DN Luke vs. Revan, Malak, and Sion

We all know DN Luke is a pimp. Could he take all three of these powerful Dark Lords at the same time?

Location: On top of the Great Massassi Temple.

I'd say he could possibly take any one of them, with the exception of Sion, all three however, not a chance, the trio rapes him.

How would he kill Sion????

How's he going to beat someone who's practically indestructable while someone notorious for his physical strength and one with great battle precog smack at him?

He could use his emerald lightning on him. It's an instakill, so there is no way to regenerate from it. We also know that with one hand he is better then Kyp Durron, who could take Yoda.

Wow, I feel like an idiot, I read DE Luke, you have DN, sorry. Well, in that case, I feel that Luke stands a decent chance. In truth, Sion would be the only true threat due to his ability to constantly regenerate. As Glentract said, Lukes lightning could possilby take care of that problem, if not Luke is still a force brute, more so than any of the men that he's fighting.

I do have a question though, Luke in DN is portrayed as being weaker than his NJO counterpart. I was wondering if this is simply cause it's a different author, or is there an actual story explanation.

Luke was holding back in the beginning, but later on, after he took out Raynar with ease(something even NJO Luke would have had difficulty doing) we knew he could do more.

From what I know of Luke, Sion wouldn't be much of a challenge he could just rip his body apart using the force. Revan and Malak wouldn't be much of a challenge either. Probably.

Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
Luke was holding back in the beginning, but later on, after he took out Raynar with ease(something even NJO Luke would have had difficulty doing) we knew he could do more.

Ahh, thank you.

Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
He could use his emerald lightning on him. It's an instakill, so there is no way to regenerate from it. We also know that with one hand he is better then Kyp Durron, who could take Yoda.

Glentract. . .

I think you need to analyze that passage again. Luke never said that with his weak hand, he would duel better than Kyp Durron at his best. It was said that, although he preferred two-handed styles, he could fight one-handed as well as anyone else in the academy could. Not 'Luke, with his weak-hand, would beat anyone in the academy at their best'.

And Kyp taking Yoda is, again, highly debatable.

Originally posted by Darth Faunus
Glentract. . .

I think you need to analyze that passage again. Luke never said that with his weak hand, he would duel better than Kyp Durron at his best. It was said that, although he preferred two-handed styles, he could fight one-handed as well as anyone else in the academy could. Not 'Luke, with his weak-hand, would beat anyone in the academy at their best'.

And Kyp taking Yoda is, again, highly debatable.

Start a thread and we'll debate Kyp being stronger then Yoda if you're game, because I sure am.

You need to analyze that passage again. Do you have an explanation for why he would mention his weak hand in that passage? Unless someone noteworthy uses their left hand as their main one(which we have no knowledge of), then it shows that your interpretation of what it says is wrong.

Honestly? If I had to take one person's word for it, it would be Faunus'. He's very methodical and rational, and his analysis of EU works is enough to make me second guess my own conclusions sometimes.

This coupled with the clear bias you have for OT and post-OT characters makes you a shakey source, Glentract. No offense meant either. Just my perception.

Janus, you're probably the most reputable source around here. Lets hear your interpretation of it.

In lightsaber combat, Luke favored two-handed styles, but he could still fight single-handed-even with his weak hand-just as well as anyone in the academy.

Now, at the least it says that Luke using his weak hand(his left) if weaker then Kyp with his strong hand.

Please show me specifically when I have been biased towards post-ROTJ characters. I would like to see what it is that makes people think I am biased and see what I can do to fix that.

Janus, you're probably the most reputable source around here. Lets hear your interpretation of it.

I'm not much of a source. I'm just another guy here, but okay.

In lightsaber combat, Luke favored two-handed styles, but he could still fight single-handed-even with his weak hand-just as well as anyone in the academy.

Assuming that this is the exact wording or close enough to, this could mean a lot of things. First off, if I can fight with a sword one handed, even in my weak/off hand as well as anyone in the academy, this doesn't mean that I am a sabergod. The bar is set by others, and if they suck, I can't be that much farther ahead, can I? And you couldn't compare Kyp and Luke in this instance, since Kyp is a head and shoulders above the average of the academy.

And it would have to be the average that Luke is being compared to, since he can't reasonably be compared with each and every person in the academy- their levels fluctuate between those who are good and those who aren't. And if Luke was indeed better or equal to Kyp's lightsaber fighting style with just one hand(Or his weak off hand) don't you think they would have simply said that?

Now, at the least it says that Luke using his weak hand(his left) if weaker then Kyp with his strong hand.

Not really sure where you plucked this from.

Please show me specifically when I have been biased towards post-ROTJ characters. I would like to see what it is that makes people think I am biased and see what I can do to fix that.

Glentract, 90% of your decisions in situations which compare OT/Post-OT characters and those of PT or before favor the former. Just go look at every thread you post in; it's there. This is my own observation (I, who have known you longer than anyone here at KMC) that you are extremely interested in and in favor of those timeframes and their characters. If I say that AOTC Anakin can pwn ESB Luke, you will fight me on it tooth and nail (As you have done). If I say that Mace Windu can pwn Kyp Durron, you will fight me on that too (Simply overlooking the fact that Mace Windu is a true jedi master and a lightsaber fighting prodigy who could beat Sidious.)

So I don't mean to single you out for your bias, but it's there. I wish you were a bit more neutral, but in reality none of us can be completely neutral, right?

That is the exact wording from the book, bottom of page 345.

Janus, wouldn't anyone incompass everyone at the academy? And the reason it wouldn't say Kyp specifically I believe is that they don't want to name who is necessarily the second strongest in the Order and instead leave that up for fans to discuss.

The reason I am so one-sided in most threads with most post-ROTJ characters is because most people underrate them, not because they don't think they are powerful, but because they aren't informed well enough. I'm not saying I have no bias, I fully recognize that I do, but usually I am the only one, or one of the only ones providing any proof for a post-ROTJ character.

It's the wording I have a problem with, the idea of substantiating not even being considered: it doesn't really say "Oh, Luke with his one weak hand is as good as Kyp Durron with two hands or otherwise." It says that Luke can handle a lightsaber in one hand about as good as anyone in the academy. The very fact that the entire institution was cited and not someone who is a reputable saber user just goes to show that it's not saying Luke > Kyp.

Originally posted by Dark Aristokrat
It's the wording I have a problem with, the idea of substantiating not even being considered: it doesn't really say "Oh, Luke with his one weak hand is as good as Kyp Durron with two hands or otherwise." It says that Luke can handle a lightsaber in one hand about as good as anyone in the academy. The very fact that the entire institution was cited and not someone who is a reputable saber user just goes to show that it's not saying Luke > Kyp.

How does it being from a narrator point of view make it less reputable?

So, lets assume that the quote is non-conclusive. That really leaves us with a big hole. The only other thing we have for showing Luke as being that powerful was by how much he awed Jaina where Kyp didn't(it seems like she would have said something, since she was his master for a time) and that Luke defeated Raynar and Lomi one after the other, but this is turning more Luke vs. Kyp then Luke vs. the trio.

I'd say Luke knew what he was thinking...he's probably fenced Kyle, Kyp and the like dozens of times

How does it being from a narrator point of view make it less reputable?

Normally, it doesn't. But then again, did this author create all of the other characters too? Not likely. The statement is too vague. And if it really meant to say that Luke was as good with a blade in his off hand as Kyp was normally, why would it not say that? Is it any secret that Kyp is the second in power and prestige? Why not directly compare the two?

So, lets assume that the quote is non-conclusive. That really leaves us with a big hole. The only other thing we have for showing Luke as being that powerful was by how much he awed Jaina where Kyp didn't(it seems like she would have said something, since she was his master for a time) and that Luke defeated Raynar and Lomi one after the other, but this is turning more Luke vs. Kyp then Luke vs. the trio.

Agreed, but you need to substantiate Luke's ability. So far I've seen a hyperbolic statement (In the past) about him fighting like he had twenty lightsabers, and this statement which is too vague to support itself. Now I imagine Luke IS pretty good. But so are his competition. And Revan and Malak were a team for many years. If it came down to just the blade, Luke would be working his ass off just to stay alive. With the force? I dunno. Luke has his green lightning thingy, but how that would work on others remains to be determined. Three Sith Lords tend to operate better in Force battles than Vong.

And I know how much you dislike the idea of Sion being more or less invulnerable, you still have to prove that he can be significantly damaged. I mean, his body was fractured, cut, burnt, and broken in thousands of different places according to the frigate's logs. Later on it's stated more than once that his body is held together by the Force and by his own will. I mean, if you say that Sion can be effectively sabered apart, you have to account for the reason why the Exile and his friends could not do this. This would make Sion better at fighting than the Exile AND his friends, and even later on after the Exile beat Nihilus Sion would still be better.