Originally posted by Janus Marius
Hm. You're correct in a sense, I did rather gloss over him. But while Maul was a good tool and hired sword for Sidious, I don't see him toppling truly terrible and capable Sith lords. We all know that Maul was more like a prized hound; fed and taught to do his job and nothing more.But it's been a long time too since I read Shadow Hunter. I'd like to reread it to see if maybe that will change my mind.
By the same instance, Maul was made for the purpose of destroying the top Jedi Masters-and he showed himself capable of that twice over.
Maul is certainly not as overtly terrible and dramatic...he seems less dangerous given his lack of personal ambition and how he's general extremely stoic, but Maul's fighting prowess has been demonstrated as nothing short of amazing....in the comic 'Darth Maul', without sustaining a single injury, Maul separately decimates two fortresses full of defenders and then kill as described as 'the deadliest killers and assassins' in the galaxy....without sustaining one wound.
Despite his personality and lack of ambition, Maul was molded to be a weapon, and that he was good at
Anoon is noted as being one of the best jedi duellists at the time of TPM, yes. I'm not sure how far along I'd take that line, as Anoon clearly wasn't a Dooku, Yoda or Mace Windu. Even Cin Drallig, who is noted to be pretty good, is not someone I'd say could properly combat a Sith lord.
No. However, in both appearances, Anoon is described as one of the best Jedi duelists of the entire order, whose sheer work with blades is apparently 'second to none' (I'll be generous and take that with a grain of salt and refer to it just in terms of swordsmanship abilities sans Force usage in the same, but Anoon is a genuine legend in the Order, and the Battlemaster prior to Cin.
Let's face it- the PT Jedi hadn't seen one in a thousand years. Malak's Jedi- they just got done fighting them. Lightsabers were the dominant fighting form at the time.
Well, in the case of Yoda, that's untrue, but 99.9 percent of the time, yes.
And it's actually a vast misconception there: The Sith War itself with Kun contained very, very little combat with Sith. The people therein were Exar-whose combat therein was with Vodo and Ood...Ulic, and Exar's 20 Apprentices, most of whom did not survive beyond a single mission-exceptions being as follows: Oss Willum, captured and redeemed
Crado, who did absolutely no fighting
Lorian Nod, who abandoned Exar and lived in isolation the rest of his life.
Jolee Bindo and his wife....we know the few surviving apprentices from Kun holed up in the Teta system and died in an overwhelming assault, but The Great Sith war contained very, very little actual force user combat comparatively, so many of the Jedi in the Jedi Civil War were actually younger Jedi who hadn't seen combat, or Masters who hadn't taken part in the Great Sith war save until the final assault on Yavin 4
You can't say it was the norm for the past Jedi since, until the end of the War, very few Jedi saw active combat.
In fairness, there were quite a few other combat situations, but the same is true of the PT Jedi- conflicts like the Stark Hyperspace War, the Yinchorri, Kibh Jeen, Volfe Karkko and the massive Clone Wars, which contained more than a bit of force user to force user combat
Luke's mother wouldn't require the broken ladle though. Ragnos could just use his scepter to make her a messy blot on the carpetting.
This all aside, to clarify my views to you, Janus:
I've never endorsed anything saying Palpatine or Yoda would beat Ragnos and Kun with a broken ladle, that's ridiculous...
Now, however, if you'd like to debate the merits of Yoda or Palp strictly in regards of continuity, by all means tell me and I'll make the thread for us. I'd prefer to do it without insults this time, though-to tell you the truth, the Goebbels remark crossed the line for a variety of reasons.
The only thing that's pretty undeniable is Luke being at the top. Lucas's own words made that really clear.