ROTJ Luke vs. ROTS Yoda

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Eli Vanto
canon versions.

force
sabers
all-out

Darth Thor
We saw how he faired against Palpatine.

Zero reason to think hed fair much better against Yoda.

relentless1
Originally posted by Darth Thor
We saw how he faired against Palpatine.

Zero reason to think hed fair much better against Yoda. '

agreed, but to be fair Sidious caught him off guard with lightning and Luke wasn't aware of that ability which is DEFINITELY something Yoda should've taught the kid how to counter with his lightsaber at least lol

Darth Thor
Originally posted by relentless1
'

agreed, but to be fair Sidious caught him off guard with lightning and Luke wasn't aware of that ability which is DEFINITELY something Yoda should've taught the kid how to counter with his lightsaber at least lol


It shows he was still a novice compared to the elite masters.

xPRIMEx
I disagree with your reasoning. Luke threw his lightsaber away basically refusing to fight.

That being said, Yoda wins

Darth Thor
Originally posted by xPRIMEx
I disagree with your reasoning. Luke threw his lightsaber away basically refusing to fight.

That being said, Yoda wins


According to the ROTJ novel he did try to deflect but couldnt. Its not canon but is Legends.

Regardless I doubt throwing away his Saber means he was just letting Palpatine fire away at him. Otherwise he wouldnt have begged his Dad to help him out.

Total Warrior
Yoda wins

Galan007
Originally posted by Darth Thor
We saw how he faired against Palpatine.

Zero reason to think hed fair much better against Yoda. Tbf, RotJ Palpatine should be considerably above RotS Yoda.

...And Yoda isn't going to spam lightning.

Darth Thor
Point is he was dominated by him in the Force and I see little reason to believe he couldnt have ragdolled Luke instead.

But yeah the margin between this Palps and Yoda has probably increased, so there is that.

carthage
Yoda with difficulty.

Lord Stark
Originally posted by Galan007
Tbf, RotJ Palpatine should be considerably above RotS Yoda.

...And Yoda isn't going to spam lightning.

In the force probably, but in an all-out fight I still put them pretty close.

Galan007
Yeah, Palpatine had likely ceased trying to hone his lightsaber skills by that point.

But it's entirely possible that RotJ Palpatine wouldn't even need a saber to defeat Yoda, imo.

Lord Stark
Depends on the setting, Palpatine would def have the edge in a place like the Grand Convocation Chamber but in something like Palpatine's office I'd probs give it to Yoda.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Galan007
Yeah, Palpatine had likely ceased trying to hone his lightsaber skills by that point.

But it's entirely possible that RotJ Palpatine wouldn't even need a saber to defeat Yoda, imo.


So that means Snoke would beat Yoda lol

Galan007
If Snoke's mastery of the dark side is truly on par with RotJ Palpatine's, then he should be a good bit above Yoda in the Force, yeah.

He's obviously not winning a lightsaber duel, though.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Galan007
If Snoke's mastery of the dark side is truly on par with RotJ Palpatine's, then he should be a good bit above Yoda in the Force, yeah.

He's obviously not winning a lightsaber duel, though.


No I meant because you're pointing out ROTJ Palpatine may not need a Saber to beat Yoda.

So then if Snoke is his equal, then logically he wouldn't need a saber either.

Granted though it'd be a Big Risk not having a saber to defend against even one strike. Especially so against Yoda.

Galan007
Depends on the setting.

If it's tight quarters(which favors Yoda's size/agility), then not being able to defend with a saber could be a problem. If it's a more open field, like Snoke's throne room, then he should logically be able to own Yoda with the Force.

Darth Thor
Yeah in tight quarters Snokes stock goes down a lot.

Lord Stark
Nah I think Yoda smokes Snoke. Palpatine may not be a great Lightsaber combatant but I imagine he still has significant force augmented speed to keep his distance. Snoke on the other hand seems to struggle to even walk, and doesn't really have the speed feats to keep up with Yoda.

Darth Thor
^ Ah yes I didnt think about speed.

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by Darth Thor
We saw how he faired against Palpatine.

Zero reason to think hed fair much better against Yoda.
You mean that version of palpatine yoda hasn't fought?

Vader scales miles above a dooku stomper and luke is his equal. Not really sure what yoda's argument here is. Are you expecting luke to throw away his lightsaber and for yoda to use force lightning?

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by Galan007
Tbf, RotJ Palpatine should be considerably above RotS Yoda.

...And Yoda isn't going to spam lightning.
And luke isn't going to throw away his lightsaber lmao. The fight's completely irrelevant to yoda vs luke. Unless yoda has a massive stylistic advantage i don't know about, or he is capable of ragdolling anakin++ opponents, he should lose. I don't know why so many people who hold vader as this god tier being are saying yoda wins when canon luke is his explicit equal.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
You mean that version of palpatine yoda hasn't fought?

Vader scales miles above a dooku stomper and luke is his equal. Not really sure what yoda's argument here is. Are you expecting luke to throw away his lightsaber and for yoda to use force lightning?



Whose the Dooku stomper that Vader scales miles above?

ROTJ Luke was equal to a conflicted Vader. Hes not a match for Prime Vader in the Force. Theres tons of evidence that contradicts this that idea.

quanchi112
Luke destroyed Vader but yoda wins imo. Vader is just overrated.

Petrus
Yoda no question.

Sheev
Vader scales massively above Dooku, and is a better duelist then Sidious. ROTJ Luke was his equal.

So I'm curious why Yoda would win. Much less "easily"??

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Sheev
Vader scales massively above Dooku,

As does Yoda.


Originally posted by Sheev
and is a better duelist then Sidious.

Maybe.

But im curious if everyone who propagates this also concede Maul is a superior duelist to Dooku, and that both Maul and Dooku are superior duelists to Kylo. Because there does seem to be some double standards going around regarding that list.

Originally posted by Sheev
ROTJ Luke was his equal.


Well we know he was equal to a conflicted Vader. But we dont know he was equal to Prime Vader.

Lukes trouble against a Rancor compared to Vader ripping apart a cybernetically enhancer Rancor (with the Force and without his Saber), suggests Prime Vaders force mastery is significantly above ROTJ Lukes.

Originally posted by Sheev
So I'm curious why Yoda would win. Much less "easily"??

Dont know about how easy it would be, but he didnt seem at all close to Palpatine, so my guess would be he was not Yodas equal YET.

xPRIMEx

Darth Thor

Sheev
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Maybe.

But im curious if everyone who propagates this also concede Maul is a superior duelist to Dooku, and that both Maul and Dooku are superior duelists to Kylo. Because there does seem to be some double standards going around regarding that list.

Lukes trouble against a Rancor compared to Vader ripping apart a cybernetically enhancer Rancor (with the Force and without his Saber), suggests Prime Vaders force mastery is significantly above ROTJ Lukes.


Dont know about how easy it would be, but he didnt seem at all close to Palpatine, so my guess would be he was not Yodas equal YET.

1. Maybe prime Maul would be above Dooku as a duelist if he wasn't an overconfident dumbass in every fight, and actually went allout- he did do well against Sidious for a bit. But Dooku would still beat him in a fight, just like Sidious would beat Vader in a fight.

2. TBF, Luke didn't even try to use the force against the Rancor at all. Maybe it was part of his ruse, or maybe you can chalk it up to shitty 80s direction. Either way, a canon quote puts Luke's power in the force equal to Vader's.

3. Vader wasnt equal to ROTJ Sidious, but that doesn't mean he wouldnt have been equal to or stronger than ROTS Sidious (and therefore ROTS Yoda). Like i said- ROTJ Sidious > ROTS Sidious.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Sheev
1. Maybe prime Maul would be above Dooku as a duelist if he wasn't an overconfident dumbass in every fight, and actually went allout- he did do well against Sidious for a bit. But Dooku would still beat him in a fight, just like Sidious would beat Vader in a fight.

2. TBF, Luke didn't even try to use the force against the Rancor at all. Maybe it was part of his ruse, or maybe you can chalk it up to shitty 80s direction. Either way, a canon quote puts Luke's power in the force equal to Vader's.

3. Vader wasnt equal to ROTJ Sidious, but that doesn't mean he wouldnt have been equal to or stronger than ROTS Sidious (and therefore ROTS Yoda). Like i said- ROTJ Sidious > ROTS Sidious.


1. He's not overconfident in EVERY fight. He's overconfident when he's the superior fighter, or when he underestimates his opponent. Neither would apply to fighting Dooku. Like he didn't underestimate Sidious or Vader. He accepted he's their inferior in combat.

Given Maul's latest force feats, I really don't see an argument for Dooku winning if it's accepted Maul is the superior duellist.

2. What ruse? He wasn't hiding he's a Jedi. He warned Jabba not to underestimate his powers. Not to mention he Did Kill the Rancor.
Again ROTJ Luke was equal to ROTJ Vader who seemed to have a fair bit of conflict by that time. Doen't mean ROTJ Luke was equal to Prime Vader, at the height of his evil and dark side days.
And canon quotes are not > canon showings. In fact I'd say showings are more indicative of the truth, as quotes can ignore context.
As for old effects, it's not like the writer of that comic didn't remember Luke's showing against a regular rancor.

3. Yeah I get that. It's just that Luke was so hopelessly helpless against Sidious in a way I don't see a saber less Yoda being.
In fact Seemed Vader was much better equipped to take on Sidious (he did kill him), which again indicates Vader's superiority to Luke in the Force.

Sheev
Originally posted by Darth Thor
1. He's not overconfident in EVERY fight. He's overconfident when he's the superior fighter, or when he underestimates his opponent. Neither would apply to fighting Dooku. Like he didn't underestimate Sidious or Vader. He accepted he's their inferior in combat.

Given Maul's latest force feats, I really don't see an argument for Dooku winning if it's accepted Maul is the superior duellist.

2. Again ROTJ Luke was equal to ROTJ Vader who seemed to have a fair bit of conflict by that time. Doen't mean ROTJ Luke was equal to Prime Vader, at the height of his evil and dark side days.
And canon quotes are not > canon showings. In fact I'd say showings are more indicative of the truth, as quotes can ignore context.
As for old effects, it's not like the writer of that comic didn't remember Luke's showing against a regular rancor.

3. Yeah I get that. It's just that Luke was so hopelessly helpless against Sidious in a way I don't see a saber less Yoda being.
In fact Seemed Vader was much better equipped to take on Sidious (he did kill him), which again indicates Vader's superiority to Luke in the Force. 1. I should say- every LOSS Mauls had can be attributed to him going full retard and underestimating his opponents. If he actually goes allout without being an overconfident dumbass, he's pretty uber (again just look at his fight with Sidious. He did pretty well at the end, all things considered). As for a fight with Dooku- I think their TK would be comparable, but the difference is that Dooku can spam lightning. I think that would give him an advantage in the end. And just because the list puts Maul above Dooku as a duelist, it doesnt mean there is some massive difference between their skills. Same with Vader and Sidious.

2. Vader was conflicted, but to think his conflict took him down considerably is a bit baseless. He was still a BEAST in ROTJ, and Luke was his equal. The Rancor showing alone doesnt denote a difference in Force power.

3. Yoda barely managed to hang in there with a weaker version of Sidious. I have no doubt that a more powerful Sidious (ROTJ) would stomp him comfortably. It would be like comparing 19bby Vader to 0bby Vader.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Sheev
1. I should say- every LOSS Mauls had can be attributed to him going full retard and underestimating his opponents. If he actually goes allout without being an overconfident dumbass, he's pretty uber (again just look at his fight with Sidious. He did pretty well at the end, all things considered). As for a fight with Dooku- I think their TK would be comparable, but the difference is that Dooku can spam lightning. I think that would give him an advantage in the end. And just because the list puts Maul above Dooku as a duelist, it doesnt mean there is some massive difference between their skills. Same with Vader and Sidious.

2. Vader was conflicted, but to think his conflict took him down considerably is a bit baseless. He was still a BEAST in ROTJ, and Luke was his equal. The Rancor showing alone doesnt denote a difference in Force power.

3. Yoda barely managed to hang in there with a weaker version of Sidious. I have no doubt that a more powerful Sidious (ROTJ) would stomp him comfortably. It would be like comparing 19bby Vader to 0bby Vader.

1. Fair enough. As long as everyone using that list is being consistent now and accept that Dooku would be just a little above a non-retarded Maul due to his lightning advantage.

2. Well there's the Rancor showing, the chasing scout troopers (Vader would have casually TK'd those bikes and bikers). Plus the fact Luke and Vader never had a TK contest in ROTJ (Power in the force also applies to Sabers).
Point is we really don't know how much his conflict was effecting Vader at that time. But we do know ROTJ Luke doesn't seem to be anywhere near as impressive as Peak Vader. At least not in the TK department.

3. Would it be that much of a difference? I don't know. I'm sure he was more powerful, but again, Luke was completely helpless next to him. I don't see Yoda (or Vader for that matter), being that helpless against ROTJ Sidious. Unless it's somehow shown that his power increase from ROTS to ROTJ is that large.

Sheev
1. thumb up

2. Right but Luke not using TK as predominately as Vader in the movies doesn't preclude the notion that they were still equals in the force. They just fought lesser adversaries differently, as Jedi and Sith tend to do.

3. It took all Yoda had just to barely block Sidious's lightning in ROTS. A more powerful ROTJ Sidious would definitely overwhelm him rapidly. You're right that there's no way to know exactly how MUCH stronger Sidious became between ROTS and ROTJ but considering how stupidly OP his bloodline is (which we saw in Rey's growth) it's safe to assume his powers would have grown immensely over that time. He at least grew enough that even Vader (who himself grew far more powerful over the years) still wasn't able to defeat Sidious alone by the OT.

Galan007
Originally posted by Sheev
2. Right but Luke not using TK as predominately as Vader in the movies doesn't preclude the notion that they were still equals in the force. They just fought lesser adversaries differently, as Jedi and Sith tend to do. Grandiose displays of Force power in the OT films was a rarity anyway.

I mean, what were Vader's best Force/TK feats in the original films? Choking a couple officers..? Throwing some small boxes at Luke..? Palming blaster fire..? It's not like the films back then emphasized large-scale battleboard feats.

The difference is that Vader's power/skill in canon has been fleshed out abundantly across dozens of appearances in comics, novels, and TV shows. Conversely, RotJ-era Luke has only appeared in one comic since 2014, so he really has no supplementary showings to weigh against Vader's(even though his one appearance in that era was pretty beastly.) Almost everything we've seen from canon Luke thus far has been from the ANH and ESB eras, which obviously has no bearing on RotJ Luke... So you can't just say: "Vader preformed in the comics, therefore he is above Luke." It's a faulty comparison, because as of now RotJ Luke hasn't really been explored at all.

But as mentioned, the fact that Luke(or Vader, for that matter) haven't displayed massive Force feats on-screen doesn't preclude the notion that they were still intended to be equal by the time of RotJ, per a canon source. So until canon gives us a legitimate reason(in the way of contradictory material) to assume otherwise, that's just... How it is. /shrug

Sheev
I agree.Makes sense.

Scizard
Gonna go with Yoda atm.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Galan007
But as mentioned, the fact that Luke(or Vader, for that matter) haven't displayed massive Force feats on-screen doesn't preclude the notion that they were still intended to be equal by the time of RotJ, per a canon source. So until canon gives us a legitimate reason(in the way of contradictory material) to assume otherwise, that's just... How it is. /shrug


Vader dealing with the cybernetically enhanced Rancor as he did, is a legitimate reason Imo.

Its not like the writer of that comic wasnt aware of Lukes struggle against a regular Rancor.

Its not good enough to say the films dont show massive force feats. Whatever Vader didnt do in the OT didnt contradict what he can do.

For example Vader choked someone from the other SD over the view screen, doesnt mean he cant choke someone from another planet.

Plus again, ROTJ Luke being equal to a conflicted Vader doesnt mean hes equal to Vader at the prime of his dark side peak.

And again Power in the Force /= TK Mastery. Power in the Force is used in Saber prowess as well, as we saw in ROTS when Anakin beat Dooku without the use of TK or FL, but clearly the intention was he was more powerful in the Force.

Total Warrior
Originally posted by Sheev
Vader scales massively above Dooku, and is a better duelist then Sidious. ROTJ Luke was his equal.

So I'm curious why Yoda would win. Much less "easily"?? Sid's skills as a duelist decresed after RotS, in sabers only ROtS Yoda would likely defeat RotJ Sid

Galan007
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Vader dealing with the cybernetically enhanced Rancor as he did, is a legitimate reason Imo.

Its not like the writer of that comic wasnt aware of Lukes struggle against a regular Rancor.

Its not good enough to say the films dont show massive force feats. Whatever Vader didnt do in the OT didnt contradict what he can do. I'm just saying it's a faulty comparison.

The OT films did not emphasize large-scale battleboard feats. Vader's best TK feat in the original films was hurling some small boxes at Luke, for example. We only know how OP Vader's Force powers really are thanks to the plethora of supplementary material he has appeared in since. Luke, however, simply does not have any supplementary material to weigh against all of Vader's.

For example, in the film Luke didn't even attempt to use any Force powers/TK against the Rancor or Jabba's goons on the sail barge... But in the one canon comic RotJ-era Luke has appeared in, he spammed TK waves multiple times against his opponents:
https://i.imgur.com/LWO8fni.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/3ZMPYz6.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/IkOu7pN.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/97wci9i.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/MVuL5Br.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/e9SXJFS.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/UY6InFx.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/3htt1nC.jpg

Point being: canon supplementary material undoubtedly portrays some of the characters in a much more uber light than the films did. So just because Luke didn't handle the Rancor in a 1983 film similarly to how Vader handled one in a 2016 comic, it doesn't preclude the fact that they were still intended to be equals during RotJ(as a canon quote explicitly states.)

Now if RotJ-era Luke actually HAD a bunch of canon showings that still didn't put him on par with Vader(or even a couple quantifiable contradictory showings/statements), then I could see your point... But the Rancor showings alone certainly do not disprove anything, for reasons I mentioned above. Canon says they were equal during their fight in RotJ, so that's just how it is until we get a legitimate reason to believe otherwise. /shrug

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Plus again, ROTJ Luke being equal to a conflicted Vader doesnt mean hes equal to Vader at the prime of his dark side peak. Just depends how much you think Vader's conflict was hindering him.

Beware the Power of the Dark Side! states that Vader was still "always" fueling himself with hatred/rage during RotJ -- even while fighting Luke:

"Vader blocks attack after attack, but is pushed back farther each time. Always fueled by hatred... But now he gathers additional strength from fear."

So like I mentioned in the other thread: said conflict was not implied to be affecting him much at all in that battle.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
And again Power in the Force /= TK Mastery. Power in the Force is used in Saber prowess as well, as we saw in ROTS when Anakin beat Dooku without the use of TK or FL, but clearly the intention was he was more powerful in the Force. The quote differentiates between lightsaber skill and power in the Force. They were stated to be equal in both areas.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Galan007
Now if RotJ-era Luke actually HAD a bunch of canon showings that still didn't put him on par with Vader(or even a couple quantifiable contradictory showings/statements), then I could see your point... But the Rancor showings alone certainly do not disprove anything, for reasons I mentioned above.


I feel that is a contradictory feat though. I mean how can it not be?

They both went up against a Rancor, one struggled physically and ran and had to kill it with the gate. The other just force owned an enhanced rancor. And again, did the writer of that comic not know about the ROTJ scene?

We can talk movie feats are not as good all we want, but they are canon. And with Vader in the movie, they were very careful not to put limitations on his force abilities.

On the sail barge Luke used his Saber against Jabbas goons. But That doesnt contradict the idea that he could use the force. He does when he is attacking without his lightsaber against the Gamorrean guards.




Originally posted by Galan007


The quote differentiates between lightsaber skill and power in the Force. They were stated to be equal in both areas.


It says skill with a lightsaber then power in the force.

Pre-Vizsla has mad skillz with a lightsaber. But without power in the force he couldnt possibly be Mauls equal in Sabers.

So I feel both parts of that quote could be referring to their (Luke and Vaders) Saber fight.

I mean unless you think an unarmed Vader would be just as helpless against Palpatines FL as Luke was, then they clearly were not equals in every aspect of the Force.

Scizard
I mean damage wise yeah Vader seems to be as helpless. He's just more tolerant to pain.

Galan007
Originally posted by Darth Thor
I feel that is a contradictory feat though. I mean how can it not be?

They both went up against a Rancor, one struggled physically and ran and had to kill it with the gate. The other just force owned an enhanced rancor. And again, did the writer of that comic not know about the ROTJ scene? Right, but again: Luke didn't so much as attempt to use the Force against the Rancor, even though we know he was capable of generating potent TK at the time(as seen in the scans I posted earlier, not to mention that he had already shaken a Star Destroyer by this point.)

Personally, I've always chalked it up to a case of CIS. There was literally no logical reason for Luke to not use any Force powers whatsoever against the Rancor, when it was in his ability to do so. Now, if Luke had tried, and failed, to affect the Rancor with the Force, you'd be onto something... But since he didn't even try to use the Force, it just screams of illogical CIS to me. /shrug

So again, their respective Rancor showings alone certainly do not prove that Vader's power in the Force was above Luke's.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
We can talk movie feats are not as good all we want, but they are canon. And with Vader in the movie, they were very careful not to put limitations on his force abilities.Of course it's all canon, but hopefully you still understand my point.

In terms of overall impressiveness, scope, scale, etc., supplementary feats have been >>>> OT movie feats. Current writers are doing things with Force users that GL never even dreamed of back in the 70s/80s when the films were originally released(I'm sure we can both agree there.) That said, Vader has a plethora of supplementary feats in canon, while RotJ Luke pretty much ONLY has his movie feats... So I still see it as a faulty comparison.

We cannot lowball/downplay Luke just because he doesn't have the amount of supplementary appearances Vader does... Especially when a canon quote explicitly states they were equals during RotJ. It's an "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" sort of thing, imo.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
So I feel both parts of that quote could be referring to their (Luke and Vaders) Saber fight.

I mean unless you think an unarmed Vader would be just as helpless against Palpatines FL as Luke was, then they clearly were not equals in every aspect of the Force. Do we have any reason at all to believe that a saberless Vader wouldn't be completely helpless against RotJ Palpatine's lightning?

Darthadi
I think the problem most people have with Luke=Vader in ROTJ is how could Luke become so powerful so fast and with so little training especially in canon where Vader is above Anakin in power.
Like, maybe in legends or Lucas's version of star wars where Vader was suposed to be kind of weak (relative to other characters) it made sense, but in canon is mind blowing how can Luke can catch up with Vader so fast. And if you think Vader didn't lost any potential after Mustafar is even more weird.

quanchi112
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Point still stands. If we use that list then should use it consistently.

But yes im fine with it being Kylo as of TFA. (The book was one of the Journey to TFA series and the list had a picture of Kylo in the background). If you have not figured out the hypocrisies of posters using whatever logic they can to promote their favorite characters then you might be one of them. I give Windu his due despite thinking he is a very uninteresting character. Maul bring my second favorite does not make me somehow try to prove he beats Windu. I also think Rey is lame but her power level as is Kylos is insane.

xPRIMEx

Darthadi
At least with Rey there is that weird dyad related thing in TFA where she downloads his training. As stupid as it sounds there is at least an explanation.

Galan007
It has always been odd to me that a kid with only a few years of training could even approach Vader's level... Skywalker blood or not. /shrug

Curious to see how the comics flesh out this era of Luke's history, because even as of ESB he was still absolutely no match for Vader... So he now has just 1 year to get to that level. It could be somewhat believable(I guess), depending on how they go about it(ie. the types of training Luke undergoes over that time.)

srug

Darthadi
There is just one year between ESB and ROTJ iirc. And Vader is vastly more powerful than Dooku in canon. Luke's growth is absurd if he's Vader level in ROTJ.

Darthadi
Not to mention that if Vader didn't lost any potential his growth would be even bigger than Luke's during this time period (greater potential, better training, better knowledge). We will have to wait for the comics i guess.

Galan007
I honestly wonder if Vader's potential is actually greater than Luke's in canon..? If it is, I doubt it's by much, tbh.

Darthadi
He is the chosen one. It will be kind of lore breaking if his potential is not the biggest.

Galan007
Luke's potential being on par with(or very close to) Vader's wouldn't alter his destiny as the Chosen One.

It has always been pretty telling that Palpatine believed Luke had the potential to destroy he and Vader after first sensing him. /shrug

Darthadi
That was because in the old canon the idea was that Vader lost most of his potential. This is why Palpatine wanted to replace him with Luke.
In general, the idea that of any other force user having Anakin level potential seems lore breaking to me. It also cheapens the idea that only Anakin could replace the Father if any of his children (and grandchildren?) could eventually do that.

Zenwolf
Originally posted by Darthadi
That was because in the old canon the idea was that Vader lost most of his potential. This is why Palpatine wanted to replace him with Luke.
In general, the idea that of any other force user having Anakin level potential seems lore breaking to me. It also cheapens the idea that only Anakin could replace the Father if any of his children (and grandchildren?) could eventually do that.

I mean that's still true in a sense, they can't change what the movies say unless they redo them.

Galan007
Right, but the films are still canon. And as of ESB, Palpatine still asserts that Luke has the potential to destroy he and Vader.

Vader's potential could have still been superior, but given everything we know so far(ie. Luke's growth over the films), it seem likely that Luke's potential was really close to his.

Darthadi
Actually. If Luke with only a few years of training could be at the same level as Vader who had 20+ years of training (not to mention his training and knowledge of the force were better than Luke's) wouldn't this be the proof that either Vader lost potential after Mustafar (either because of injuries or, more likely, psychological reasons) or that for some reason he was not at his best during ROTJ?
I'm really curious if they would give as some form of explanation in the comics. Who knows, maybe it will be something similar to Rey downloading knowledge from Kylo, lol.

Zenwolf
Originally posted by Darthadi
Actually. If Luke with only a few years of training could be at the same level as Vader who had 20+ years of training (not to mention his training and knowledge of the force were better than Luke's) wouldn't this be the proof that either Vader lost potential after Mustafar (either because of injuries or, more likely, psychological reasons) or that for some reason he was not at his best during ROTJ?
I'm really curious if they would give as some form of explanation in the comics. Who knows, maybe it will be something similar to Rey downloading knowledge from Kylo, lol.

Yeah, Vader still lost his potential due to his injuries...I mean if you wanna say temporarily because if he didn't, I'm sure by the time of ANH/ESB/ROTJ he would have been at his peak or moreso.

So yeah, Vader still lost potential and would never reach that cause well...he died. So he did or at best temporarily did, the potential was never gonna be reached anyway, so it doesn't matter.

Darthadi
Like, why would Palpatine want to replace Vader with Luke if Vader's potential is bigger/equal but unlike Luke, Vader is also already a sith so he doesn't need to be converted? It is as if I would want to replace my laptop with a new one that is not better then the old one and possibly is even worse.

Zenwolf
Originally posted by Darthadi
Like, why would Palpatine want to replace Vader with Luke if Vader's potential is bigger/equal but unlike Luke, Vader is also already a sith so he doesn't need to be converted? It is as if I would want to replace my laptop with a new one that is not better then the old one and possibly is even worse.

Well as far as I recall, Palps wasn't gonna be replaced anyway and he wanted to takeover Luke's body which isn't full of mechanical stuffs, according to the new Canon info...or was that just implied? Either way. Why would he wanna have a crippled body or an apprentice?

Really though this is just another one of those many new Canon issues. It would easily be done with if they said that Vader's potential was lost because...it honestly doesn't change much of anything actual power wise that Vader has shown thus far, because his potential was never gonna be reached anyway.

I mean his potential could be 10 or 100 of Palpatine, but how does anyone really gauge that with the actual power shown? It's pointless. 10 could be lifting an ISD, 100 could be lifting an ISD who cares.

Though it would help with the story and the reasoning of ESB/ROTJ dialogue. It'll probably come up at some point, just as it's noted that Ben Kenobi did grow weaker.

Galan007
Originally posted by Darthadi
Actually. If Luke with only a few years of training could be at the same level as Vader who had 20+ years of training (not to mention his training and knowledge of the force were better than Luke's) wouldn't this be the proof that either Vader lost potential after Mustafar (either because of injuries or, more likely, psychological reasons) or that for some reason he was not at his best during ROTJ?
I'm really curious if they would give as some form of explanation in the comics. Who knows, maybe it will be something similar to Rey downloading knowledge from Kylo, lol. There's really no good explanation for Luke's exponential growth as of now.

As mentioned, canon states/implies that Vader never lost potential, and his power only grew over the years. He was indeed conflicted to some extent in RotJ, but Beware the Power of the Dark Side! states that he cast those emotions aside, and legitimately wanted to either kill Luke or turn him to the dark side -- his feelings towards Luke were initially hate/fear... So I don't think his conflict was inhibiting his abilities much at all there.

Strange as it is, I think Luke was just on Vader's level by then(which canon also confirms.) HOW Luke ascended to that level is the real question -- one that I hope is fleshed out in the comics.

Galan007
Originally posted by Zenwolf
Well as far as I recall, Palps wasn't gonna be replaced anyway and he wanted to takeover Luke's body which isn't full of mechanical stuffs, according to the new Canon info...or was that just implied? Either way. Why would he wanna have a crippled body or an apprentice?

Really though this is just another one of those many new Canon issues. It would easily be done with if they said that Vader's potential was lost because...it honestly doesn't change much of anything actual power wise that Vader has shown thus far, because his potential was never gonna be reached anyway.

I mean his potential could be 10 or 100 of Palpatine, but how does anyone really gauge that with the actual power shown? It's pointless. 10 could be lifting an ISD, 100 could be lifting an ISD who cares.

Though it would help with the story and the reasoning of ESB/ROTJ dialogue. It'll probably come up at some point, just as it's noted that Ben Kenobi did grow weaker. Yeah, it was stated in the RoS novel that Palpatine had made the same proposal to Luke that he did to Rey. So presumably the line in RotJ: "strike me down with all of your hatred, and your journey towards the dark side will be complete" equates to: "kill me in anger so that I can transfer my essence into you." /shrug

An argument could me made that peak Vader may have been on par with(or possibly even beyond) the level of RotS Palpatine... But Palpatine's own power would have also grown considerably over the years, which explains why Vader was always a notch or two below him.

I've said this before, but I think Vader never unlocked more of his potential because Palpatine was intentionally withholding knowledge from him -- only feeding Vader just enough teachings to keep him subservient, while hoarding as much knowledge as possible for himself. Remember, Palpatine never really wanted Vader to usurp him... So keeping his power in check like that would make sense.

Zenwolf
Originally posted by Galan007
Yeah, it was stated in the RoS novel that Palpatine had made the same proposal to Luke that he did to Rey. So presumably the line in RotJ: "strike me down with all of your hatred, and your journey towards the dark side will be complete" equates to: "kill me in anger so that I can transfer my essence into you." /shrug

An argument could me made that peak Vader may have been on par with(or possibly even beyond) the level of RotS Palpatine... But Palpatine's own power would have also grown considerably over the years, which explains why Vader was always a notch or two below him.

I've said this before, but I think Vader never unlocked more of his potential because Palpatine was intentionally withholding knowledge from him -- only feeding Vader just enough teachings to keep him subservient, while hoarding as much knowledge as possible for himself. Remember, Palpatine never really wanted Vader to usurp him... So keeping his power in check like that would make sense.

Ah ok, I thought you said something about that, but I wasn't sure of the source if it was the RoS novel or not. /Shrug

So basically the same as he was in prior Canon too, cause there were sources saying that he did grow in power and all that and did have access to great knowledge and what not.

The only thing now that I'm seeing different with Vader, is just that his potential apparently was never hindered(was this actually stated or just speculation since there isn't saying otherwise?) ....but that doesn't really matter if he is or isn't cause he'd never reach it regardless.

Galan007
Originally posted by Zenwolf
The only thing now that I'm seeing different with Vader, is just that his potential apparently was never hindered(was this actually stated or just speculation since there isn't saying otherwise?) ....but that doesn't really matter if he is or isn't cause he'd never reach it regardless. Chee said in a Tweet that injuries don't reduce potential in canon, and one of Vader's bios from Rebels stated that he still had the highest midi-chlorian count among Jedi or Sith.

But yeah, he was obviously never able to reach his full potential. Palpatine likely saw to that.

Zenwolf
Originally posted by Galan007
Chee said in a Tweet that injuries don't reduce potential in canon, and one of Vader's bios from Rebels stated that he still had the highest midi-chlorian count among Jedi or Sith.

But yeah, he was obviously never able to reach his full potential. Palpatine likely saw to that.

Now that I'm thinking of it...wasn't this also true prior? Because there were a few characters who got maimed and yet only grew more powerful beyond what they were before. Hell I also recall that Palps noted that Vader could still grow to the point where he could kill him and that only his only real hinderance was psychological than physical. Which if Chee or Lucas really did care on that aspect, I don't think would let fly, especially Chee.

Plus didn't Plaeguis muse that cybernetics didn't actual hinder a Force User?

Irregardless though, Vader did or didn't get hindered, it doesn't matter in the end.

Buuuut anyway, seeing as I guess this has trailed off long enough. I'm thinking Yoda has the better feats IIRC.

EmperorSidious2
While Luke is extremely skilled and talented he is still not at the Yoda level.

Sabers: Yoda. Luke can put up a good enough fight, but Yoda was able to conclusively demonstrate his superiority to Dooku, and was able to disarm Sidious in ROTS.

Force: Yoda. Not much explanation needed here. One can absorb Sidious lightning while the other cannot. While Luke has more potential than Yoda that potential has not been realized by ROTJ.

All-Out: Yoda. Reasons stated above. Yoda is a far more seasoned duelist, has better feats, and Luke just is not there yet.

Sheev
Luke wins.

Vader by this point would have smoked Yoda, and Luke was Vader's peer.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.