__________________ "Happiness is a lie. Life is horror. The light is always dying all across the universe. The last star will flicker out someday, when it does, all that remains is shadow. And I will be its king!"'-Amahl Farouk
Stover's flowery description aside, that's nothing special. It's how Jedi fight in general. It's how they are supposed to fight: by releasing all desire and letting the force flow through themselves as they fight.
In TCW, Grevious faced superior versions of Kenobi and did significantly better than Maul did, with Kenobi either winning via the force or getting out dueled.
Ventress was amped against Grievous. Whether in Legends via Dathomir being a conventional DS Nexus
Or in Canon where Nightsisters share a specific connection with the planet. Remember Ventress was "baptised in dark side energy" and became a full Nightsister at the start of that episode.
So it was circumstantial no matter how you cut it.
Last edited by Greysentinel365 on Feb 16th, 2018 at 10:23 AM
Too bad that Maul doesn't hello there General Grievous.
__________________ RealistRacism: "Sheevites, much like the Banites, were meant to increase in power with each member. From Lightsnake to Gideon to Azronger, this was supposed to be the case. However, knowledge must've been lost in some kind of Gravid-like incident, as Az turned out to be a mid-tier debater with a sub-par track record, sh!itting all over Tempest's legacy. Sad."
And let's ignore that Grievous had a cybernetic upgrade after season 5. After which he wrecked season 7 Kenobi.
Nope. The specific example Feloni cited to demonstrate what he was saying was that of Grievous vs Eath Koth where Grievous was winning the saber duel but then lost the fight when Koth force blasted him.
Not to mention Filoni (whose mere implications you take as word of God when it suits you), made it very clear, that she was just a superior duelist to Grievous.
LOL What?
Citation needed please. Again Filoni (word of God for you when convenient), made it clear Grievous wins when he catches Jedi off guard, and that hes not truly a match for the like of Ventress or Kenobi in Saber combat.
Talking Canon of course.
Oh and lets not forget the 3 fights between Maul and Grievous in SOD (S6/7), none of which showed or even implied Grievous to be superior in any way. 2 of which showed Maul as the clear superior, once Physically, and another time with TK).
I didnt say anything about Koth. I am talking about his commentary of Ventress vs Grievous, where he made it clear Ventress was just the superior duelist irrespective of any dark side amps.
You seem to be very selective on your use Filoni's commentaries.
I don't need the word of god vs an absence of evidence. It's a little different when the lore shows contradictory evidence. For example, Grievous has outright beat TCW Kenobi. Maul has never showcased superiority with a blade to Kenobi, so if Ventress can legit beat Grievous, why should we assume Kenobi or Maul is > Ventress?
You can either
A, decide the source material strongly suggests feloni is bsing.
B. Accept twhere the evidence leads, Ventress>Grievous>TCW Kenobi/Maul.
Also, there's a difference between Feloni saying "in my opinion", or Feloni outright explaining his own intent.
So again, I want to see the quote.
Quote me fam.
2 bud, it's not a fight when your opponent doesn't know there's a fight happening.
Or do we only consider context when it favors a pro-Maul argument?
You mean when Grievous tanked maul's tk+a massive fall, and then climbed back up, unharmed?
I'd be interested to see how you dance around Grievous being distracted, or is that only a viable explanation when we're trying to save Maul from padawan-endowed embarrassment?
Also, it's sabers only fam, try again.
When Grievous kicked him back landing the only hit of their fights? (Note: a "hit of a fight" happens during a fight)
Ant should have it, you're welcome to provide the quote you're wholly basing your argument on in the meanwhile.
Way to not address Kurk's argument.
Last edited by Rockydonovang on Feb 18th, 2018 at 02:36 PM
Also, thor, No evidence is definitive, it's up to us to weight evidence case by case to see which stances have more evidence. That's what debating is about. This "Feloni is the word of god" tangent is just a lazy non-sequitur.
Feb 15th, 2018 11:39 PM
