Darth Sidious (one lightsaber) -vs- Savage Opress and Maul
(please log in to view the image)
Location: Mandalore.
Starting Distance Apart: 10 Feet.
Just as in TCW; in the Mandalorian city, cargo facility.
Maul and Opress find themselves face to face with Sidious.
Except Sidious only has one lightsaber.
Does this mean death for the Dark Lord? Or does it not make a difference at all?
Scenario 1: Sidious fights the Zabrak brothers in the exact same situation as the TCW episode, with one lightsaber to use.
Scenario 2: The Mandalorians have discovered Sidious' presence upon his entering the planet, and Sidious knows he must kill both brothers in 1 Minute and then escape - is he capable of this, or no?
In both scenarios, he has one lightsaber - just as when he fought the Council members.
Sidious cannot use Offensive Force attacks to kill or subdue his opponents; he can only use his lightsaber to dispatch them, in both Scenarios.
One blade!Sidious cannot hope to match, let alone defeat, four blade!Zabraks. Only by divine intervention, perhaps by channeling the spirit of the great Barriss Offee, could the Dark Lord hope to secure a victory.
"What I really took away from the screening last night though was that when Obi-Wan rose up with his 2 Lightsabers and Defeated Maul and Opress the whole place went nuts.."
Now I might be crazy but him specifying Kenobi using 2 Lightsabers to Defeat Maul and Opress seems to suggest Kenobi having 2 Lightsabers might have had something to do with defeating Maul and Opress.
And Visage I await your response on why Kenobi performed so much better against the Brothers than Count Dooku did against Opress and Ventress if using dual sabers makes no difference against multiple opponents.
I'd also like an explanation for why Kenobi used 2 against them. He was in for the fight of his life. Was it really a good time to switch to a different style than he's used to. And was it just a big coincidence that Sidious also chose the same method to tackle the brothers?
Holding a pair of blades, as opposed to one blade, will significantly weaken your offensive and defensive capabilities, strength-wise.
With one blade, you can defeat multiple opponents through speed, and setting up your positioning, so their attacks cross in front of each other and interfere with each other.
Also, on a sidenote, using two blades that are the same length also creates a gap in your defense, which easily be exploited and this is why you will never see two long swords of equal length being utilized in real life martial arts.
A lightsaber and shoto would have sealed up the gap that two lightsabers generate. Regardless, the two brothers apparently weren't even skilled enough or evidently fast enough to take that potential opening.
It comes down to technique and utility - Sidious was masterful enough with one blade to be able to cut down a trio of highly skilled opponents in seconds; he doesn't actually need two blades to kill anyone beneath Yoda or Mace.
Everything he did, from the TK-rag-dolling, to the carrying of two lightsabers, to the constant traveling, was done to lead the brothers on and toy with them.
He was there to savor crushing them, not just physically - but emotionally and psychologically, as well.
And hope are the seeds, in the garden of despair.
Sidious didn't need two lightsabers; just one. But two fit the specific purpose of his visit, which was to inflict pain - and not just outright kill.
Well either accept that he clearly is, or that 2 Sabers aided him in fighting multiple opponents.
LOL What a Lame excuse. I think what the majority would consider bad writing is when Sidious blitzed those 3 Masters.
What's your In-Universe explanation? If your just putting down whatever you feel like to Bad Writing, then I'll have field day doing the same.
I never said it's without disadvantage. But if there were no advantages then no one would ever use 2. What I'm saying is the advantages are more suitable to take on 2 opponents. That's what Season 5 of the Clone Wars has shown anyway.
Even when Obi-Wan had one blade he chose to fend off the brothers one handed. So it can't be that much of a disadvantage in terms of weakening his hold.
Count Dooku also fends off powerhouses like Skywalker one handed and Maul did the same when he stomped Opress.
Well Kenobi clearly couldn't just battle them both through sheer speed alone. If he could he would have completely stomped Maul in their one on one. But he didn't. Their one on one wasn't even close to a stomp.
With 1 Blade if your stuck in between 2 of them you'd be royally screwed. Which Obi-Wan knows himself. This is the extract from the novel when he's fighting them both off with 1 Blade:
"Obi-Wan senses it coming and whirled with blinding speed, parrying Maul's attack. Then he jumped aside, knowing it would be a fatal mistake to be caught between two Sith "
And yet later he does just fine caught between the 2 of them when he had 2 Blades to deflect simultaneous attacks from opposite sides.
LOL So your actually arguing Kenobi was actually overall Disadvantaged when using 2 Blades.
Ok then, explain to me why Kenobi specifically grabbed Adi's Saber and used both Sabers when he knew he's have to face them alone.
Oh don't tell me: "Bad Writing," LOL. From what your saying Kenobi is >>> Count Dooku in Sabers.
As for your own speculation about the gap a full Saber creates compared to a Shoto. It's kind of irrelevant when facing 2 Opponents on either side of him. He wouldn't get very far parrying off one of the Sith's attacks with just a Shoto.
Not to mention he didn't have a Shoto available and he might not even be skilled in using a Shoto.
Which means nothing in this case. Because Dave Filoni has outright confirmed that just Opress's performance against Sidious was > than the 3 stooges.
Oh here we go. Back to the toying. Even though No Canon Source on the subject anywhere backs this idea up. But keep sticking to it. It's much easier than actually accepting that the Brothers challenged Sidious in Sabers
And yet you've still not explained why Kenobi used 2 Sabers. And why Filoni specifically noted Kenobi using Dual Sabers to defeat Maul and Opress.
Why even mention it if it makes no difference?
And you've certainly not proved that Sidious could just outright defeat the Brothers whenever he liked. If he could then he should have done so. Your speculation about him toying and savoring the fight is not Canon.
As usual the Sidious camp has nothing but speculation, and no answer to simple questions like why the heck Kenobi abandoned his usual use of 1 Saber in that scenario.
Whilst I'm binging all the proofs and sources on the subject, as well as the clear indications from the episodes. But it's clearly falling on deaf ears.
Last edited by Darth Thor on Feb 27th, 2013 at 11:10 AM
Kenobi may perhaps need two sabers to fight people like Ventress, Maul, Savage, etc.
Sidious does not.
Because that kind of speed is certainly out of question for the most powerful Dark Lord of the Sith in Galactic History.
Very well done, DP.
There is none.
It's Corporate Fan-fiction and doesn't consistently fit in with the showings of other Canon.
No, you can do the same amount of damage and work, with just one blade.
By positioning yourself, so their attacks interfere with each other and parrying the blade from one attacker, into the next; and delivering a follow-up cut to drop one of the opponents.
And in European swordsmanship, two swords were only deliberately used in one-on-one duels; while the sword and shield were used to take on multiple opponents.
In Japanese swordsmanship, the extra shorter blade is utilized to give added-defense to the central line - and it's not needed to deal with multiple opponents, where one blade can suffice just as well.
Fantasy movies typically have instances where heroes will pick up two weapons and fend off droves of enemies, though.
Yep, and it's made for little kids.
That's fantasy swordplay in a kids show.
It's part of the reason he lost.
His one-handed hold got hammered by Anakin's total strength.
Mhm. Kids show.
Because it's a children show, intended to have fantastic displays of flashy fantasy-swordplay, to amaze and stupefy the young children watching it.
I suppose for children and the mentally-handicapped, the writing would be quite advanced, wouldn't you say?
How so?
The "speculation" is a three-hundred year old art called Hyōhō Niten Ichi-ryū, and not my own.
Two long blades cannot be used perfectly in tandem, whilst guarding the central line.
At points, an opening is exposed; a gap created. And the use of a shorter blade is able to fill that gap at all times, while providing defense. This is universally known to those trained in swordsmanship.
He would, when he follows up that parry with a turning of his body, and a follow up cut with his lightsaber.
Remember, it's about timing, body-positioning, and the cut.
It's not a case of meeting force head-on - it's a case of footwork, timing and using his opponents movements against each other, as much as they are intended against him.
He is the foremost Master in one of the Seven Forms, so he probably has a good familiarity of it.
Either way, it's a kids show.
Because you make no sense; know nothing about swordsmanship, and are blindly prescribing to your own ideas, which is why everyone else has been chastising you for it.
A bit, yes, but its implications are radically overblown.
There's still a general hierarchy: mooks -> Padawans -> Knights -> Masters & Grievous -> Council Masters, Ventress, Savage, Maul -> Dooku, Mace -> Yoda, Sidious -> The Anchorites
You have some people of... shall we say, questionable intellect trying to hammer out concrete placement that isn't there by incorporating obviously circumstantial battles and designing a hilariously inept formula based on number of lightsabers used.
Sweetheart, your perpetual e-stalking continues to push the proverbial envelope of creepy. I understand that there's probably a deficit of people who voluntarily interact with you in any social environment, but you should keep looking.
I practiced with Shinai myself and tried with two Shinai as well.
When practiced, we agreed that one strictly attacks, the other - defends, then swap. That way we could achieve flashy SW like performance because, if both attack, fight ends within seconds.
When defending against two Shinai, it required me to constantly move backward like Dooku in AotC because it is mostly impossible to block both sabers simultaniously, dodging is required.
Also, Shinai are too heavy for one handed grip, so speed and strength were suffering a lot.
Against two opponents I certainly would prefer one sword and rely on foot movement, so opponents stumble against each other unable to attack at the same time.
Using two sabers against multiple opponents in real life is unsuitable. One handed style, while lacks strength, it offers much more movement freedom and strong attacks can still be deflected sideways but it requires a lot of focus and skill. But with two sabers your concentration is split between two hands, it is, also, very hard to focus on both opponents and respond to their attacks correctly.
Force users on the other hand are guided by the Force, which makes it much easier for them to split concentration. Moreover, they don't even need to see attack to counter it, so it is not as big problem, if one of the opponents is behind. And that's why comparison with real life doesn't work in this case.
Feb 26th, 2013 09:41 PM
