KMC Forums

 
  REGISTER HERE TO JOIN IN! - It's easy and it's free!
Already a member? Log-in!
 
 
Home » Star Wars » Star Wars: Literature & Expanded Universe » Just How Powerful Is The Outlander?


Just How Powerful Is The Outlander?
Started by: Sinious

Forum Jump:
Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (9): « First ... « 6 7 [8] 9 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread
NewGuy01
perpetual

Registered: Jan 2013
Location: USA


 

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Haschwalth

Its annoying use italics/bold with this because it create a new paragraph and leaves the old one there its annoying asf.


Just use the code. It's not hard. [b] starts bold, [/b] ends bold, [quote] starts quote, [/quote] ends quote, and so forth. There's no hassle. Takes maybe a second, champ.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 06:02 AM
Click here to Send NewGuy01 a Private Message Find more posts by NewGuy01 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
DarthAnt66
Last of the Jedi

Registered: Feb 2013
Location: USA


 

(My post is on the bottom of the last page).


__________________

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 06:07 AM
Click here to Send DarthAnt66 a Private Message Find more posts by DarthAnt66 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Rockydonovang
freedom fighter

Registered: Dec 2016
Location:


 

@Ant, when I try and quote you, the window comes up blank, so please make do with my formatting.

I'll be as concise as possible here.

Lets first establish some basic sh!t:

1. In the context it's being used here, undefeatable is an inherently hyperbolic term. No one is "undefeatable". If AOTC Anakin fought Sidious a trillion times, he could probably win one of those fights. A more accurate definition for the word given the context here would be unrealistic or extremely unlikely.

And yes, hyperbole is a thing.

And yes, it can be used in objective narration.

2.
quote:
""For Scourge, the universe suddenly seemed frozen in place, as if time itself had stopped. He realized he was at a crux in history; fate and destiny would be forever altered in the next few moments.
The Force washed over him in a wave, and a million possible futures flickered through his mind simultaneously. In some the Emperor was no more; in others he had transformed the entire galaxy into an empty wasteland. He saw both Revanís triumph and defeat in the throne room; he saw variations of his own life and death played out over and over in every conceivable way, shape, and form.
He had to choose, but there was no way to know which was the most likely outcome, or what actions of his would lead to which results. Revan had said visions could guide the Jedi, but for Scourge they brought nothing but confusion.
The moment passed and the universe began to move again, though everything seemed to be happening in slow motion. Revan and Meetra stepped forward, ready to initiate the final confrontation. Scourge knew he had to act now; he had to make his choice.
In a sudden moment of clarity he saw the Emperor lying defeated at the feet of a powerful Jedi, but that Jedi was neither Revan nor Meetra. And the Sith Lord knew what he had to do.".


ĮStar Wars: The Old Republic: Revan

^^^^This is from Scourge's perspective. How can we tell? Because the entire passage is exclusively describing what Scourge thinks.

3.
quote:
Revan is determined to keep the galaxy safe for his child. Scourge, Meetra, and Revan enter the Emperor's citadel and challenge the supreme ruler. The Emperorís power is too much for Revan. Recognizing that the Emperor is undefeatable, Scourge kills Meetra and betrays Revan.


--Star Wars: The Essential Reader's Companion

^^^^ This is objective narration. How can we tell? Because the narration here alternates between statements regarding separate characters between sentences.

Now, lets analyze the evidence you're referring to, keeping in mind what "undefeatable" means in this context:

quote:
He had to choose, but there was no way to know which was the most likely outcome[I], or what actions of his would lead to which results. Revan had said visions could guide the Jedi, but for Scourge they brought nothing but confusion.

Emphasis mine. Since Scourge admits he has no way of telling which outcome is more likely from these visions, such visions remain an insufficient counter to the notion that Revan could win was [I]extremely unlikely
. Objective narration later shows Scourge recognizing that for the trio here, Vitiate was virtually undefeatable here. You don't see the virtually because the author utilized hyperbole.

Finally, you've failed to respond to this:
quote:
Furthermore, you've failed to explain why this being Scourge's opinion renders my argument illegitimate when Scourge has no reason to be biased here.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 10:51 AM
Click here to Send Rockydonovang a Private Message Find more posts by Rockydonovang Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Rockydonovang
freedom fighter

Registered: Dec 2016
Location:


 

Oh for fcks sake, KMC won't let me edit and fix the errors in my use of italics or the formatting fck ups kmc loves performing

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 10:53 AM
Click here to Send Rockydonovang a Private Message Find more posts by Rockydonovang Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
SunRazer
Outer God

Registered: Apr 2015
Location: Far, far away...


 

Doesn't matter that much. That's a lot more readable than some of your other posts.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 10:54 AM
Click here to Send SunRazer a Private Message Find more posts by SunRazer Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Rockydonovang
freedom fighter

Registered: Dec 2016
Location:


 

quote: (post)
Originally posted by SunRazer
Doesn't matter that much. That's a lot more readable than some of your other posts.

I'm growing in power, yea.
Thanks for noticing smile

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 10:56 AM
Click here to Send Rockydonovang a Private Message Find more posts by Rockydonovang Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
DarthAnt66
Last of the Jedi

Registered: Feb 2013
Location: USA


 

quote:
1. In the context it's being used here, undefeatable is an inherently hyperbolic term. No one is "undefeatable". If AOTC Anakin fought Sidious a trillion times, he could probably win one of those fights. A more accurate definition for the word given the context here would be unrealistic or extremely unlikely.


The meaning of the word "undefeatable" is easily one of the most direct in the language: the character cannot be defeated. You will be hardpressed to find any definition of the word across the hundreds of dictionary websites that even list another definition for the word than that. There is absolutely no reason to not take the word at face-value. There are countless other words that could have been used to convey the point otherwise, but the terminology is as direct as possible.

Further, we know the fight will be close enough that it is not even "unrealistic or extremely unlikely." The way Scourge's visions are portrayed in the text, it is evident that for every future he saw with the Emperor winning, he likewise saw one with Revan winning. Scourge explicitly thinks to himself that, after seeing every possible outcome, there is no way to know which one is more likely over the other, therefore demonstrating the regularity that Revan defeated the Emperor.

Thus, the notion that the Emperor would be defeated anywhere close to a false hyperbolic assessment of the terminology undefeatable.

quote:
^^^^ This is objective narration. How can we tell? Because the narration here alternates between statements regarding separate characters between sentences.


I must admit, I did cringe reading this. You have no clue how this sort of thing works, but I'll explain it to you.

Recognizing that the Emperor is undefeatable, Scourge kills Meetra and betrays Revan.

Let's exclusively look at the independent clause for a second:

Scourge kills Meetra and betrays Revan.

The subject of the sentence is Scourge. The narrator is describing the action Scourge performs: Scourge kills and betrays.

Moving forward, let's look at the dependent clause of the sentence:

Recognizing that the Emperor is undefeatable

Since Scourge is the subject, he is the one "recognizing that the Emperor is undefeatable."

For whatever reason, yourself and TenebrousWay associate Scourge's "recognition" with a "realization of fact."

(please log in to view the image)

"Recognize" can also mean to simply perceive as true - the perception in question does not necessarily have to be fact.

In this case, Scourge is perceiving that the Emperor is undefeatable as true.

This has nothing to do with what the narrator of this teritary source believes. Scourge is the one doing the action, not the narrator.

quote:
Emphasis mine.


You're not Nai.

quote:
Since Scourge admits he has no way of telling which outcome is more likely from these visions, such visions remain an insufficient counter to the notion that Revan could win was extremely unlikely.


This claim here is the perfect equivalent to saying, "I lost my glasses!" without realizing it's on your head.

To repeat, Scourge had millions of visions of different ways Revan or Vitiate would triumph. After seeing it all, Scourge notes how he is unsure "which was the most likely outcome."

If Vitiate would have defeated the strike team significantly more than vice versa, Scourge would not be in doubt, since he would see more victories for Vitiate.

This was not the case. The amount of wins the strike team landed against Vitiate was roughly equivalent to the amount Vitiate striked against them.

Therefore, the idea that Revan's victory is vastly unlikely is, by definition, false. Revan's chances are, if anything, close to 50 / 50 in this confrontation.

quote:
Furthermore, you've failed to explain why this being Scourge's opinion renders my argument illegitimate when Scourge has no reason to be biased here.


I actually have. I was unaware I had to also play connect-the-dots too.

Follow me here:

a.) Scourge has what he, as someone without substantial knowledge on how visions or the future works, believes is a "moment of clarity."

b.) Scourge does not have a vision of the strike team losing - Scourge has a vision of the Hero of Tython defeating the Emperor.

c.) Scourge personally concludes, therefore, the Emperor is undefeatable until the moment the Hero of Tython defeats him.

Here's the twist: remember Episode III and how Anakin has "visions of clarity" of Padme dying?

That the entire film is Anakin performing action after action in an attempt to prevent the vision from coming true?

But in the end, Anakin realizes the vision he saw was the reality if he performed the action he did, thus meaning he is responsible for her death?

This is a common trope in literature: the actions a character takes to prevent a reality is what ultimately causes the reality.

Same idea here.

The vision Scourge saw was the reality if he were to betray the strike team.

We know this because if Scourge decided not to, the reality of the Hero of Tython defeating Vitiate would not have happened.

If the fight continued, either Vitiate or Scourge would have died, but both are needed for the Hero of Tython to eventually confront Vitiate

Thus, Scourge's opinion is irrelevant since he incorrectly assessed the vision, believing it to mean the strike team would lose, but that was not the case.

--- --- ---

In an unrelated but relevant point, explain to me how the Emperor can one-shot Revan with lightning, yet the following happens:

Revanís head snapped to the side, shock and horror emanating from him even though his mask hid his expression.

The distraction gave the Emperor the opportunity he needed, and he unleashed another blast of lightning into the Jediís chest.


Why would the Emperor need a "distraction" for an "opportunity" to arise to destroy Revan? Why could he have not destroyed him regardless?

The Jedi Exile and Scourge, as the novel establishes, are weak enough to indeed be one-shot by Vitiate; they are not the reason for Vitiate not attacking.

Oh, perhaps, just perhaps, that Vitiate cannot straight-up one-shot Revan - that if he attacked Revan, the attack would be futile?



Just a thought.


__________________

Last edited by DarthAnt66 on Aug 30th, 2017 at 03:23 PM

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 03:19 PM
Click here to Send DarthAnt66 a Private Message Find more posts by DarthAnt66 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
TenebrousWay
Senior Member

Registered: Sep 2016
Location:


 

@Ant

quote:
What does that even mean?

The fact the victory visions never materialized does not preclude the notion that the victory visions could not have happened.


Victory visions that are immediately supplanted by a "clearer" one that inevitably means the defeat of the team.

quote:
We know that the victory visions could have happened:


Victory visions? Yeah. Actual victories? No.

quote:
The fact the victory visions could have happened therefore means the Emperor is defeatable.


Victory visions that are overrided by a clearer one and objectively clarified to not being able to materialize by the narrator.

quote:
You are arguing that the Emperor is merely undefeatable in this specific instance, but it is this specific instance in which the visions occur.


I said "specific instance" to highlight especifically his confrontation with the trio.

quote:
All these visions, all these possibilities, are possibilities that may happen within this specific instance.


No, they can't, as establishes the source.

quote:
The fact they never materialized simply means it is unknown who would have won the fight if the fight continued as planned.


The encounter that actually happened was won decisively by the Emperor.

quote:
Thus, you are arguing that, if the fight continued, the Emperor would not have lost - that the strike would have lost every possible fight conceivable.


That's actually what the narrator states and what motivates Scourge to betray the team.

quote:
You are arguing that, if the strike team fought the Emperor a trillion times, the Emperor would have won a trillion times over.

That is the meaning of the word undefeatable.


That's the word being employed by the narrator, after all.

quote:
This is false. Scourge's vision reveals that there were instances, many, in fact, where the strike team won.


Visions that didn't materialize and were actually suplanted by one that suggests defeat and specificaly clarified by the narrator as being an impossibility.

quote:
You are also arguing that Scourge's vision granted him temporary omniscience, which is absurd and wildly inconsistent with lore.


I said he recognized something that was established by the narrator to be an universal truth.

quote:
The Force is always in motion, that is a key stable of Star Wars lore. Scourge's "vision of clarity" can be interpreted in an alternative way:

Scourge's vision of the strike team losing is the same as Anakin's vision of Padme dying: Scourge views the reality that he is about to make true.


Irrelevant.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 03:29 PM
Click here to Send TenebrousWay a Private Message Find more posts by TenebrousWay Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
DarthAnt66
Last of the Jedi

Registered: Feb 2013
Location: USA


 

I just responded to Kbro one post above, who more-or-less said what you said, so refer to that.

If you have any original points not touched in my response, requote them to me.


__________________

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 03:33 PM
Click here to Send DarthAnt66 a Private Message Find more posts by DarthAnt66 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Haschwalth
Senior Member

Registered: Jul 2017
Location:


 

quote: (post)
Originally posted by DarthAnt66
I just responded to Kbro one post above, who more-or-less said what you said, so refer to that.

If you have any original points not touched in my response, requote them to me.


Nice notice, on that fact Vitiate needed an opportunity, to take Revan down, even after Revan was badly wounded. Indicate's Vitiate couldn't draw on his charged force lightning again. Meaning he had expended a fair bit of his power.

Last edited by Haschwalth on Aug 30th, 2017 at 03:49 PM

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 03:44 PM
Click here to Send Haschwalth a Private Message Find more posts by Haschwalth Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
DarthAnt66
Last of the Jedi

Registered: Feb 2013
Location: USA


 

TW believes that there is only one set definitive outcome for any input in the Star Wars universe, lmfao.


__________________

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 03:53 PM
Click here to Send DarthAnt66 a Private Message Find more posts by DarthAnt66 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
TenebrousWay
Senior Member

Registered: Sep 2016
Location:


 

quote: (post)
Originally posted by DarthAnt66
I just responded to Kbro one post above, who more-or-less said what you said, so refer to that.

If you have any original points not touched in my response, requote them to me.


I'll just summarize here the main point. The others are irrelevant.

quote:
Since Scourge is the subject, he is the one "recognizing that the Emperor is undefeatable."


Scourge can only recognize what is previously established to be true, even if no one knows it yet. Scourge doesn't conclude a "fact" (liberty taken, a conclusion isn't a fact, obviously) by his own reflexions, he recognizes it.

Think about the following sentence:

"Scourge, falsely recognizing the Emperor to be undefeatable, attacks Vitiate and is destroyed in the process."

In this case, we know, based on Scourge's recognizing the wrong universal fact, that the Emperor is, indeed, undefeatable.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 03:59 PM
Click here to Send TenebrousWay a Private Message Find more posts by TenebrousWay Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
DarthAnt66
Last of the Jedi

Registered: Feb 2013
Location: USA


 

quote: (post)
Originally posted by TenebrousWay
Scourge can only recognize what is previously established to be true, even if no one knows it yet.

Scourge doesn't conclude a "fact" (liberty taken, a conclusion isn't a fact, obviously) by his own reflexions, he recognizes it.

The word recognize doesn't demand the recognition is that of truth.

(please log in to view the image)

So, in other words:

"Perceiving to be true that the Emperor is undefeatable, Scourge betrays Revan and kills Meetra."

This makes total sense.

Nothing states the recognition has to be that of universal truth.


__________________

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 04:01 PM
Click here to Send DarthAnt66 a Private Message Find more posts by DarthAnt66 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
TenebrousWay
Senior Member

Registered: Sep 2016
Location:


 

quote: (post)
Originally posted by DarthAnt66
The word recognize doesn't demand the recognition is that of truth.

(please log in to view the image)


I think the source, trying to give a concise resume of the events, would employ the more objective definition:

quote:
B2 [ T ] to accept that something is legal, true, or important; officially accept the existence of


That is, Scourge accepts the (universal) notion that the Emperor is undefeatable.

quote:
So, in other words:

"Perceiving to be true that the Emperor is undefeatable, Scourge betrays Revan and kills Meetra."

This makes total sense.


"Accepting that the Emperor is undefeatable, Scourge betrays Revan and kills Meetra."

This looks far better for a concise narration.

quote:
Nothing states the recognition has to be that of universal truth.


He must recognize a notion and he recognizes the notion that Vitiate is undefeatable. If his recognition were bonkers it'd had been written something like:

"Falsely recognizing the Emperor to be defeatable, Scourge attacks Vitiate and is destroyed in the process."

By his recognition being false, the author communicates with the reader the notion that Vitiate is, indeed, undefeatable.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 04:41 PM
Click here to Send TenebrousWay a Private Message Find more posts by TenebrousWay Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Rockydonovang
freedom fighter

Registered: Dec 2016
Location:


 

@ant. Again I can't directly quote and respond, likely coz you're getting fancy with how you quote evidence.

1. We don't always take the most direct definitions when they don't align with the context they're taken in. To take this term literally would be accepting a falsehood, regardless of the perspective it's written in. And generally speaking sh!t like undefeatable, unbeatable, or unparalleled is hyperbolic because the literal definition of these words is rarely literally true.

2. Nowhere is it stated anywhere that Scourge saw an equal amount of visions for either side. That Scourge was overwhelmed with the number of scenarios he saw doesn't prove that one outcome wasn't significantly more likely than another. That there were an equal amount of scenarios is at best speculation. Unfortunate, I know. sad

3. Ant, you do realize that you can't identify the perspective of narration from a single sentence? In order to identify what perspective narration is coming from, we need to look at the whole of the passage, not a single sentence. And yes Ant, a sentence about Scourge will include Scourge's name. Much like the first sentence here mentioned Revan when it was talking about Revan:
quote:
Revan is determined to keep the galaxy safe for his child.

This doesn't change regardless of whether the narration is third person or from a specific character's perspective. That a single sentence had Scourge as the subject does not prove that this is from Scourge's perspective. We can tell this is objective because the subjects of the sentences here are continuously being alternated:
quote:
Revan is determined to keep the galaxy safe for his child. Scourge, Meetra, and Revan enter the Emperor's citadel and challenge the supreme ruler. The Emperorís power is too much for Revan. Recognizing that the Emperor is undefeatable, Scourge kills Meetra and betrays Revan.

The author is simply stating what is happening throughout the narrative with a variety of sentences that focus on a variety of characters. In other words, this is objective narration.

4. Realize means:
quote:
become fully aware of (something) as a fact; understand clearly.


5. Yes Ant, you have to explain how you came to the conclusion you're arguing for, that's how debating works. roll eyes (sarcastic)

Anyway, as noted earlier, the quote regarding the visions was objective narration, your speculation notwithstanding.

6. Vitiate got the opportunity he needed to catch Revan off guard, yea. That he wouldn't have won otherwise is a baseless conclusion. That Revan's companions are one-shottable doesn't change they're distractions, which seems to be Vitiate's kryptonite. As we've repeatedly seen, he's absolute trash when dealing with multiple opponents. You could argue against the semantics of using the term one-shot for vitiate instantly defeating Revan with a charged up blast, but the point stands, Revan remained outclassed by Vitiate as clearly shown here:
quote:
A dozen bolts of purple lightning arced from the Emperor toward him. Revan tried to draw them in and contain them, but the Emperor was infinitely more powerful than Darth Nyriss had ever been. Revan's body was engulfed in agony as the electricity coursed through his body. His skin began to boil and blister, the flesh of his face melting and sticking to the superheated metal of his mask as the Emperor poured more and more power into him. Through the haze of indescribable pain, he saw T3-M4 rushing in to help him. The droid let loose with his flamethrower, bathing the Emperor in fire. At the last instant the Emperor cocooned himself in the Force to save himself from being incinerated, breaking his focus on Revan. The Jedi collapsed to the ground, burned but still alive, the hilt of his extinguished lightsaber lying on the floor less than a meter beyond his grasp. Almost too weak to move, Revan managed to raise his head just in time to see the Emperor turn on the brave little astromech. A tremor rippled through the air as the Emperor unleashed the full power of the Force against the defenseless droid. T3 never stood a chance. The little droid exploded into a million pieces, internal circuits and external casing obliterated in a single instant. (SWTOR: Revan)


Revan's still sh!t to Vitiate which is more than sufficient for my argument as a whole considering that Vaylin is shown both holistically and directly as someone who threatens Valk by virtue of her power.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 05:00 PM
Click here to Send Rockydonovang a Private Message Find more posts by Rockydonovang Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Omnipotent

Registered: Aug 2013
Location: Beyond the beyond.


XSUPREMEXSKILLZ is online now!

Ant, it's true, recognize = realize in the context of the quote, tbh.

That said, the quote still contradicts the actual source material.


__________________



"I was lying! See? There's an Omniverse in the box. And that Omniverse died. But alot of the lives in it carried onto the new one. New broom--same handle."

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 05:21 PM
Click here to Send XSUPREMEXSKILLZ a Private Message Find more posts by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Rockydonovang
freedom fighter

Registered: Dec 2016
Location:


 

quote: (post)
Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ

That said, the quote still contradicts the actual source material.

Not neccesarily

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 05:39 PM
Click here to Send Rockydonovang a Private Message Find more posts by Rockydonovang Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
FreshestSlice
Guardian Biotic

Registered: May 2014
Location:


 

Vitiate's been defeated several times. He's obviously not undefeatable.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 06:15 PM
Click here to Send FreshestSlice a Private Message Find more posts by FreshestSlice Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Rockydonovang
freedom fighter

Registered: Dec 2016
Location:


 

quote: (post)
Originally posted by FreshestSlice
Vitiate's been defeated several times. He's obviously not undefeatable.

Hence why the term is being used hyperbolically

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 06:27 PM
Click here to Send Rockydonovang a Private Message Find more posts by Rockydonovang Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
FreshestSlice
Guardian Biotic

Registered: May 2014
Location:


 

That has literally nothing to do with whether it's contradictory or not.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2017 06:32 PM
Click here to Send FreshestSlice a Private Message Find more posts by FreshestSlice Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
All times are UTC. The time now is 02:54 PM.
Pages (9): « First ... « 6 7 [8] 9 »   Last Thread   Next Thread

Email this Page
Subscribe to this Thread
   Post New Thread  Post A Reply

Forum Jump:
Search by user:
 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON

Text-only version
 

< Contact Us - KillerMovies.com - Forum Archive - Forum Rules >


© Copyright 2000-2006, KillerMovies.com. All Rights Reserved.
Forum powered by: vBulletin, copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.