November 12, 200421 yr From the Casting Doc we sent to LucasArts... Mandalore is 63 in Mandalorian years. From K1, Canderous spoke of : (paraphrased) : "For 40 of your years, I've fought...." His first initiation battle as a "young mandalore plunged into the thickest fighting" above some world in his bassilisk war droid. i.e. Coming of adulthood @ 18 years BUT, 5 years have elapsed since K1.... Therefore : 18 + 40 + 5 = 63 :ph34r:
November 12, 200421 yr From the Casting Doc we sent to LucasArts... Mandalore is 63 in Mandalorian years. From K1, spoke of : (paraphrased) : "For 40 of your years, I've fought...." His first initiation battle as a "young mandalore plunged into the thickest fighting" above some world in his bassilisk war droid. i.e. Coming of adulthood @ 18 years BUT, 5 years have elapsed since K1.... Therefore : 18 + 40 + 5 = 63 :ph34r: <{POST_SNAPBACK}> One could be surgestive to think your a big fan of canderous :cool:
November 12, 200421 yr Author One could be surgestive to think your a big fan of canderous :cool: One could be assumptuous to say that you're right. :cool:
November 12, 200421 yr If this turns out to be true, I will hunt you down with a vibroblade for ruining a sub-plot for me. "Console exclusive is such a harsh word." - Darque"Console exclusive is two words Darque." - Nartwak (in response to Darque's observation)
November 12, 200421 yr I think you might be right, but I will still try and ruin it. He is 63 in mandalorian years, so the 40 and the 18 are most likely mandalorian years since Candersous supplied that information. But what about the 5 years? Does the whole galaxy count in mandalorian years too? And how many mandalorian years equal a standard year?
November 12, 200421 yr Author I think you might be right, but I will still try and ruin it. He is 63 in mandalorian years, so the 40 and the 18 are most likely mandalorian years since Candersous supplied that information. But what about the 5 years? Does the whole galaxy count in mandalorian years too? And how many mandalorian years equal a standard year? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Perhaps the concept of "mandalorian years" refers not to the acutal astrometic variations, but to the net effect of aging on the mandalorian body chemistry.
November 12, 200421 yr Mandalore is definately Canderous!I suspect as much. There was a dev post that stated the 'Mandalore' character didn't always come in Chrome. Or somesuch. He is 63 in mandalorian years,Don't start with a specious premiss. You won't come to any accurate conclusions.
November 12, 200421 yr I think you might be right, but I will still try and ruin it. He is 63 in mandalorian years, so the 40 and the 18 are most likely mandalorian years since Candersous supplied that information. But what about the 5 years? Does the whole galaxy count in mandalorian years too? And how many mandalorian years equal a standard year? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Perhaps the concept of "mandalorian years" refers not the acutal astrometic variations, but to the net effect of aging on the mandalorian body chemistry. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bah eff it. You win. Canderous is THE MANDALORE!
November 12, 200421 yr Seriously, if you think about it in terms other than his supposed age it makes even more sence. Who is the most badass known Mandalorian around at the time? Who is the only NPC other than the droids that cannot be killed no matter how you play the game? All signs point to Canderous.
November 12, 200421 yr HUH? Canderous is the MANDALORE! ??? where is this proof???? I don't get it Press Teh Button
November 12, 200421 yr That's true Salsabettis. Jag, does 18 count as a starting age or adult age in Star Wars as it does for that planet called... um... what was it again... oh yeah Earth?
November 12, 200421 yr HUH? Canderous is the MANDALORE! ??? where is this proof???? I don't get it <{POST_SNAPBACK}> There is no proof. Jaguars4ever reasoned it through the ages of the characters. And I am too lazy to refute it, so I gave reasons to support it.
November 12, 200421 yr If this turns out to be true, I will hunt you down with a vibroblade for ruining a sub-plot for me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i agree 100% That's true Salsabettis. Jag, does 18 count as a starting age or adult age in Star Wars as it does for that planet called... um... what was it again... oh yeah Earth? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i agree 101%
November 12, 200421 yr You know... if this hasn't actually been refuted by any devs, that has to mean something. I'm gonna hate you for spoiling it but I suppose it's my fault for reading it in the first place. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
November 12, 200421 yr Whether Manadalore is Canderous or not, he will definately be in the game. "Some men see things as they are and say why?""I dream things that never were and say why not?"- George Bernard Shaw"Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man."- Friedrich Nietzsche "The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." - Some guy
November 12, 200421 yr Its fine by me if Mandalore is Canderous. I liked his character, and he was a melee machine. I don't care to be spoiled by this either.
November 12, 200421 yr Be warned: if its NOT Canderous, then I will hunt you down with a vibroblade for making me believe Canderous is back!!! :ph34r:
November 12, 200421 yr i agree ludozee the force is what gives a jedi his power. its an energy field created by all living things. it surrounds us and penetrates us. it binds the galaxy together
November 12, 200421 yr Well, lets face it, anyone who played K1 is going to being wondering who is under that helmet all through K2 just because you know of Canderous.
November 12, 200421 yr I think Canderous is the new Mandalore as well. jaguars4ever already brought up proof, 40 years + 18 years + 5 years. If you don't agree, refute it or just say you don't agree, its such BS when you say there's no proof when the man clearly supported his theory with something.
November 12, 200421 yr I think Canderous is the new Mandalore as well. jaguars4ever already brought up proof, 40 years + 18 years + 5 years. If you don't agree, refute it or just say you don't agree, its such BS when you say there's no proof when the man clearly supported his theory with something. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Errr.. .no one is BS-ing overhere, pal. This is actually one of the most decent topics at the moment.
Create an account or sign in to comment