't think that there were any EU stories that took place before the invention of blasters; shouldn't any book/comic/whatever that doesn't include at least one blaster be listed, just for its rarity value? Jwebb13 00:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• We should start an "Exceptions" list for any stories, games, etc. that blasters don't appear in (if any). —Xwing328^(Talk) 14:10, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Categories

Should a section be added for blaster carbines or should examples of the type just be included on the blaster rifle page? Jwebb13 02:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Under the heading "Blaster Mechanics", there are about 3 paragraphs on blaster mechanics, but they are scattered while the rest are actually about different blaster types. Perhaps it should be re-organized so that the mechanics are more logically connected first with types of blasters being a sub-point or a following heading. DarthSideoftheMoon 18:50, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

And now that I'm looking at it "blaster mechanics" actually come under the larger heading of "laser mechanics", and while canon dictates that they are related, it would seem that the larger heading should be "blaster mechanics" with "laser mechanics" being an explanatory sub-point... DarthSideoftheMoon 18:53, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

5.1 and 5.2 Grammar and Factual correction: Lasers are real

I was reading the Laser Mechanics section when something occurred to me: Did anyone besides me know that lasers are in fact real, not just an invention of science-fiction??? And they're not just real, they're all over the place: Bar-code scanners, laser pointers (duh), etc. However, for some reason the writer of the "Laser Mechanics" section placed all the verbs in past tense (implying that lasers are not real), and had some of his facts wrong.

To rectify these, I changed the verbs in that section to present tense and made factual corrections. StarSword 15:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• • no...the lasers here are laserly charged particle bolts, completly different id think from sanners :P Jedi Dude 15:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• • Wrong on two points, Jedi Dude: First off, it explains right below the "Laser Mechanics" section in the "Blaster Mechanics" section the difference between traditional lasers and Star Wars blasters. Secondly, the US government is currently researching laser weapons. The difference between the laser in the YAL-1A (a laser-armed 747 capable of shooting down ballistic missiles (I'm not making this up)) and the laser in a barcode scanner is merely one of scale. Yes, blasters are not traditional lasers in that they are particle bolts charged by a laser, but the laser itself is produced the same way as the lasers in this century.

StarSword 13:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• • StarSword, you seem to be unaware of our policy that all in-universe topics are written in past tense. See the Manual of Style. Whether or not the ABL program exists (and yes, I know ALL about it), in this case laser weapons are in-universe, and are written in past tense. See also the articles on things like oxygen. Do they exist on Earth and in Star Wars? Yes. Are they still written in past tense? Yes. Atarumaster88 ^{(Audience Chamber)} 19:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

P.S. And all roads lead to Rome, which basically means that although the basic principles of lasers are still present, different mediums/materials/construction methods may be used that give Star Wars lasers quite a large difference from Terran lasers. I mean, there's a considerable difference just between our Class I and Class IV lasers, so a laser from another galaxy could exhibit considerable variation. Atarumaster88 ^{(Audience Chamber)} 19:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I wasn't aware of that. StarSword 12:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Well, all of us were unaware at some point. Happy editing. :-) Atarumaster88 ^{(Audience Chamber)} 22:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Just check Wiki. I'm a geek, more than normal, so I know this crap.

Merge Blaster Variants

I was looking at the articles for each of the variants and all but the Repeating blaster were rather short. I was wondering if they should a be merged into this article? Reignfire 02:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

What causes blaster bolt color

The article has nothing to say about what causes blaster bolts to be green, blue, or red (or any other colors they might come in). I know it's caused by the blaster gas, but I was hoping for more information.

• well you hoped wrong.
  • There's probably something on laser colours here, likely something to do with the setting of the laser's wavelenths. As for the second poster, there's no need to be rude, nor to post when you don't have anything of relevance to add - \\Captain Kwenn// ^{— Ahoy!} 18:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• I'm guessing, but I think that the light made inside is just different frequencies of light. It's just like in a laser. You can probably find that on Wiki. Technicaly, you don't need a gas inside. Red laser light can be made with flash bulb and ruby. I guess the same woks in a lightsaber.

It's like a laser pointer. When the light is created, it can be any color, and changed to any color. It could be white even, but not black. Black isn't a light, black is lack of light.

• I seem to remember a source mentioning that the type of gas used determines the color, which is why Rebel and Imperial blaster bolts are different- the two sides were getting gas from different sources. I'll look for a source on this and update if I find it. —Unsigned comment by 68.116.52.190 (talk • contribs)

Handheld Blaster Power

Can someone give me an accurate estimate of a rifle or pistol blaster's firepower (NOT the ridiculously overpowered types like disruptors)? For example, Rukh's blaster knocked down a house in Heir to the Empire, and it was only a regular blaster, yet blaster bolts hitting various surfaces in the other books, films, etc. doesn't show quite that much power (except Han Solo's DL-44,, of course). 82 Airborne^Tac-Com "All the Way!" 22:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• If I recall correctly he needed several/many shots.

A blaster shot is super hot. Imagine heat enough to melt a half inch of steel or more, in a tiny ball the size of a marble.

History (Or Lack Therof)

Can anyone tell me when blaster technology first came into being? This information on the triple blaster makes no sense to me. In what context was it mentioned in Star Wars Galaxies? I've been scouring the Internets for answers but little comes up. I somehow assumed more information would be available, blaster technology must have dramatically changed the Galaxy, right? —Ortchel 06:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• Well, the article mentions that the Rakatans had the oldest known blaster, so I suppose we can assume that they invented it? Lalala la 21:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Recoil

Do blasters have recoil? The video games seem to indicate this, but is there any info on how this works? Or on how strong it is? I mean, there are plenty of occurrences where people use dual blaster pistols, but if the recoil was as strong as real life, they would break their wrists, indicating that whatever recoil suffered is very small. DarthMRN 11:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

• Yeah your right, although now that you bring it up, i've seen it in both the movies and the games. Like when Han Solo fires his blaster with one hand, there is noticable recoil, but when the stormtroopers fire their E-11's with 2 hands it seems to nullify the recoil considerabley. Also Han's blaster was modified considerabley, so that may also be an issue with his higher recoil. Also in instances with Droideka's when their arms fire, they recoil, and when clones fire their DC-15a's they recoil back slightly. Also yes, in the games, pretty much all the blasters and slugger's have recoil, either small or big. especially the E-11's. But that may all be game mechanics. Hope that helped! -Z.T.

Recoil is related to Newton's Third Law: for every action there is a reaction. In other words, even if you are accelerating micro-sized energized particles or plasma, you're still going to have backward force generated from firing because those particles or plasma still have weight and mass that are being driven forward. I am unsure how recoil for weapons such as this would be precisely calculated though.

____

There's just a little recoil from the bolt. Imagine a little more than a BB-gun. More a little more than that... Maave.

____

About breaking your wrists: don't mix up real life with TV. People in movies ARE able to fire most modern pistols single handed which is of course wrong. So that's probably not a good a way to come to conclusions about the amount of recoil from blasters. From the way it is depicted I would say they definitely have recoil similar to modern weapons (even ship mounted weapons have recoil, just think about the death-star turbolaser cannons).

Sub classes of blasters and specific ones

If you go down a little bit in the blaster article, you will see the blaster variants, and the links to those variants below them. When you go to them, and then link to specific blasters, there has been an increasing amount of tech. information, but it has a lot of room to grow. Such as speciications, prices, dur. etc. And i was thinking that maybe the people that worked on these, and new people, could come back and finish the job so to speak. You know, add more specs, prices, and more. Thoughts? -Z.T.

Color

Is there any information available to add about the color of blaster bolts?

Xciter

Would the Xciter be a magnetic bottle? I have a feeling it is. 69.19.14.21 22:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Inside?

Where is the image page. I want an inside view of a blaster.

Clean UP

This article needs serious cleaning up. First it says blasters fire plasma, then goes on with some totally unrealistic plasma compression stuff? Compressing a plasma does not convert it into a particle beam, please clean this up. 66.82.9.92 05:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Weird noises

Have you noticed that whenever a clone or stormtrooper raises his blaster it makes a sort of hiss-click sound? This can be best heard in Revenge of the Sith when Appo (?) points his blaster at Organa and tells him to leave. Is this the blaster being cocked, or the safety catch being removed?--The All-knowing Sith'ari 16:55, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Blasters vs. Verpine Rifles

I'm a little confused here; it says that blaster bolts travel faster than the speed of light, yet on various articles it says that jedi have hard times deflecting slugs from guns such as Verpine Rifles. So why is it that jedi can deflect bolts very easily, yet find it difficult to deflect slugs? Theres no way that bullets are faster than bolts, if anyone could give me a little insight please.

---It could have something to do with how bullets wouldn't be deflected so much as blocked and melted. Though admittedly I don't know if that would affect the actual difficulty or not.

The movies clearly show that blaster bolts do not travel faster than the speed of light. Also, blasters are not based upon pure lasers, but rather particle beam or plasma energy weapons.

It's simple, if you try to deflect blaster bolts, a lightsaber can do it easily, however a slug is a chunk of metal, what happens when you force hot metal through something which can cut through almost anything and melt durasteel on contact? why you get a slug of of hot slag flying through that lightsaber of course. and that will ruin just about anyone's day. so yeah deflecting a slug is..bad idea, best to just dodge for force reflect them

It could've been simplified

The language used here regarding the nature of how the blasters function is very confusing and a bit redundant. The thing that is seemingly forgotten on this page is the statement between how a "particle" blaster and a "plasma" blaster describe what is essentially the same process.

In the former, it is said that "a small amount of high-energy gas moved from the gas chamber to the chamber commonly called the XCiter. In the XCiter chamber, the gas was energized by the power pack, then passed into the actuating blaster module, which, when assisted by the components in the barrel, processed the now extremely high-energy gas into a compressed beam of intense energy particles, coupled with intense light."

The "plasma" type is described as "a high-energy gas would move from the gas chamber into another chamber where it was altered into a plasma state. It was then released from a magnetic "bottle" effect through the collimating components."

If you look closely, it should be clear that what is being described is actually the same thing, except that the language is garbled. The fuel gas which is excited in the XCiter chamber is the same thing as saying that it is moved into a chamber and altered into a plasma state.

The same can be said of the function of the actuating blaster module, which according to its own entry, is a magnetic containment, compression, synchronizing, and acceleration device. The statement that it processes the energized gas/plasma into a compressed beam of intense energy particles is the same as saying that it was released from a magnetic bottle effect through collimating components.

From a logical standpoint, the statement of "intense energy particles with intense light" is also redundant. The mass of coherent plasma which is being discharged would already be both hot and emitting light as moved away from the weapon, so saying that it has "intense light" is basically stating the obvious.

Of course, given the behavior of blaster bolts, it is possible that the "intense light" is actually referring to a laser beam fired in addition to the plasma bolt. In that case, the laser would serve as a means of maintaining the shape and perhaps even boosting the plasma bolt's energy.

It could help keep the bolt coherent because the laser would impart its energy to the particles, and likely keep them moving in a straight line. This can be seen in recent real-world experiments, where multiple high-energy laser beams were shot into a plasma, and it was found that they could manipulate the plasma.

So to make a long story short, you could describe a blaster as a magneticall propelled, plasma firing, laser driven and stabilizing weapon from deciphering the garbled and redundant language.

--Exalted Obliteration 02:29, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

bleeding and invisible shots

Two questions: 1. What's source for that part "Some types of sniper rifles fired invisible bolts of energy by using a special type of blaster gas." ? 2. Can blaster make someone bleed? I think it cannot as it's energy and, same as lightsaber, it should cauterize wound, but is there any canon source stating that? 2b. Not entirely related with blaster, but related to question above - can disruptor's shot make someone bleed? 62.141.242.162 18:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

id think not. but i would not know. Illogic armada 01:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Clean up.

This article needs a serious cleaning up. The first part, the part that explains the laser mechanics, is much more clear and concise than the mess that follows in the Blaster Mechanics part. That part needs to be removed completely, as the Laser Mechanics section is short and to the point. 66.82.9.99 06:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

• It seems mostly fine to me. SoresuMakashi^{(Everything I tell you is a lie)} 06:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Perhaps instead of simply gutting entire sections, let's see what we can do with the material that's there. This isn't worth an edit war.--Goodwood ^{(Alliance Intelligence)} 07:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Clean up.

Hopefully that should help, that article was terrible. It repeated and contradicted itself and the blaster mechanics made no sense. The laser mechanics shouldnt be on this page, it says blaster not laser. —Unsigned comment by 4.248.239.43 (talk • contribs)

Clean up!!!

This whole article is a contrived, non-technical mess. The blaster mechanics section has TWO explanations that describe the same freaking process! This page is a sad excuse of an article, not fit for this Wiki. I strongly urge you to please clean it up! --69.19.14.38 01:11, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

• You have a keyboard, yeah? You may do it. Be bold! The Doctor K.^{(No I'm not really a doctor.)} 01:16, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Whoever wrote the laser mechanics section did it nicely, it is a concise explanation of blasters that fits with every thing we know. The plasma blaster explanation came from the West End Games, which I hear LucasFilm doesn't regard as canon any more. --69.19.14.38 01:21, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

• West End Games is most definitely canon, I don't know about the plasma blaster though. Xicer9^(Combadge) 01:31, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Well, I heard West End Games had a lot of bad errors in it. The worse being the 5 mile estimation for the Executor Star Dreadnought. --69.19.14.38 01:35, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

• To be fair, just about half the sources that give Executor sizes are incorrect by now. But anyway, the West End Games books have a few errors mostly because they were written before the prequels, but so does the Thrawn Trilogy and yet that's still canon. Everything from the WEG sources is generally canon unless it contradicts something more recent. You'd be surprised how much information this wiki has from WEG sources, they're a real goldmine of info. Xicer9^(Combadge) 01:40, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I give up! Some one just reverted what I did. You want to keep your pitiful self-contradictory article? Go right ahead! I wash my hands of this lousy website! 69.19.14.38 01:40, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

• There's a difference between removing ridiculous content and just going through and blanking whatever you subjectively think is garbage. Sorry, this is not how this lousy website works. Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:45, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Laser mechanics need to be deleted from Blaster section...

Lasers are different than blasters. Also Laser Physics

The assumption that Lasers move at the speed of light only is out of date.

Lasers in real life can move as fast as 300 times the speed of light or as slow as 17 meters per seconded. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2810 http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/3090

Star Wars Laser can and are accurately called Lasers... As a race we have much to learn about everything. The likely hood that Lasers can do what they do in Star Wars is great if we continue advancing in the Laser science field.

Also Lasers can and are manipulated by magnetic fields in real life. Laser bolts could be a the same thing as a Blaster bolt, but instead of Plasma being turned into a Particle beam, and Magnetically bottled, the Laser is Magnetically bottled possible as a add counter measure or for guidance against shielded craft. —Unsigned comment by Bk777 (talk • contribs)

64.109.54.132 22:40, January 25, 2018 (UTC) Man, you got it right, I don't care how old this is. However...Star Wars officially uses plasma and particles. Laser is just a colloquialism. You are absolutely right, and relativists just blow off the new ways light works. Yes, it is a compliment to fiction science is wrong yet again. However, we must follow the canon, the reality, of the Story. And sue me how old this is, it should be an honorary mention for just how true this statement is and what it says about deriding fiction.

What a mess.

This article makes no sense, you have two explanations describing essentially the same process. The explanation describing the plasma being released from a magnetic bottle makes far more sense than the one describing blasters as "particle based". Please remove it to clean up this article and make it look like some one tried to write it with some coherency. Thanks. 71.48.152.235 03:20, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

Wow, I guess editing this page and even attempting to make it sound intelligent is forbidden now, huh?--71.48.154.53 08:57, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

I am going to attempt another clean-up. And if this time it is reverted, then I give up, and I will warn any one I talk to to not to visit this Wikia.--71.48.154.53 09:13, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

• You can't just hop in and anonymously delete two paragraphs. This isn't how Wookieepedia works. Wookieepedia collects facts from canon sources. If something is described in a source, we threat it true. We can't make decisions like "this makes more sense". Fan teories are not allowed here. Darth Morrt 12:32, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

Appearances

Hey is it really necessary to list each indviidual episode of The Clone Wars television series that a blaster appears in? Can't we just put the show in under the appearences. This is done for blaster pistol but not blaster. Thanks

````Yodaman5678````

Silencers?

Can Blasters have silencers like real world guns? 174.7.66.152 22:50, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

-Yes they can, as noted here: DC-19 "Stealth" carbine —Unsigned comment by 99.166.190.141 (talk • contribs)

Canon.

So now that the EU is no longer Canon, does that mean the blaster descriptions are non-canon since they came from non-canon sources?--76.7.152.238 15:49, December 21, 2014 (UTC)

I just for fun looked up the blaster in the tech section of "StarWars.com" and it says the blaster fires a " cohesive bursts of light-based energy", which in my eyes means its no longer a Plasma based weapon, but a real Laserweapon now. If there aren´t any other canon sources that contradict this one, I think it should be changed. Sry for my bad english - SR SfG (talk) 12:48, June 30, 2018 (UTC)

Save the Mess

Can we add back the magnetic bottle answer. This was deleted a long time ago willy nilly, and was stupid. We all know canon facts back then were in favor of the difference between a plasma and particle beam categorization of blasters, however similar the principles were. This is stupid. People roam the internet bragging about lasers over blasters, railguns over lasers, and just bullets over plasma, and et cetera over etc. Please keep the old answer, I wanted to look it up before it ran off on me now. 64.109.54.132 22:37, January 25, 2018 (UTC)

Blaster Bolts have no heat?

How does it have no heat when it was said that it is light. In physics, Light is electromagnetic radiation and can be used to transfer energy in the form of heat so technically it has heat? —Unsigned comment by Kirilla Bellerose (talk • contribs)

• Well, real-world physics doesn't always apply in Star Wars. In this case, the given material appears to be properly referenced, so it's likely true in-universe, though I admit that I am not particularly familiar with the Republic Commando novels. VergenceScatter (talk) 03:58, 9 July 2021 (UTC)