Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Video in YT.

Death Battle-Luke Skywalker Vs Harry Potter

lRLuPHvF6Fo

Do you agree with the outcome of this fight?

The only thing I disagree about with the video is Luke being able to block expelliarmus (a disarming spell) with his lightsaber. That makes no sense.

Rogue Jedi would have a coronary over this video.

Still, everyone else would agree, without even seeing the video, that Luke wins.

We've been saying it for years.

yeah pothead loses

Originally posted by Nemesis X
The only thing I disagree about with the video is Luke being able to block expelliarmus (a disarming spell) with his lightsaber. That makes no sense. Well, to be fair, it does take the form of a projectile.

How does Luke resist Confundus?

What's Confundus?

One of RJ's favourite spells. Hello mysterious new poster who joined today.

Luke resists by running up and cutting Potters head off before the first syllable is uttered.

Originally posted by Impediment
What's Confundus? Confundus is a spell that makes the victim suddenly become confused. They forget what they were doing and wander off confused.

It can be a mere whisper from hundreds of feet away, and the caster does not even have to be looking at the victim. No wand is required either.


Way I see it, Harry can teleport a safe distance away and use Confundus, then, the split second Luke is confused, Harry death spells him (or vanishes him, or transfigures him, or does one of hundreds of spells at his disposal.) And before anyone questions this, yes, teleporting (apparition) is instant. Harry will be gone before Luke speed blitzes over.

What about BFR? Isn't that a forfeit?

Originally posted by Impediment
What about BFR? Isn't that a forfeit? Depends on where they are fighting. Luke wins in a steel cage, Harry wins in the Roman coliseum.

Luke wins any scenario with the exception of first to look like a whiny crying queer. Though he doesn't lose that by much.

Originally posted by Robtard
Luke wins any scenario with the exception of first to look like a whiny crying queer. Though he doesn't lose that by much.


Because he's a Jedi and you hate Potter, we get it.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Because he's a Jedi and you hate Potter, we get it.

Correct, because he's a Jedi...

Which grants Luke increased speed, reaction-time and precognition, ie first attack. Your hatred of SW blinds you.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
How does Luke resist Confundus? He resists it with the Force

Originally posted by Robtard
Correct, because he's a Jedi...

Which grants Luke increased speed, reaction-time and precognition. Your hatred of SW blinds you.


Apparition>>>>>>>Increased speed, reaction time and precog.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Apparition>>>>>>>Increased speed, reaction time and precog.

LoLZ. Nope.

Luke's way faster, he'll be aware before Potter tries to teleport and he'll be aware where Potter will be teleporting too before Potter arrives and will be ready with an attack, if Potter should somehow survive long enough to teleport in the first place.

Originally posted by Robtard
LoLZ. Nope.

Luke's way faster, he'll be aware before Potter tries to teleport and he'll be aware where Potter will be teleporting too before Potter arrives and will be ready with an attack, if Potter should somehow survive long enough to teleport in the first place. And when Potter ports hundreds of feet away, behind cover?


You're overpowering Luke and the Force. If Jedi were as powerful as that, then none would ever die.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
And when Potter ports hundreds of feet away, behind cover?


You're overpowering Luke and the Force. If Jedi were as powerful as that, then none would ever die.


none of those silly spells hurt Master Skywalker

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
And when Potter ports hundreds of feet away, behind cover?

You're overpowering Luke and the Force. If Jedi were as powerful as that, then none would ever die.

If (big if) Potter is able to teleport to cover before Luke kills him, then he's safe and so is Luke, unless Luke is able to Force push whatever "cover" Potter is hiding behind and possibly crush him with it. So this is your 'Potter wins' strategy, winning by running away and hiding? Odd.

LoL. Jedi aren't all the same and Luke happens to be one of the most powerful, this is like basic SW lore. Even a weaksauce Jedi could take out Potter in a 1v1, as Potter is still slower and isn't overwhelming a Jedi's precog by himself.

Before this threads gets too heated, we should all be clear about BFR. Battle field removal is something that I need to amend in the rules.

Who can clearly define BFR and how it applies to this match?

Originally posted by Impediment
Before this threads gets too heated, we should all be clear about BFR. Battle field removal is something that I need to amend in the rules.

Who can clearly define BFR and how it applies to this match?


Match: Superman Vs Wolverine

Setting: In a boxing ring in San Diego

Rules: To the death

BFR = Superman punches Logan to Quebec.

If someone gets removed from the battlefield without a way to immediately return to the fight then they lose is my definition.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
And before anyone questions this, yes, teleporting (apparition) is instant. Harry will be gone before Luke speed blitzes over.

No it's not, at least not in the books. As it requires the user to spin in a circle as or at least neophytes like Potter have to.

Originally posted by ares834
No it's not, at least not in the books. As it requires the user to spin in a circle as or at least neophytes like Potter have to.

Yet Fred and George are shown doing it instantly in the movies. They literally pop up behind Molly.

Apparating is shown at different speeds in the films, sometimes there is a lag, sometimes it is instant. In this fight, you can bet your ass Harry will be doing it instantly. That, or he half apparate. In the films, death eaters are shown half apparating while intangible and invisible.

Read my post please.

"At least not in the books."

And I'm unsure why we would use the Harry Potter films rather than the books.

Originally posted by ares834
Read my post please.

"At least not in the books."

And I'm unsure why we would use the Harry Potter films rather than the books. Because there are some powers listed on the books but not the movies, and vice versa. We can go as far as video games too.

I'd strong disagree with that. Regardless, the films' version of apparition directly contradicts the books' and therefore is wrong.

it appears "rj" is back lol..

they'll be a plenty potter threads now..

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Yet Fred and George are shown doing it instantly in the movies. They literally pop up behind Molly.

Apparating is shown at different speeds in the films, sometimes there is a lag, sometimes it is instant. In this fight, you can bet your ass Harry will be doing it instantly. That, or he half apparate. In the films, death eaters are shown half apparating while intangible and invisible.

That they appeared instantly does not mean that the apparated instantly. Even if they had to hop on one foot for 5 minutes before apparating they could still appear instantly. The question is of how quickly they can disappear, as in perform apparition. In the books, it is clearly said that they need to turn around to apparate, therefore it is not instant.

Harry never performed half-apparition in the movies.

Originally posted by Nephthys
That they appeared instantly does not mean that the apparated instantly. Even if they had to hop on one foot for 5 minutes before apparating they could still appear instantly. The question is of how quickly they can disappear, as in perform apparition. In the books, it is clearly said that they need to turn around to apparate, therefore it is not instant.

Harry never performed half-apparition in the movies.


Do I really need to post a link?

The books superceed the movies, numnuts.

Originally posted by Nephthys
The books superceed the movies, numnuts. Actually they don't. Silly thing to say.

lol, what?

Why would they? I am talking about in a debate like this one, mind you.


Think about it, if one were to quote a Potter feat from one of the movies, but Potter was never said to have done anything that powerful in the books, would you really say "Sorry, can't use that feat here, books>>>>>movies?"

That's stupid.

If the movies contradict the abilities or something like that then yes, the book takes precedent.

Not that it matters. The Luke in the video is EU Luke and he lolstomps like mad.

Originally posted by AuraAngel
If the movies contradict the abilities or something like that then yes, the book takes precedent.

Not that it matters. The Luke in the video is EU Luke and he lolstomps like mad. It's a moot point. Books list powers and feats that trump what is in the Potter movies. Book Potter>>>>Movie Potter.


Another question: If Potter is shown apparating in the movies, but he was never said to apparate in the books, you really expect someone arguing for Potter to accept that Potter using apparition cannot be used here?

No. That's not similar at all. Apparating in the books works differently than it does in the movies. Therefore, since the books have precedence, apparating works like it does in the books.

Originally posted by ares834
No. That's not similar at all. Apparating in the books works differently than it does in the movies. Therefore, since the books have precedence, apparating works like it does in the books.

Nah, if I realize a movie feat that's more powerful than it was in the book, it stands.

You're saying that the original Potter media (books) trump the movies, yes?

That's how it goes in all the forums. The original media the character appeared in takes precedence.

However, as has been said, this is only in the case of contradictions. If they get extra powers in the movie then they get the powers. However, if they are explicitly said not to be able to do something in the book, they can't do it. Even if they could in the movie.

Originally posted by Pwned
That's how it goes in all the forums. The original media the character appeared in takes precedence. Sure you want to go with this?

I can roll with that.

I'm not entering the debate. I don't care what people think, however I do side with Luke. The shenanigans are strong with this one. But yes, that is the rule to the best of my knowledge.

Originally posted by Pwned
I'm not entering the debate. I don't care what people think, however I do side with Luke. The shenanigans are strong with this one. But yes, that is the rule to the best of my knowledge. If what you said is true, if "The original media the character appeared in takes precedence", then Luke's force powers in JL cannot be used here. After all, the original media is the movies, right? And said movies>>>>>the EU.


See how your argument backfired on you?

EU Luke is Luke after the films.

While there's a book for every movie for Harry Potter. See?

Now if there's some Harry Potter movie made after and/or not based on any of the books, sure, what happens there couldn't be surpassed by written material.

EU Luke is Luke after the films, as the sodomite above me said, and as such, his feats after the movies by definition can't contradict the ones in the movies.

And EU Luke roflstomps.

Originally posted by Robtard
EU Luke is Luke after the films.

While there's a book for every movie for Harry Potter. See?

Now if there's some Harry Potter movie made after and/or not based on any of the books, sure, what happens there couldn't be surpassed by written material.

Exactly, movie Luke is before the EU. Therefore, according to you guys, the movie takes precedence.

After all, people are claiming that the Potter books, since they are before the films, take precedence, right?



What I see here is rules being applied to Potter that do not apply to Luke. You cannot have it both ways.

Lol, what? It's not similar at all. The thing is the EU does not contradict the films as they are in different time frames.

Plus, TBH, I still think the films are not part of HP canon. But I can relent on that.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Exactly, movie Luke is before the EU. Therefore, according to you guys, the movie takes precedence.

After all, people are claiming that the Potter books, since they are before the films, take precedence, right?


What I see here is rules being applied to Potter that do not apply to Luke. You cannot have it both ways.

Incorrect.

The Harry Potter in the movies is directly from the books; why the books take precedence. EU Luke is AFTER the movies and is essentially like a separate entity.

This is EU Luke Vs Harry Potter, not Ep 4-6 Luke. It's a spite thread, if anything, as EU Luke is a beast and Harry Potter is a boy with a stick and some magic spells.

edit: Not that it matters though, even using a movie/film Harry Potter using his best from both mediums, EU Luke still obliterates him.

Originally posted by Robtard
Incorrect.

The Harry Potter in the movies is directly from the books; why the books take precedence. EU Luke is AFTER the movies and is essentially like a separate entity.

The Potter books and films have many discrepancies. See, if you read the books you'd know this.



This proves your flaming bias here. You have no right posting in a Potter thread.

Depends on the setting, depends on many things.

Originally posted by ares834
Lol, what? It's not similar at all. The thing is the EU does not contradict the films as they are in different time frames.

Plus, TBH, I still think the films are not part of HP canon. But I can relent on that. Different time frames, yes. But the thing is, Luke is the same man he was in the movies, just more powerful, older and wiser.

It's the same universe, same planets, the same force, the same many things. The fact that the books are before/after the films is a crutch you are using.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
The Potter books and films have many discrepancies. See, if you read the books you'd know this.

That is exactly why the books take precedence: Due to those discrepencies.

Originally posted by NemeBro
That is exactly why the books take precedence: Due to those discrepencies. Because the books are the original media, right?

Yes.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
The Potter books and films have many discrepancies. See, if you read the books you'd know this.

This proves your flaming bias here. You have no right posting in a Potter thread.

Depends on the setting, depends on many things.

Which is the point here; why in regards to Harry Potter (two mediums of the same character/events), the books take precedence when there's a conflict, as they came first.

LoL, wut? Explaining the sheer inequality of two characters is being biased?

No, not here. EU Luke outclasses film and book Harry Potter. Just a fact.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Yes. On that note, the SW films take precedence over the SW EU books, because the films are the original media.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
On that note, the SW films take precedence over the SW EU books, because the films are the original media.

Fine. Please point out where the films contradict an EU Luke feat and it will be stricken as usable or modified to fit the source material.

Originally posted by Robtard
Fine. Please point out where the films contradict an EU Luke feat? Lol, get off the timeline thing. Timeline has nothing to do with it. Original media rules according to you guys, timeline is irrelevant.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Lol, get off the timeline thing. Timeline has nothing to do with it. Original media rules according to you guys, timeline is irrelevant.

Where does it state that? If the EU books expand on the characters of the Star Wars universe, then why would original media matter? This is the ALL versus and not movie versus.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Lol, get off the timeline thing. Timeline has nothing to do with it. Original media rules according to you guys, timeline is irrelevant.

No, it does matter. Original media rules when there's two of the same character events and there's a conflict.

There's no conflict concerning Star Wars film Luke and EU Luke.

If there was Harry Potter film made after the books, anything Potter does in those wouldn't be bound/restricted to the books.

Not that is matters though, even gimping Luke to Ep4-6 and allowing Harry Potter anything from the films and books, Luke would still likely win by a simply wave choking Potter out as his enhanced Jedi speed/reflexes/precog grant his first attack.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Lol, get off the timeline thing. Timeline has nothing to do with it. Original media rules according to you guys, timeline is irrelevant. Timeline has everything to do with it, you're just not intelligent enough to grasp the reasoning behind it.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Timeline has everything to do with it, you're just not intelligent enough to grasp the reasoning behind it.

Which media came first has everything to do with it. I challenge you to link me to evidence that what you say is true. A direct quote from Rowling or Lucas, mind you.

Originally posted by Robtard
No, it does matter. Original media rules when there's two of the same character events and there's a conflict. I can roll with this. Now apply the same rule to Skywalker,

Are you effing kidding me?



Er........



No. Harry would apparate away before Luke even raises his hand. You need to accept this.

Whitey, you seem incapable of grasping that this is EU Luke. He has been given time to learn/develop new technniques and has grown exponentially in power.

Your argument for gimping Luke falls apart at this:
The HP movies take place at the same time of the books, and are based exactly off them. However, there are discrepancies. In those cases, the books will take precedence.

The Star Wars books, however, take place 1-50 something years after ROTJ. Therefore, this Luke is not the same Luke as in the movies, unlike Potter. He is an entirely different animal.

Originally posted by Pwned
Whitey, you seem incapable of grasping that this is EU Luke. He has been given time to learn/develop new technniques and has grown exponentially in power.

Your argument for gimping Luke falls apart at this:
The HP movies take place at the same time of the books, and are based exactly off them. However, there are discrepancies. In those cases, the books will take precedence.

The Star Wars books, however, take place 1-50 something years after ROTJ. Therefore, this Luke is not the same Luke as in the movies, unlike Potter. He is an entirely different animal.

No, I realize this is EU Luke. Read the argument and try to keep up. Sorry it's not a pop-up book.

Nah, the timeline argument is a crutch. It doesn't matter, because all media goes.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
I can roll with this. Now apply the same rule to Skywalker,

Are you effing kidding me?

Er........

No. Harry would apparate away before Luke even raises his hand. You need to accept this.

Done.

Can you point out where Ep 4-6 Luke directly contradicts something EU Luke can do?

Did you not follow the like comparison?

Nope. Luke is faster, Jedi abilities grant him this. Potter is as fast as a typical man-boy his age.

Originally posted by Robtard
Done.

Can you point out where Ep 4-6 Luke directly contradicts something EU Luke can do?

Did you not follow the like comparison?

Nope. Luke is faster, Jedi abilities grant him this. Potter is as fast as a typical man-boy his age.


Done and, done.


Lol, again with the time line BS. Let it go, you're trolling.

I did. Get off the timeline BS.

Apparition>>>>>>Fast Jedi. Fact. Accept it.

Whitey, you are confused. The movies only trump the EU in issues of canonicity. Which basically means that if a conflict arises over how an event occured then the movies take precedence. It does not however, mean that the movies are the only aspect of Star Wars that we can ever look to about anything. That would be dumb.

As for the fight, Luke pwns Potter a millisecond into the fight, using the Force to pin him to the floor like he did to Jacen Solo, without moving a muscle or appearing to exert himself at all.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Whitey, you are confused. The movies only trump the EU in issues of canonicity. Which basically means that if a conflict arises over how an event occured then the movies take precedence. It does not however, mean that the movies are the only aspect of Star Wars that we can ever look to about anything. That would be dumb.

As for the fight, Luke pwns Potter a millisecond into the fight, using the Force to pin him to the floor like he did to Jacen Solo, without moving a muscle or appearing to exert himself at all. So you think that Luke can pin Harry to the ground before Harry can apparate? You think that the force can keep prevent teleporting?

Yes.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Yes. Prove it.

You need to move (specifically, turn) to apparate. Luke will stop Harry from moving. Hence Harry cannot apparate.

QED.

This fight would remind me of Mike Tyson in his prime against Archie....

Galactus vs. Popeye...

Originally posted by Nephthys
You need to move (specifically, turn) to apparate. Luke will stop Harry from moving. Hence Harry cannot apparate.

QED. Ah, knew you would say this. Wrong. See, Harry is not moving by physical means, he is apparating, a magical means of teleporting. There is nothing, I repeat nothing, in the entire Star Wars films/books that suggest that the Force is capable of restraining someone who can teleport via magic.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Ah, knew you would say this. Wrong. See, Harry is not moving by physical means

... except when he is? We have this explained at quite some length to us in the books where the Apparation classes explicitly say that to apparate you need to turn on the spot.

Furthermore, can you tell me of a single time Potter has used apparation in combat?

Originally posted by Nephthys
... except when he is? We have this explained at quite some length to us in the books where the Apparation classes explicitly say that to apparate you need to turn on the spot.

Furthermore, can you tell me of a single time Potter has used apparation in combat?


Yeah but Harry didn't "turn on the spot" when he apparated in the movies. Oh wait, let me guess, books counter that?

Back at you, when has Luke used the Force to restrain a teleporter? BTW, Harry used teleporting in the Deathly Hallows during combat.

Yes.

In the latest series of books against Abeloth? She can teleport (As well as melt a city by getting pissed off, just to let you know how out of his league Potter is). Let me guess, in the movies right?

Originally posted by Nephthys
Yes.

In the latest series of books against Abeloth? She can teleport (As well as melt a city by getting pissed off, just to let you know how out of his league Potter is). Let me guess, in the movies right?

No. All feats count here.

Ah, but it she a wizard? Does she use Harry Potter magic? Nope. She is a Dark Side force user.

Except when they contradict each other you blibbering tool.

Who cares? You didn't say they needed to use magic. Point is, Potter can't teleport if he's eating dirt with Luke's invisible boot on his back.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Except when they contradict each other you blibbering tool.

Who cares? You didn't say they needed to use magic. Point is, Potter can't teleport if he's eating dirt with Luke's invisible boot on his back.

Lol, again with the personal insults. Calm down, man, it's just a stupid vs debate.


You are comparing two totally different forms of teleporting, that's all I am saying.

I'm joking around. 'Blibbering' isn't even a real insult, or word. I'm pretty sure I just made it up.

Yes, Abeloths is much easier to do and doesn't require her turning on the spot.

To sum: Harry can't teleport when he's disabled. There, I win. Get on Nemebro's level.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I'm joking around. 'Blibbering' isn't even a real insult, or word. I'm pretty sure I just made it up.

Yes, Abeloths is much easier to do and doesn't require her turning on the spot.

To sum: Harry can't teleport when he's disabled. There, I win. Get on Nemebro's level.


K.

Magic users do not need to turn on the spot to apparate. It is not a requirement. Also, stop saying that the Force and Magic are the same. They are entirely different.


http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Apparition



Derp.

No proof to back up that Harry cannot be restrained by the force from apparating.

Yeah they do. Furthermore, it takes Deliberation, Destination and Determination to apparate. As in, it takes some effort, concentration and time to do it. Which is likely why it is not used in battle since they don't have the time to do that.

I'm not saying they are the same. Although, Force magic is a thing that exists in Star Wars, fyi.

You're right, there is no proof to back that up. :I

Originally posted by Nephthys
Yeah they do. Furthermore, it takes Deliberation, Destination and Determination to apparate. As in, it takes some effort, concentration and time to do it. Which is likely why it is not used in battle since they don't have the time to do that. Whoa, what movies/books did you watch/read?

And HP magic exists in HPverse, and?

Good to see you come to your senses.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Whoa, what movies/books did you watch/read?

And HP magic exists in HPverse, and?

Good to see you come to your senses.

All of them? This was clearly explained in the apparation classes.

You said that the Force and Magic are not the same thing. I'm pointing out that you are wrong in that.

Lol. Re-read what you wrote, doofus. Double negative ftf.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Done and, done.

Lol, again with the time line BS. Let it go, you're trolling.

I did. Get off the timeline BS.

Apparition>>>>>>Fast Jedi. Fact. Accept it.

Originally posted by Robtard
Done.

Can you point out where Ep 4-6 Luke directly contradicts something EU Luke can do?

Did you not follow the like comparison?

Nope. Luke is faster, Jedi abilities grant him this. Potter is as fast as a typical man-boy his age.

Mind answering the question instead of dodging and accusing me of trolling when I'm clearly not? Point out where there's a contradiction, and you'll have proven your point.

Originally posted by Nephthys
All of them? This was clearly explained in the apparation classes.

You said that the Force and Magic are not the same thing. I'm pointing out that you are wrong in that.

Lol. Re-read what you wrote, doofus. Double negative ftf.


Yet many times Magic users are seen apparating without doing so. Pwned.

Please tell me you are kidding.

Lol, just caught that, I meant "can."

Originally posted by Robtard
Mind answering the question instead of dodging and accusing me of trolling when I'm clearly not? Point out where there's a contradiction, and you'll have proven your point.

You're going from barely trained Jedi to the most powerful Jedi of all time. You really need an answer for that?

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Yet many times Magic users are seen apparating without doing so. Pwned.

Please tell me you are kidding.

Lol, just caught that, I meant "can."

Doing what? Deliberating? Thats not really something you can see on-screen. I'm just pointing out what's said in the books. You have read the books right? Not merely seen the shitty films?

No, theres legit magic in Star Wars. Google the Witches of Dathomir, or the Sorcerers of Tund.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
You're going from barely trained Jedi to the most powerful Jedi of all time. You really need an answer for that?

And how is that a contradiction between film Luke and EU Luke?

EU Luke is Luke AFTER the films, where he's older and has learned more. Film Harry Potter is the same Harry Potter from the books; so where when there's a contradiction, you refer to the source material.

Not sure how many other ways I can explain the same exact thing.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
You're going from barely trained Jedi to the most powerful Jedi of all time. You really need an answer for that? That barely trained Jedi defeated Darth Vader, one of the most powerful Sith Lords of all time.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Doing what? Deliberating? Thats not really something you can see on-screen. I'm just pointing out what's said in the books. You have read the books right? Not merely seen the shitty films?


I did say all media, didn't I? I assumed we used high end feats here.

Originally posted by NemeBro
That barely trained Jedi defeated Darth Vader, one of the most powerful Sith Lords of all time. Because he turned to the Dark Side, and was faster/more powerful when doing so.

Originally posted by Robtard
And how is that a contradiction between film Luke and EU Luke?

EU Luke is Luke AFTER the films, where he's older and has learned more. Film Harry Potter is the same Harry Potter from the books; so where when there's a contradiction, you refer to the source material.

Not sure how many other ways I can explain the same exact thing.

Get off the timeline. You're using the timeline as a crutch.

Question: Luke was like 18-19 in ANH, yes?


Not sure how many ways I can say "let go of the timeline crutch."

The Witches of Dathomir, were human Force sensitives. When one used the dark side in the final battle, her eye popped a blood vessel, remember? Good book BTW.

The Sorcerors of Tund? A Sith sorcerer or sorceress was an individual who was proficient in the arts of Sith magic, using spells, talismans or incantations to focus the power of the dark side. They were discovered during the time of the original Sith Empire. Sith sorcerers gained their powers through intense study of Sith traditions, and applications of the dark side of the Force.


Nah, not magic. Even if it were, it is a different magic from a different universe. AND Luke is not a Sith Sorceror.

On a side note, stop comparing the Force to HP magic. Ask yourself the following questions:

Is the Magic in HP the same as the magic in The Witches of Eastwick? Is the magic from The Craft the same as the magic from The Covenant? Is the magic from LOTR the same as the magic from the same as The Blair Witch?




No on all counts. So stop comparing The Force to HP magic.

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Get off the timeline. You're using the timeline as a crutch.

Question: Luke was like 18-19 in ANH, yes?


Not sure how many ways I can say "let go of the timeline crutch."

The EU being after the films and the HP films and books being in the same frame of time is the point. So it's a fact, not a "crutch".

Yeah, and?

See above.

Originally posted by Robtard
The EU being after the films and the HP films and books being in the same frame of time is the point. So it's a fact, not a "crutch".

Yeah, and?

See above.


And all feats count. Past, present and future.