FANDOM


Wiki-shrinkable

This is the talk page for the article "Caridan (species)."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for a discussion about the topic in question. For general questions about the article's topic, please visit the Knowledge Bank. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

ClassificationEdit

Are the Caridans mammals? Unsigned comment by 71.10.71.94 (talk • contribs).

Caridan Body Structure Edit

Okay, this has been something that's been bugging me for quite a while; the body structure of the Caridans just doesn't work for a planet with heavy gravity. Sure, they explain it away as the race having "dense muscleature" or something, but seriously... Those legs would crumble. For creatures to deal with heavy pressure and gravity, they would be alot stockier and lower to the ground. This would give 'em a wider distribution and less height for the heavy gravitational feilds to pull on. If I recall, the further you are from the centre of gravity, the harder the pull. The Caridan body structure just doesn't work for a planet with heavy gravity. It'd be like putting a giraffe on Venus; the creature would crumble to the ground.

It's like whoever first designed the Caridans never took that into account. And it bugs me to no end. Trak Nar 06:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

  • The Caridans were originally described as "barrel chested" (Chapter 6 of "Jedi Search") and "stubby-legged" (Chapter 20 of "Jedi Search"). The problem is Brandon McKinney and Scott Kolins Who worked on "The Essential Guide to Planets and Moons" did not read "Jedi Search" Completely and stopped-short at the chapter 6 descriptions. However at the beginning of chapter 20 in "Jedi Search", it states that Ambassador Furgan, A Caridan, was noted as, "Stubby-legged" as he descended the ramp of his shuttle. The same chapter also makes note of the Shuttle's "denser air of Carida" when it opens its hatches. Clearly these first descriptions are completely consistent with what we would expect from heavy gravity planet and we must conclude the artwork from "The Essential Guide to Planets and Moons" is in error. This should be no surprise, there are several other examples of poorly researched artwork in the publication as well. -- Frank V Bonura 14:43, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+