Except that people do this all the time in real life. Anyway, this isn't needed, you've already admitted Maul did plan on killing him before so there's no need for me to waste any more time on this:
Maul planned to slowly kill Kenobi when he was at his mercy and he had a choice in the matter. That doesn't prove Maul wasn't trying to kill Kenobi when they were fighting. In fact he tried to kill Kenobi here: https://youtu.be/aE_CVWMWK74?t=4m33s
And as long as SC is to be taken into account, here:
Yes, Maul has pointed out he wants Kenobi to die slowly, when they weren't in a fight and Kenobi was in no position to fight back. You've already addressed Maul's statement on Mandalore for me above so I'm not going to waste my time with that.
In actual fights we've seen Maul explicitly try to kill Kenobi, hence the use of logic dictates he was trying to kill Kenobi when they were fighting but wanted to kill him slowly when he didn't have to worry about Maul fighting back.
Maul's intentions for Kenobi is a long period of suffering, as you've admitted. An anti climactic saber instakill is pretty much the opposite of that. The idea that his motives and ultimate goal change during a fight is... nuanced to say the least.
Aiming at Kenobi's body with blade slashes (one's that are inevitably blocked) during a battle doesn't preclude the idea that he's still trying to engage Kenobi without killing him, as it's part of a fighting norm to wear his opponent down. If Kenobi can sense when Maul is about to attack using the Force, the latter can certainly sense when Kenobi's about to block. The article from SC is soiled further as it's written from Obi's perspective. Failing to act as a lense into Maul's underlying schemes.
Nah, you just can't seem to read properly, let me help you out.
So at the start, these motivations you keep trying to claim of him wanting to painfully kill Kenobi, but not kill him in a fight are flat out false.
Moving on....
So yes, eventually, he decides that killing him in a fight isn't enough. That this applies to Florrum, where we see Maul blatantly try to kill Kenobi is a baseless claim.
You've proven nothing. If you want to try and address my points, feel free to.
It's a pretty simple concept actually. When you don't have to worry about your opponent fighting you back, you get the leisure to choose how you want to eat your food (or at least you assume they have that leisure).
This is something that is extremely common with villians in fiction. For example, lets look Maul in TPM.
These examples are only relevant if there's a passage stating he wants to keep either Qui Gon or TPM! Kenobi alive. Feel free to continue when you find them. As for TCW Kenobi, Maul want's to keep him around to experience a prolonged and intense period of suffering. That doesn't change in a fight. The garden variety villain practice only applies to Sith Lords without said circumstances.
Re-watch the clip. Maul waits until Kenobi activates both blades before slashing at him. Why do you think that might be?
Stop being a retard and actually take a second to read the passages you regard as "evidence". Next debate, I'm not wasting my time digging out someone elses quote's because they're not intelligent enough to grasp the full context of what's happening.
Bolded are thoughts, feelings and sensations perceived by Obi Wan. Meaning this is a passage written from his perspective.
Last edited by twotter on Aug 20th, 2017 at 10:35 PM
That Maul wants to keep him alive is a falsehood as we have Maul twice saying the opposite. The statement Maul made on Malachor isn't relevant here.
:Hmm, a good observation. It seems that, assuming we don't include details in SC that contradict the episode (which is the only basis for the fight being so circumstantial), Maul wasn't fighting with lethal intent.
However Witwer's comments do make clear this doesn't apply to the turtle tanker. Though you're right here.
Before calling me a retard, how about you realize that's not the part of the passage I was using?
This isn't from Kenobi's perspective:
That's an objective narration outlining exactly what happened.
If we don't take contradictory parts of sc seriously(whichI'm in favor of), then Maul was not looking to kill on Florrum.
But if you want to take parts of sc that contradict the episode into account here, he was explicitly trying to kill him.
So their fight on Florrum wasn't one of ''many opportunities'' for Maul to kill Obi-Wan? No, he just didn't kill him when he had him in a Force choke or when he ragdolled him at the end because lulz.
How the f*** are they false when Maul himself states ''your death will be beyond excruciating'' and that Kenobi will ''feel every cut''?
I have Witver and a bunch of quotes from Maul himself. You have some reaching from yourself, nothing more. As it seems clear you're not gonna provide any shred of evidence to back up your claims, whereas I have, there's no point for me to continue.
I already conceded that Maul wasn't trying to kill him on Florrum. My concession only works if we're dismissing parts of sc that blatantly the episode, such as say, the narrow space or the brothers getting in each other's way. Otherwise, Maul explicitly trying to kill Kenobi debunks your assertion:
Either all the other context you've caught is invalidated by the episode, or Maul was trying to kill Kenobi, your choice.
And Maul never choked Kenobi btw
Because what Maul is willing to do when his opponent is completely at his mercy isn't necessarily the same when his opponent is fighting him.
Your quote confirms this:
Kenobi only starts wanting more than "fighting and destroying" Kenobi "as the story continues":
As of season 4, Maul hasn't realized that fighting and destroying Kenobi isn't enough. That Maul wanted to kill Kenobi slowly when he had the leisure to choose how to kill him doesn't prove he wouldn't take killing him in a fight. Per Witwer's statement, that leap of logic is a false one.
Last edited by Rockydonovang on Aug 21st, 2017 at 06:38 AM
Aug 20th, 2017 07:58 PM
