Darth Traya and Exar Kun versus Darth Revan and Freddon Nadd

Started by Ianus4 pages

Originally posted by IKC
I don't believe Nadd to be superior to Exar Kun. Nadd took over a backwater world that wasn't a member world of the Republic and killed a descendent of his (as a spirit) several hundred years later, perhaps with the aid of his own amulet. As well, I'd love to see the source that says Nadd killed jedi while armed with a blaster and short lightsaber that -isn't- KOTOR. Until I see it, I'm disinclined to believe it, especially since the Jedi only came to free Onderon several hundred years after Nadd's death. As far as I know, Nadd only confronted Jedi as a spirit.

Nadd's real lasting contribution to the dark side was to convert Satal and Aleema Keto (thereby indirectly converting Ulic Qel-Droma), and Exar Kun. I believe Kun at the height of his power against Nadd at the height of his would be a great battle, but one that Kun would almost definitely win.

It's said in item description that hsi blaster has killed more jedi than any lightsaber up until that time.

Never says Nadd used it, though he may have constructed it or had a hand in its making. To be fair, you only find his lightsaber in his tomb. His gun is a random item drop.

Yes, and Sadow's power too is an unknown quantity. That, and nobody knows that the event even happened. I'm disinclined to think it did, for if he met Sadow on Yavin 4 while alive, there's no reason why he wouldn't have taken Sadow's very powerful amulet and taken control of his Massassi warriors like Exar Kun later did.

And I didn't forget that he killed his descendent. But, like I said, there were no force users until Nadd arrived on Onderon, and after his death he reigned over the planet from beyond the grave through his descendents who were dependent on him for power.

(Edit)

Yes, I asked for a source that wasn't KOTOR for that dubious "fact." As I've maintained, KOTOR frequently plays hard and loose with the mythos.

Point being, IKC, that Nadd may have never used his blaster at all. And I agree with you that he didn't have to do much to overcome the beast riders. While Nadd's potential seems incredible, it's entirely possible he overcame the armies of Onderon with similar Sith magic that Exar Kun used. In any case, Kun has more visible abilities and is a known lightsaber master, so in a melee battle he would probably school Nadd.

Or the blaster may not have existed until Obsidian decided that perhaps players might want a good one-handed blaster item, somewhat like what Bioware did with "Exar Kun's Light Battle Armor" or whatever that ridiculous nonsense was called. I whole-heartedly agree on the other points, Janus.

Yeah, that is a possibility too, but for the sake of EU I was willing to suspend disbelief.

Originally posted by IKC
And? It was a planet unprotected and barely known by the Republic. It had no force users until Nadd arrived, either. It's not a great stretch to assume that Nadd's "conquest" was the result of Sith Magic (a la Exar Kun's famous "waltz into the Galactic Senate" freeze spell) and manipulation. A force user on his level had -better- be able to take over a planet like that, or they get an F in life.

How is one of the most militant planets in the galaxy "unprotected" exactly? That's wikipedia/fanboy wording there.

Well, if you had read the rest of the sentence, you would see the qualifier, "by the Republic."

Another fanboy tactic is to not read all of the opposition's argument.

Nice knowing you, IKC.

I didn't fire the first shot.

Another way to look at this is if I got sent back in time to 1450 with a tank and unlimited fuel and ammunition. I could subjugate the inhabitants of a pretty large area of North America quite easily. Now, replace the location with Onderon, me with Freedon Nadd, and the tank with the Force and Sith magic.

Originally posted by IKC
Well, if you had read the rest of the sentence, you would see the qualifier, "by the Republic."

Another fanboy tactic is to not read all of the opposition's argument.

And how does the qualifier do anything? If you want to use a qualifier it has to qualify something.

Where does it say that Onderon's defenses were lacking compared to planets in the republic? All I get is that Onderon is a warlike planet and they built massive fortifications. It has beast riders, which can literally fly from Dxun to the planet, and they had defenses designed to repel those kinds of foes, you'd think that having one guy walk up to them would be "undefended"?

You have to show me where being defended by the Republic suddenly adds 500% to all defense dice rolls or something, because I don't see it.

Are you going to tell me that Coruscant, being that it's defended by the Republic is more dangerous than Tatooine? Or that Naboo is harder to conquer than Korriban? Where's your evidence?

Are you proposing Nadd looked so godly in his shining armor that the beast riders instantly were subjugated?

Another way to look at this is if I got sent back in time to 1450 with a tank and unlimited fuel and ammunition. I could subjugate the inhabitants of a pretty large area of North America quite easily. Now, replace the location with Onderon, me with Freedon Nadd, and the tank with the Force and Sith magic.

So by this logic, someone like Nadd would lose to Coleman Trebor, simply because technologies advanced, right? A planet like Tatooine, backwards as it is, would easily be assimilated into the Republic, right? Sith Swords were backwards clumsy artifacts, so were Sith Amulets, so they are pwned. The Force gets overtaken by technology, etc.

Planets like Nar Shaddaa, in the outer rim that have technology shouldn't exist, right?

Where exactly does it ever say Onderon was an easier target than any other planet?

Go with what the canon tells you. The canon tells you Onderon was a warlike world. The canon tells you Nadd conquered it with a short lightsaber and a blaster. Trying to say "well they were unprotected by the Republic" or "they didn't have technologies" is being daft.

This thread contians to many damn unknowns...

A: You believed that I wrote that Onderon was undefended. That was not what I wrote. I wrote it was undefended by the Republic, a galaxy-spanning government that had a far greater military force than Onderon could ever hope to amass. That, and if the Republic knew of the planet and defended it, it would mean the Jedi would as well. That didn't happen, period. The Republic and Jedi entered Onderon several hundred years after Nadd's death.

B: Yes, and the beast riders are the only foes that we know Freedon defeated. See my above posts along with Janus', it's not an impossible feat for a powerful force user. "One guy walking up to them (the Onderonian defenses)" didn't happen, Freedon took control of their government.

C: Yes, Coruscant would be a more dangerous planet to attack than Tatooine, whether it's defended by the Republic or the Empire. I'd like you to tell me how such a statement is illogical.

D: Nadd's armor, if he even had any, is irrelevant. He killed the Beast Riders through Sith magic, an unimpressive feat back then when you realize that Exar Kun could have easily done the same. Like I said,

It's not a great stretch to assume that Nadd's "conquest" was the result of Sith Magic (a la Exar Kun's famous "waltz into the Galactic Senate" freeze spell) and manipulation. A force user on his level had -better- be able to take over a planet like that, or they get an F in life.

E: You'll note I did not use the word technology, Illustrious. My comparison had to do with power, and the fact that the natives in both cases had no defense against it and no outside help. The power in my example was a tank, power in the Onderon example is Sith magic and the Force.

F: The canon does not state that Freedon Nadd conquered Onderon with a short lightsaber or a blaster. KOTOR hardly says that, and KOTOR is frequently mistaken.

Read my entire argument, as I said.

A: You believed that I wrote that Onderon was undefended. That was not what I wrote. I wrote it was undefended by the Republic, a galaxy-spanning government that had a far greater military force than Onderon could ever hope to amass. That, and if the Republic knew of the planet and defended it, it would mean the Jedi would as well. That didn't happen, period. The Republic and Jedi entered Onderon several hundred years after Nadd's death.

And I pointed out the irrelevence.

That's like saying Onderon has palm trees. Okay?

You're attempting to undermine a character's achievement because it wasn't defended by the republic, so I said: prove up.

Your statement, broken down:

Onderon was undefended by the Republic, ergo it was easier to capture.

Show how exactly being defended by the Republic is indicative as to how hard it is to capture? You'll have to demonstrate how the argumens supports the postulate.

B: Yes, and the beast riders are the only foes that we know Freedon defeated. See my above posts along with Janus', it's not an impossible feat for a powerful force user. "One guy walking up to them (the Onderonian defenses)" didn't happen, Freedon took control of their government.

Dude, he took command of Iziz. AKA the side that wages against the Beast Riders. So you're saying he charmed them onto his side? Where's your proof? It was also mentioned that Iziz was better armed than the Beast Riders, who were formidable in their own right. Nadd can't exactly conquer the planet if he only subdues one side, now can he?

Not an impossible feat? Does that explain why it took Arca Jeth using Battle Meditation on a bunch of beast riders to manage to topple Iziz?

Obviously it's not impossible, Nadd did it. Don't bother with the obvious. We're saying since Nadd did it, therefore he's powerful.

C: Yes, Coruscant would be a more dangerous planet to attack than Tatooine, whether it's defended by the Republic or the Empire. I'd like you to tell me how such a statement is illogical.

In the same way that saying France would be harder to conquer than Russia. That turned out to be so true.

D: Nadd's armor, if he even had any, is irrelevant. He killed the Beast Riders through Sith magic, an unimpressive feat back then when you realize that Exar Kun could have easily done the same. Like I said,

Uh that was sarcasm poking fun at your logic. And where does it mention Kun can do the same? Freezing (in which Vodo was able to resist) equates to killing?

E: You'll note I did not use the word technology, Illustrious. My comparison had to do with power, and the fact that the natives in both cases had no defense against it and no outside help. The power in my example was a tank, power in the Onderon example is Sith magic and the Force.

Substantiate, please.

F: The canon does not state that Freedon Nadd conquered Onderon with a short lightsaber or a blaster. KOTOR hardly says that, and KOTOR is frequently mistaken.

Funny how this "KOTOR" is frequently mistaken argument only appears when convenient. So I suppose Tulak Hord doesn't even exist because it was only Kreia that said it, right? Just where do you draw that line?

Fine, if you insist, we know Nadd conquered Onderon (mentioned rather explicitly in The Freedon Nadd Uprising). And we know his spirit was strong enough to instakill a force user powerful enough to imprison Arca Jeth. Just what are you trying to prove?

Read my entire argument, as I said.

I did read your argument. It would help if you attempted to argue for something. It just seems like your randomly nitpicking at something that wouldn't prove a point either way.

--"Okay, and Kun actually took ELEVEN seconds to kill Vodo instead of the TEN we suspected. He sucks!"

Didn't it say somewhere that Nadd killed more Jedi with his saber than anyone else?

Onderon was undefended by the Republic, ergo it was easier to capture.

Substantiation: As if I need to prove this, a planet not discovered/part of/defended by a galaxy-spanning government that has a military is easy to take control of than a planet that is not. I'd like you to prove otherwise.

Dude, he took command of Iziz. AKA the side that wages against the Beast Riders. So you're saying he charmed them onto his side?

Quite obviously, yes, seeing as his descendents became the Kings and Queens of Iziz and not of Naddania. I'm sure he doesn't use subterfuge on the level of Palpatine, but I'm quite certain that his defeat of the Beast Riders certainly set him in high esteem with the people of Iziz. In other words, he didn't conquer the planet. He took control by show of power and set up his continued reign via his descendents, which he controlled and granted power to.

In the same way that saying France would be harder to conquer than Russia. That turned out to be so true.

Exactly where did I make this argument? In case you didn't know, Coruscant is a planet-wide city that just happens to be the historical center of galactic government. Its population is estimated to number in the tens of trillions. Tatooine is a planet-wide desert with sparse inhabitants and little in the way of planetary defenses. Coruscant is near the core, Tatooine near the outer rim. Other than it being the home planet of two Skywalkers and a Hutt crime cartel, Tatooine is relatively unimportant to galactic affairs.

I'd say it would be significantly harder to conquer Coruscant than Tatooine.

And where does it mention Kun can do the same? Freezing (in which Vodo was able to resist) equates to killing?

Vodo was a force user and Grandmaster of the Jedi Order, for one, making pointing him out irrelevant. And, if one's enemy is paralyzed, I would imagine it would be child's play to slaughter them at one's whim. Like I said, a feat easily replicated by Kun.

Substantiate, please.

I already have. Power, whether it takes the form of technology or Sith magic and the Force, overcomes those who don't have it and have no defenses against it.

Funny how this "KOTOR" is frequently mistaken argument only appears when convenient. So I suppose Tulak Hord doesn't even exist because it was only Kreia that said it, right? Just where do you draw that line?

Maybe you haven't read many of my posts. I've repeatedly stated that KOTOR is not canon in my eyes. Don't pull the inconsistency card on me, because I've been firm on this. The line is drawn as this, for me: KOTOR isn't canon.

Fine, if you insist, we know Nadd conquered Onderon (mentioned rather explicitly in The Freedon Nadd Uprising). And we know his spirit was strong enough to instakill a force user powerful enough to imprison Arca Jeth. Just what are you trying to prove?

Yes, we do know that Nadd took control, easily, of a backwater world with no force users. We also know his spirit was strong enough to instakill a force user that was already a puppet of his. Arca Jeth's power is an unknown quantity.

What I'm trying to prove is that Freedon Nadd's supposed accomplishments are not proof of his overwhelming power or anything close. I believe Exar Kun surpasses his achievements and his power.

Didn't it say somewhere that Nadd killed more Jedi with his saber than anyone else?

In KOTOR, yes. But that's contested, because the Jedi and Republic only went into Onderon several hundred years after Nadd's death, like I said. Nadd's accomplishments before his arrival on Onderon are even more murky than what we know about after his arrival.

Substantiation: As if I need to prove this, a planet not discovered/part of/defended by a galaxy-spanning government that has a military is easy to take control of than a planet that is not. I'd like you to prove otherwise.

I don't have to prove otherwise. You're trying to tell me that Onderon, regarded as a militant nation, is somehow weak and easily conquerable. It certainly explains why it was never done until Nadd, doesn't it?

Quite obviously, yes, seeing as his descendents became the Kings and Queens of Iziz and not of Naddania. I'm sure he doesn't use subterfuge on the level of Palpatine, but I'm quite certain that his defeat of the Beast Riders certainly set him in high esteem with the people of Iziz. In other words, he didn't conquer the planet. He took control by show of power and set up his continued reign via his descendents, which he controlled and granted power to.

You're "quite certain"? Too bad the events of SW chronology isn't what IKC dictates, now is it? You still haven't established how defeating the beast riders is easy, or that he absolutely did conquer it virtue of a diplomatic ploy.

Exactly where did I make this argument?

Do I need to look up analogy for you? Don't attempt to get snappy if you can't bring the goods.

In case you didn't know, Coruscant is a planet-wide city that just happens to be the historical center of galactic government. Its population is estimated to number in the tens of trillions. Tatooine is a planet-wide desert with sparse inhabitants and little in the way of planetary defenses. Coruscant is near the core, Tatooine near the outer rim. Other than it being the home planet of two Skywalkers and a Hutt crime cartel, Tatooine is relatively unimportant to galactic affairs.

I'd say it would be significantly harder to conquer Coruscant than Tatooine.

In the same whim as "France is a heavily fortified nation with a largest standing armed forces, the most advanced military technology, and one of the more opulent western civilizations juxtaposed to Russia is a barren land of sparse natural resources per square mile. It's a largely backwards nation with little in the way of weaponry."

Again, stop pulling the "you say" cards, they are irrelevent.

I already have. Power, whether it takes the form of technology or Sith magic and the Force, overcomes those who don't have it and have no defenses against it.

Okay, and none of those people in the Senate outside of Vodo had a defense against Kun's freezing magic. Does that mean he's overrated and less powerful than Nadd, who was able to wipe out armies?

Please, now it's technicalities, next it'll be semantics.

Maybe you haven't read many of my posts. I've repeatedly stated that KOTOR is not canon in my eyes. Don't pull the inconsistency card on me, because I've been firm on this. The line is drawn as this, for me: KOTOR isn't canon.

Okay, so Traya doesn't exist, Revan never had his power substantiated, and this battle is unresolvable. Good job getting to that point.

Yes, we do know that Nadd took control, easily, of a backwater world with no force users. We also know his spirit was strong enough to instakill a force user that was already a puppet of his. Arca Jeth's power is an unknown quantity.

How is "one of the most respected Jedi Masters" an unknown quantity exactly? Regardless, you can't call him a weakling.

He was a descendent, where does it say Nadd could do whatever he wishes on him?

What I'm trying to prove is that Freedon Nadd's supposed accomplishments are not proof of his overwhelming power or anything close. I believe Exar Kun surpasses his achievements and his power.

And you attempt to undermine Nadd's accomplishments to achieve that end. Boy, I hope you aren't a Sidious supporter.

In KOTOR, yes. But that's contested, because the Jedi and Republic only went into Onderon several hundred years after Nadd's death, like I said. Nadd's accomplishments before his arrival on Onderon are even more murky than what we know about after his arrival.

So those people in KOTOR say it for kicks and giggles? Is it necessarily 100% accurate? No, but discounting that completely is like discounting that Revan never existed.

A: I didn't say Onderon was easily conquerable, I said it was easily taken control of by a dark side Force user of Nadd's level with knowledge of Sith magic.

A force user on his level had -better- be able to take over a planet like that, or they get an F in life.

As well, an explanation for why Onderon wasn't conquered before Nadd may be because hardly anyone had heard of it. It took the Republic and Jedi hundreds of years after Nadd's death to get off their asses and look into Onderon.

B: Defeating the Beast Riders, for someone of Nadd's level is child's play. See my "freeze spell" argument. There are plenty of techniques just as effective. DE Sidious could have done so, for instance.

C: Good, you're making the argument that Tatooine is harder to conquer than Coruscant. Now prove it, because I've made the argument to the contrary. Your analogy is flawed, too, since Tatooine's population in comparison to Coruscant's doesn't jive with Russia's to France's, and Tatooine isn't the seat of any government whereas Coruscant is. A better analogy would be a comparison of how easy Washington D.C. might be to conquer relative to how easy it might be to conquer Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.

Okay, and none of those people in the Senate outside of Vodo had a defense against Kun's freezing magic. Does that mean he's overrated and less powerful than Nadd, who was able to wipe out armies?

D: You're making my point. The Beast Riders have no hope against any Force user like Nadd, whether Dark or Light. Their defeat, again, is not indicative of Nadd's greatness. I've already submitted that this feat can be easily replicated by others.

E: Since KOTOR is part of the subject matter, the battle is resolvable. That doesn't make it canon. Since KOTOR likely contradicts other sources regarding Nadd (i.e. claiming he fought Jedi while still alive, which is dubious), then it can be discarded. As well, since KOTOR has nothing to do with either of these men other than mentions of them within both games, then we can argue this point without going into KOTOR.

Besides, I submit that both Kreia and Revan would be stomped by Freedon or Exar.

How is "one of the most respected Jedi Masters" an unknown quantity exactly? Regardless, you can't call him a weakling.

Respect doesn't make him powerful. Arca Jeth was respected for his great wisdom and battle meditation abilities, not his fighting prowess. I can say that he was nowhere near one of the most powerful force users, considering that he was captured on Onderon and killed by a Krath droid ambush some years later while surrounded by hundreds, perhaps thousands of other Jedi.

And you attempt to undermine Nadd's accomplishments to achieve that end.

Yes, because Nadd's accomplishments are said to be indicative of his great power, and somehow conquering a backwater, nonmember world of the Republic and harassing jedi as a spirit hundreds of years later makes him greater than Exar Kun, who was actually declared the Dark Lord of the Sith and did far more than Nadd could ever achieve, in the process accumulating more knowledge and power than he could use.

So those people in KOTOR say it for kicks and giggles? Is it necessarily 100% accurate? No, but discounting that completely is like discounting that Revan never existed.

No, they say it because they are making a video game. Read below:

Or the blaster may not have existed until Obsidian decided that perhaps players might want a good one-handed blaster item, somewhat like what Bioware did with "Exar Kun's Light Battle Armor" or whatever that ridiculous nonsense was called.

Originally posted by IKC
Respect doesn't make him powerful. Arca Jeth was respected for his great wisdom and battle meditation abilities, not his fighting prowess. I can say that he was nowhere near one of the most powerful force users, considering that he was captured on Onderon and killed by a Krath droid ambush some years later while surrounded by hundreds, perhaps thousands of other Jedi.

You do realize that GG's droid parts are based on Krath War Droids, exactly the same except that Krath War Droids are powered by Sith Magic.

Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
Didn't it say somewhere that Nadd killed more Jedi with his saber than anyone else?

In KOTOR 2 it says that his blaster has killed more Jedi than any lightsaber.

P.S.- I ended up with 2 of his blasters, two weapon fighting, beezneez.

Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
You do realize that GG's droid parts are based on Krath War Droids, exactly the same except that Krath War Droids are powered by Sith Magic.

Indeed, but the ambush wasn't made by Krath war droids. They were serving and protocol droids that had been sabotaged and given weapons.