Responding via Xbox 360 is hard so I'm gonna do it short: In lightsaber combat, Maul has been hyped far higher than Revan; accolades such as being among the deadliest Sith in history and being a "high-end master of multiple forms", not to mention his showings of killing Qui-Gon Jinn, defeating Opress and defeating Kenobi. Combine that with being physically stronger and faster and mastering martial arts, Maul undoubtedly wins. In a force contest, Maul has collapsed caves and manhandled Kenobi's ship while evading blasterfire not to mention numerous ragdollings of Kenobi who himself has force pushed Durge's starfighter and rather stalemated Pre-Suit Vader in a contest of force power; Pre-Suit Vader was able to easily levitate a big statue in the Jedi Temple and then blasted a door open with it. In an all-out fight, Revan's chances are small. Maul is more skilled, stronger and faster and should he get up close, which is likely, he should have little trouble dealing a deadly blow. Revan's best chance would be to exploit Maul's lack of knowledge in the force in comparison to his, but with Maul's own feats and with a lightsaber in his hands, everything point toward a victory for Maul.
Not really. He's just pointed out that Maul's legs were attached in a different manner. He hasn't proven at all that Maul had no feeling in those legs.
Since the rule in SW is that people do have feeling in their cybernetic limbs, someone needs to prove Maul had no feeling in his, otherwise the point is moot.
Lol. If you actually watch the episode in which he gets them, you'll see that his legs are attached by frickin' metal cables. Now I'm not big city doctor, but I doubt metal can substitute for nerves very well.
Maul didn't actually rag-dolled the shuttle; he pulled it off the cliff. The feat makes it obvious that Maul is strong in the Force, so no dismissal is involved.
As far as Revan is concerned, he is calculative about his actions. We do not have a single example of him going all-out with his TK abilities; we don't know his limit. However, given his repute and all the praise, he certainly wouldn't disappoint in a contest of Force powers.
If we only apply feats based logic in debates then Marek should waste Sidious (Pre-DE period) with his Force powers. Lesson is that feats are good to put on the table but evaluation process of a character's relative strength and capabilities doesn't rests upon this single factor/consideration. Feats are just part of the equation.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on May 20th, 2013 at 10:07 PM
If its valid, Karpyshans assertion that Revan can destroy a building puts him higher than Maul in power and TK imo. Buildingbuster > pulling a shuttle.
Yet you favorably consider repute only when it involves a character from an era you like.
We should accept as the gospel the idea Revan is the Jedi order's "most powerful champion" but someone counters with the fact that Maul is one of the most highly trained Sith in history and you have a goddamn allergic reaction.
No, because we have a source that flat out confirms Marek is inferior to Sidious.
This is great on paper. But your execution of it has been wretched from the get-go.
If we are going to resort to accolades based logic then Revan easily outclasses Maul in this aspect. And if we are going by performance against noteworthy combatants then Revan outclasses Maul in this aspect too. As far as dueling skills are concerned, Revan is no slouch in this aspect either and I have already covered this part. If you are going to use Qui-Gon card then I am going to use the Imperial Guard card in response. Your arguments are weak.
This kind of argument have already been shot down but you keep on parroting it; ignoring counterarguments of fellow debaters is not going to win you an argument. Pay attention to what others have to say if you are willing to have a debate. Otherwise, you will be projecting the image of a stubborn fanboy who cannot be reasoned with.
Don't you get tired from repeating subjective assertions like these?
Neph, use your +3 critical analysis instead of +9 lie your ass off plz.
In the case where feats are being used to determine relative placement, we clearly lack narration or confirmation of that placement. Otherwise we wouldn't use feats at all. SWL is trying to use that particular example to get me to concede the point, I was simply explaining that that example is not one that need be determined at all by feats because we have direct confirmation.
I attempt to do justice with all characters involved.
I regard Revan as one of the most powerful Jedi in the history of the Order by virtue of all the accolades he have received within the mythos. With such repute, why is it so difficult for some to digest the assumption that Revan isn't a looser when it comes to command of the Force? Just because a character is not featured in big budget mediums, doesn't means that we should lowball him/her in comparison to more well defined and explored characters.
And "Maul being most highly trained Sith in history" based assertion has been ret-conned lately; I suppose you have read the Plagueis novel and you are in touch with all the latest developments in the mythos?
Fair enough but my point is about relying solely on the feats based logic to determine chances of a character against other. This kind of logic isn't going to work as per numerous examples offered in this thread alone.
I can bring my arguments on the table; whether people accept them or not is up to them. However, I am going to stick by my arguments unless someone manages to convince me otherwise. I am flexible in my views. Issue arises when people don't listen to my arguments and keep on parroting their POV like gospel.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on May 20th, 2013 at 10:58 PM
Careful, your high horse is in heat. T'would be a terrible shame if you fell off it and broke your spine as it humps a nearby arse.
I know, its just that you didn't seem to be making that point in that response. It looked like you'd just missed his point and were obliviously responding to his literal suggestion that Galen > Sidious.