Revan vs. Maul

I agree with Advent None of us can say anything about revans power because there is SIMPLY not enough Canon information to base our claims.

That simple.

Power? OR saber abilities..

Originally posted by Advent
Legend, let me say first that I'm growing tired of your constant lies, exaggerations, and unsupported assumptions.

Originally posted by Advent
I've caught you in a lie. Only the ice grenade was supposed to be used. Oh, and you can carry other grenades on your person anyways.

And we can access other grenades in our inventory even in the Tomb of Naga Sadow because the Game Mechanics allows us to do so. But this will not be true in a proper canon scenario because those Sith Masters won't be foolish enough to let people carry grenades with them in to the Tomb of Naga Sadow to make the Sith Trials easy for them. A Jedi mostly uses a Light Saber and the Force in most combat scenarios and also during the Jedi Trials.

Originally posted by Advent
...Your basing this off what exactly? The fact you believe what you want to believe?

One grenade in the mouth a la Jaws would be sufficient.

However if you throw a grenade in to its mouth, then it is a different story. Still this assumption is also unsupported that Revan really did this.

Originally posted by Advent
Just because you type it out, doesn't make it so. There's other options, such as indirect use of the Force, direct use of the Force.

Originally posted by Advent
Nonsense. Simply because Revan said it (I want to see the quote, by the way) doesn't make it true. I suppose Darth Sidious must really have "UNL1MITED POWAH!!/!1ONEELEVEN!!" simply because he says so.

Originally posted by Advent
Furthermore, how could Revan have said that if it's possible to just run past them and pull the lever? Oh? What's that? You just got owned? Quod erat demonstrandum, *****.

Your so called "owned" declaration will fall at your own face.

Originally posted by Advent

A relatively young Jedi Knight was able to severely injure a terentatek with a single strike. I'd hope someone who's talents are as boasted as Revan would be able to top that.

Originally posted by Advent
No, you cannot make a sound deduction from what we have to deduce from.

Originally posted by Advent
Your point is moot, see below.

By this type of ridiculous logic, I could question why they didn't indirectly use the Force. Are they immune to that as well?

Answer: No. Ergo simply because a few, young Jedi didn't opt to use the Force doesn't mean they are completely resistant. Or alternatively, I could inform you that to generalize because one batch of fighters didn't use the Force, it means everyone else is thusly incapable is fallacious.

Keep using reasoning like that and you'll find yourself getting laughed at.

However I have never denied the possibility of a Jedi using the Force to augment his/her strength or stamina in such a fight but that is not a direct use of the Force.

Originally posted by Advent
Wow. I didn't realizing skirting the point (that because unofficial website A says X is true, doesn't mean X actually is) was an acceptable form of response.

Thanks for the insight, junior.

Originally posted by Advent
I don't have to[/i], because the actual intention and reasoning behind the question itself is fallacious.

Originally posted by Advent
Refute it or drop the point.

Oh, and three Force powers that I know of definitely are effective against them, so your SOL.

Originally posted by Advent
Quoting of context is a fallacy.

I never even said that it was absolute that he did stun them. Try quoting for me truth. What I said was:

Nice try.

Originally posted by Advent
You can use stasis field or insanity, both work. You can also use Force kill. I'm sure there are other assorted powers too. Now that I've established Force powers do work, you lose.

😆 GG, Legend. Better luck next time junior!

Originally posted by Advent
Refute it or drop the point.

Oh, and three Force powers that I know of definitely are effective against them, so your SOL.

Originally posted by Advent
Quoting out of context again. Saying that they're unofficial, third party sources does not equate to them "lying".

Oh. If you want to talk about your "sources", then I'd once again direct you to them:

"Regardless, terentatek were virtually immune to effects of the Force."

vir·tu·al·ly adv.

For the most part; almost wholly; just about

Not even your own source believes you, Legend. QED.

Originally posted by Advent
You were saying?

Considering you've been adamant this entire time on arguing the only possible way to defeat them was with a melee weapon, I'm going to call you out on lying.

Originally posted by Advent
I'm not going to believe the word of an established embellisher and liar. Proof or it isn't true.

Originally posted by Advent
<edit> In fact, I just looked it up. You can carry grenades, mines, thermal detonators, etc. with you and use them. Seems you've been making shit up again. QED. </edit>

Originally posted by Advent
I'm not denying that Revan killed Yusanis, what I'm arguing is that there's absolutely no proof to support the claim that he "destroyed" Yusanis (and clearly, in the context you were using it, you meant it as 'kicked his ass'😉.

Evidence that he "destroyed" him has yet to surface from your side of the table (likely because you don't have any). Either put up or shut up.

Originally posted by Advent
Appealling to authority is always going to a logical fallacy, no matter how many times you repeat it.

This man was one of the most famous and feared of the Echani warriors who were active in the galaxy during the decades leading up to the Jedi Civil War. He was a decorated solider who was considered one of the greatest heroes of the Mandalorian Wars. Later, when Yusanis discovered that an Echani Senator had been killed by Darth Revan, he set out to confront the Sith Lord and bring him to justice. Despite his own skills and the special weapons of cortosis-weave that he used, Yusanis was quickly defeated by Darth Revan and forced to submit. Darth Revan held no compassion, and killed Yusanis in cold blood. It was later discovered that Yusanis was the father - figuratively and literally - of the Echani Handmaidens

Originally posted by Advent
It shows me that they most likely passed blades, which is something I've said myself. A better question would've been "what doesn't it show?". The answer to which is relatively simple and has been explained numerous times. It doesn't show that Revan killed Malak with a saber, nor does it show that they fought longer than two seconds.

If you believe otherwise, then I'd advise you to PROVE. UP. Something of which you've yet to do.

Originally posted by Advent
Your ability to twist arguments are almost on par with your ability to spew bullshit.

Originally posted by Advent
Quote me for truth, where have I ever said that "for sure" it lasted two seconds? Oh? Nowhere? It was something you pulled out of your ass?

Check this quote:

Originally posted by Advent
Yeah, I'm only using 2 seconds as a random amount of time tailored to suit my argument (within reason, of course)

And that specific reason does not makes you sure about your point?

Originally posted by Advent
The point I'm trying to make with it is that while Duron's vision may suggest a saber duel ensued, it doesn't mean they did battle with said weapon for long, much less that Revan killed Malak with it.

Originally posted by Advent
How about deducing from the fact we have an omniscient narrator telling us that Maul was "one of the deadliest Sith apprentices in history" at only age 22. He has defeated the greatest lightsaber wielder of the then Jedi Order (which included such Jedi like Yoda, Dooku, and Windu), was able to contend with and dominate a contest against Jinn and Kenobi, both who are formidable in their own right. All with less than twenty years of training.

And Kenobi was a Padawan at that time when fought against the Maul and he alone managed to give him a hard fight and Maul was forced to use the Force to over-power him. So if an enraged Padawan can give Maul a decent fight in a Saber Duel, Revan can surely do better.

Originally posted by Advent
You don't do any of that without being a prodigious being.

Originally posted by Advent
Reading comprehension is your friend.

I stated that he did such [defeated Yusanis] by "unknown means", which is absolutely true. I never asked about his foresight, you idiot. Ergo, your entire response was a huge red herring.

Originally posted by Advent
This a largely unsupported. Simply because you believe the revelation caused a hindrance does not mean it did. It's hardly acceptable to say that it did, because correlation does not imply causation.

Originally posted by Advent
That, coupled along with the fact you didn't have a strong leg to stand on to begin with, makes your assumption incorrect to state as truth.

Originally posted by Advent
This proves his precognitive abilities were still diminished how, exactly? You appear to be missing the entire point.

Originally posted by Advent
No one said he wouldn't, but does that necessarily mean it would impede on his concentration? No, because correlation does not imply causation. Ergo, your argument holds little water (there's enough in the glass for it to be a possibility, but hardly enough to state as being a definite cause).

Originally posted by Advent
A textbook example of a quasi intellectual. Do you think using big words makes you look any more intelligent, especially when you take into consideration you defy the main aspect of them in almost every argument (the logic)?

You've committed more fallacies, and made more unsupported assumptions in this thread alone than Takeru Kobayashi had hot dogs last year.

Originally posted by Advent
I said he did? Where? Try quoting me for truth instead of out of context.

And to continually disacknowledge the point that the circumstances of the fight are unknown doesn't change the fact that they are.

Originally posted by Advent
Making a mountain of assumptions without feasible logic and evidence behind them doesn't make anything true, son.

I have started to show some flexibility already.

Originally posted by Advent
Uh, connect the dots. He lived in the "Prime of the Jedi" (which furthers the point), where we have accomplished duelists such as Yoda, Count Dooku, and Mace Windu. The Jedi of old don't hold a candle to that.

And you can't say for sure that their were no duelists in the old times, who could match the likes of Yoda, Dooku and Mace in a Saber Duel.

Originally posted by Advent
I don't make a point if I can't back it up. Unlike you.

Originally posted by Advent
And, if you'll read IOU's post:

Originally posted by Advent
It's apparent that Anoon was simply that damn good.

Originally posted by Advent
Except...none of it establishes a basis for claiming he would beat Maul due to the fact the conditions of the most of his battle are largely blank.

Originally posted by Advent
Repeating yourself ad nasuem really won't help.

Anyways, so was Qui-Gon Jinn, is he now "among the greatest"? Absolutely not. Simply because he was a [possible] practicioner of the form means exactly squat. We see Revan using a single blade on the Star Forge, and zilch indicates a mastery of Jar'Kai.

Originally posted by Advent
According to the Exile, he practices Jar'Kai. It's an unsound assumption to say that he "mastered" it. One could say that it was a short time period that Revan even used dual lightsabers (much like Exar Kun did). Jack shit suggests what you're saying.

If it does, PROVE. UP.

Originally posted by Advent
The point obviously flew over your head like Superman. It's the fact that one of your own sources says it's only "possible". I find it hard to believe one could be "among the greatest" of X if it's only possible that they used X.

Originally posted by Advent
...Which proves absolutely nothing in regards to your original assertion.

Originally posted by Advent
No, it's demonstrating the absurdity of your assertion. Concept art is not the final product, it does not prove that he's even a user of such a form (even if another point is in your favor, this point holds no water), nor that he's "among the greatest".

Prove your original assumption or drop the point.

Originally posted by Advent
Who do you think designed the picture I've provided? A kindergarten student? It's official concept art of Chewbacca, made during the production of ANH for George Lucas himself to consider. The evidence of which can be found in the Bonus Features of the OT DVD set, if you want to question it.

Originally posted by Advent
And finally Legend, let me conclude with telling you that you're a lying sack of steaming, stinking, grade-A monkey crap. Don't bother responding if I can expect another post of literally nothing but that.

And move on, girl! This is just a debate on a fiction issue.

I am not a bad person or a professional liar in real life. If by any chance we meet in the real life, you will be amazed by my real attitude and personality. You can test me on a normal chat, if you want some clue.

I just want to say 2 things (i had to go, exams are exams 😆 ):

An emotionally disturbed Jedi or a Jedi without a clear mind will never fight very well because such things will limit his focus. Anakin is a clear example of this.

This is SO true, and if anyone doubt it i advise him to play kotorII and talk with HK-47- He pretty much shows how to hunt and kill jedis, and 1of the things he refers is that a jedi connection to the force rely depends on their mind. So, you affect it, their connection with the force will also be affected. Anyway, just dialogue with him, he says some things rather interestings. By the way, don't forget that it was Revan who created and programed this "jedi killer".

Second:

After Revan passed the test, Uthar congratulates him, which he replies:

"I wouln't say I exerted myself getting this" note: "this" was the sith lightsaber. Ok, you can say Revan was talking big but Uthar replies;
"Perhaps not, to someone of your talent"

Notice that the used word was taleent, not power, why? Because he need more then force power to beat the tentareks, he need his lightsaber. So, even Uthat admites that, with his lightsaber, Revan was a gifted jedi. By the way, one should notice that after what is suppose to be a tough challenge, Revan still beats the hell of Uthat and Yuthura together and still makes through several siths to get of that place.

By the way, from Canderous to you: "We had never met one like you before, and never since"...

Originally posted by kamhal
After Revan passed the test, Uthar congratulates him, which he replies:

"I wouln't say I exerted myself getting this" note: "this" was the sith lightsaber. Ok, you can say Revan was talking big but Uthar replies;
"Perhaps not, to someone of your talent"

Notice that the used word was taleent, not power, why? Because he need more then force power to beat the tentareks, he need his lightsaber. So, even Uthat admites that, with his lightsaber, Revan was a gifted jedi. By the way, one should notice that after what is suppose to be a tough challenge, Revan still beats the hell of Uthat and Yuthura together and still makes through several siths to get of that place.

OMG !
How many pointless stuff can a single person but into one single post ?

The dialog and the reaction to it is dependant on the choice of the player. As is the reaction of Uthar. So what do you want to do here ? Neither did Revan canonically say that line nor did Uthar reply with the other. Urm. And that also pretty much destroys that assumptions you were drawing from that quote.

Aside of that Revan canonically redeemed Yuthura. So no "beating the hell out of them".

By the way, from Canderous to you: "We had never met one like you before, and never since"...

That would have what effect on that debate ? Did Canderous meet Maul ?

Really. Maul did almost manage to destroy Sidious in direct confrontation. Not to mention that he tooled the likes of Anoon Bondara and Qui-Gon Jinn (even when he was fighting against him and Kenobi). I don't see where Revan would "own" him if he's able to take him down in a lightsaber fight at all.

So, to you, canonly Revan didn't say a think since you had more then 1 option from dialogue... And Revad DID beat yuthura, in fact, it's only after beat her that you can redeem her...

By the, but who the hell was Bondara? What did he do? People say that he MIGHT have been a battlemaster but, lol, hadn't anakin beat a battlemaster with 1 hand while grabing other jedi's neck? And about qui-gon, well, i think it's quite common knowledge that, even if he was a great jedi, his power and skill were not high close to guys like windu, yoda, anakin, dooku, etc. Even obi-wan surpassed him. Also, the fact that an simple enraged padwaan like obi-wan, who was probably weaker then the padawan anakin who was easily beat by dooku or weaker then the jedi knight obi-wan who easily lost to dooku, isn't very good to help maul's side.

I am not saying he was bad, because he was damn good, but if an enraged padawan cut one of his lightsabers like that then i doubt maul would be stronger, for example, then a jedi master obi-wan, much stronger after 3 years of the clone wars.

Power = Force + Saber

Originally posted by kamhal
So, to you, canonly Revan didn't say a think since you had more then 1 option from dialogue... And Revad DID beat yuthura, in fact, it's only after beat her that you can redeem her...

By the, but who the hell was Bondara? What did he do? People say that he MIGHT have been a battlemaster but, lol, hadn't anakin beat a battlemaster with 1 hand while grabing other jedi's neck? And about qui-gon, well, i think it's quite common knowledge that, even if he was a great jedi, his power and skill were not high close to guys like windu, yoda, anakin, dooku, etc. Even obi-wan surpassed him. Also, the fact that an simple enraged padwaan like obi-wan, who was probably weaker then the padawan anakin who was easily beat by dooku or weaker then the jedi knight obi-wan who easily lost to dooku, isn't very good to help maul's side.

I am not saying he was bad, because he was damn good, but if an enraged padawan cut one of his lightsabers like that then i doubt maul would be stronger, for example, then a jedi master obi-wan, much stronger after 3 years of the clone wars.

Poor reasoning. Bondara's skill /= Cin Drallig's. Maul tooled the foremost lightsaber duelist at the "prime of the Jedi". I'd say that in itself gives him skills above Revan. Bondara would have a field day with KOTOR Jedi.

And OB1 beat Maul...does that mean that he's above Maul, Revan and Anoon? No, the best doesn't always win...and you can have all the skill you want, but you wont be effective unless you know how to utilize it. Thats why Anoon had the most skill with a saber, but was only hailed as one of the best duelists.

But I do agree with you that Maul has most likely (from what we know of Revan) has more technical talent than Revan.

Originally posted by Darth Subjekt
And OB1 beat Maul...does that mean that he's above Maul, Revan and Anoon? No, the best doesn't always win...and you can have all the skill you want, but you wont be effective unless you know how to utilize it. Thats why Anoon had the most skill with a saber, but was only hailed as one of the best duelists.

But I do agree with you that Maul has most likely (from what we know of Revan) has more technical talent than Revan.

Kenobi "won" in a far from traditional sense of the term. Basically, Maul ended up dead, Kenobi ended up alive, and that's as far as it goes. Maul dominated the fight, leading Kenobi and Qui Gon to the pit. He beat Qui Gon's superior in thirty seconds. Maul was hurt and was fighting less effectively than he could have to provide more of a challenge. To Obi Wan's credit he did manage to very briefly challenge Maul, which, despite the small time frame in which he did so, is a most impressive feat (and a titanic one for a Padawan).

Qui Gon was on par with Mace, the most powerful person Kenobi had seen fight (which I think includes people like Plo Koon), and (one of?) the best duelist(s) a Jedi Battle Master had seen in 400 years.

Anoon Bondara, who was the best duelist his apprentice had ever seen (when we know that his apprentice had seen Yoda fight), a master of teras kasi, gave Qui Gon regular beatings, and usually did it quick. His skills were the best in the order, and had uncanny adeptness.

Maul crushed Anoon into the floor.

Darth Sidious, the most powerful Sith Lord ever, who defeated three of the best swordsman ever in mere [I]seconds[/], was almost defeated by Maul in a lightsaber battle when Maul used his rage (and after that I believe he mastered his use of that Rage).

All it will take is for Maul to use his speed and better reactions to close whatever distance there is between himself and the masked man of mystery, putting constant pressure on Revan with the weapon he designed after Exar Kun's own, which he "mastered." Revans Force attacks will be completely disrupted, or he will just be torn through if he tries any offensive maneuvers with the Force.

With all due respect to this Maul fellatio and anti Revan crap, Maul won't be owning Revan at anything. There is more information on Maul's abilities with a saber, than Revan, but that in no gives him a victory And this is just talking about saber combat, Maul stands no chance in a force battle.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
With all due respect to this Maul fellatio and anti Revan crap, Maul won't be owning Revan at anything. There is more information on Maul's abilities with a saber, than Revan, but that in no gives him a victory And this is just talking about saber combat, Maul stands no chance in a force battle.

It's mostly facts, quoting, or paraphrasing, I wouldn't really consider that to be over the top, but to each his own. Also, I said nothing "Anti-Revan." However, if it helps, I will mention that he is a very powerful warrior and that Maul's victory with a saber will be more than Maul igniting his blades and Reavn instantly vaporizing. It will be a battle.

As far as a force fight, Kreia's hyperbole is the only thing putting Revan above Maul in raw power. As far as techniques we know Revan has scores, but I would imagine that Maul does also, seeing as how he was Sidious apprentice for around twenty-ish years. This is an area where we don't have much knowledge of Maul. However, it is agreed that Revan would most likely beat Maul, handily even, in a purely force battle.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
With all due respect to this Maul fellatio and anti Revan crap, Maul won't be owning Revan at anything. There is more information on Maul's abilities with a saber, than Revan, but that in no gives him a victory

That's bullshit. I could just as easily credit you with being a Revan fanboy, DS. Don't use crappy logic like that. The difference is: Jollyjim has done a hell of a lot better job than LeGenD at making an argument, and Advent's torn the Revan Fan Brigade to shreds. If you think Revan is the superior swordsman, you have to prove it. I'm tired as hell with people complaining about "there isn't enough information!11!!" to adequetly defend one's favorite character. Deception just did it with Marka Ragnos and the Ancient Sith, and people are now doing it for Revan.

It's bullshit. If the evidence we have for Maul makes a better case for his dominance than the evidence we have for Revan, then it stands that Maul > Revan (in swordsmanship) until you can prove otherwise.

I love it how we conveniently have enough information about Revan to place him as "an uber Sith" and yet when push comes to shove, people cry that there isn't enough to make an argument, and so the debate itself should be waived. Not happening.

And this is just talking about saber combat, Maul stands no chance in a force battle.

I guess Maul's fortunate, since the thread-opener clearly states that this is a saber-fight. I suppose that would make a convincing reason to credit you with being a Revan fanboy, DS, adding irrelevant statements to fellate him.

Conclusion: There isn't any pro-Maul, anti-Revan shit going on. And if there is, who the hell cares, so long as they can back it up. The Revan side sucks ass when it comes to that, so far. Prove the Maul guys wrong.

Originally posted by Gideon
That's bullshit. I could just as easily credit you with being a Revan fanboy, DS. Don't use crappy logic like that. The difference is: Jollyjim has done a hell of a lot better job than LeGenD at making an argument, and Advent's torn the Revan Fan Brigade to shreds. If you think Revan is the superior swordsman, you have to prove it. I'm tired as hell with people complaining about "there isn't enough information!11!!" to adequetly defend one's favorite character. Deception just did it with Marka Ragnos and the Ancient Sith, and people are now doing it for Revan.

It's bullshit. If the evidence we have for Maul makes a better case for his dominance than the evidence we have for Revan, then it stands that Maul > Revan (in swordsmanship) until you can prove otherwise.

I love it how we conveniently have enough information about Revan to place him as "an uber Sith" and yet when push comes to shove, people cry that there isn't enough to make an argument, and so the debate itself should be waived. Not happening.

I guess Maul's fortunate, since the thread-opener clearly states that this is a saber-fight. I suppose that would make a convincing reason to credit you with being a Revan fanboy, DS, adding irrelevant statements to fellate him.

Conclusion: There isn't any pro-Maul, anti-Revan shit going on. And if there is, who the hell cares, so long as they can back it up. The Revan side sucks ass when it comes to that, so far. Prove the Maul guys wrong.

By your logic, I'm as much a Revan and ancient sith fan as you are anti revan, anti ancient sith. It goes both ways Escape.

By your logic, I'm as much a Revan and ancient sith fan as you are anti revan, anti ancient sith.

...What the hell? No. I don't argue out of bias, that's the damn difference. I've defended the Ancient Sith and Revan based on the evidence laid down before me. Did you forget that, at all? I'm not the one who attempts to make arguments or debates inadmissable because there isn't enough evidence for me to support my character. Deception did it with the Ancient Sith, you agreed. Now you and LeGenD want to do it with Revan. It's bullshit. I'm the guy who argues based on evidence, regardless if it fellates the characters I like or otherwise. No one here is arguing that Maul wouldn't get an ass beating from Revan in the Force. What we are telling you is that the pro-Maul people are making a vastly superior argument than the pro-Revan.

Based on sheer evidence alone, Maul is the superior swordsman. You liking Revan better isn't going to change that.

It goes both ways Escape.

It would, if I undermined Revan's and the Ancient Sith's power and achievements. I don't. I put it into proper perspective.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
We are talking about a character whose information is not yet complete, so the possibility of exaggerations and unspported assumpions do exist in these kinds of cases.

That's not the point, the point is throughout this entire debate you've claimed that Revan did feats x, y, and z easily. If we don't know, why would you make the claim? There's so many times where you've posted nothing but bullshit scenarios and acted as if they were factual.

and people can bring up different assumptions regarding a same issue but do not forget that every person has some degree of flexibilty in him/her. We are just debating here and there is no need to get annoyed by views of any person in these kinds of debates.

Thank you for the lesson on "How To Handle Yourself on the Internet", but I think I'll follow my own way. And there is a need to get "annoyed" when people twist your arguments around (like you do constantly).

You can notice that I am not calling you a liar either.

That's because absolutely nothing I said was based on a falsehood. You can't label someone a "liar", if they haven't lied.

And we can access other grenades in our inventory even in the Tomb of Naga Sadow because the Game Mechanics allows us to do so. But this will not be true in a proper canon scenario because those Sith Masters won't be foolish enough to let people carry grenades with them in to the Tomb of Naga Sadow to make the Sith Trials easy for them.

Here's the thing, Legend, you've yet to prove up. Prove that the Sith masters don't allow the usage of grenades. Typing it out doesn't make it true. You have no evidence, so it's unsupported. The opposite assumption is backed up by the fact you're aloud to have them in your inventory and use them.

If it's not said in a cutscene, you have no point. And if it is, I want the quote.

A Jedi mostly uses a Light Saber and the Force in most combat scenarios and also during the Jedi Trials.

And this is relevant how?

The bodies of Terentatek beasts are heavily armored and rough, so naturally they are more resistant to the damage caused by a Grenade.

You stated that no grenade would be enough to "seriously injure" or "kill" the terentateks, your proof for this would be where? Your ass?

However if you throw a grenade in to its mouth, then it is a different story. Still this assumption is also unsupported that Revan really did this.

It doesn't have to be supported by anything (though because it's unknown, it's automatically a possibility), because I am not suggesting that he actually accomplished his goal by these means. I am opening your blind eyes to the fact that there are other options at hand, as you have been hellbent on claiming that he did this with a lightsaber.

Continually twisting my position around will do you no good. I would've thought you learned that by now.

It is my assumption but since there is no hard evidence to back it up, so I have decided to drop it in this debate.

You didn't have a choice to begin with, Legend, your assertion had no backbone to it.

After the completion of the Sith Trails, Uther asks Revan about the Terentatek beasts and Revan replies that he killed them easily.

Originally posted by Borbarad
OMG !
How many pointless stuff can a single person but into one single post ?

The dialog and the reaction to it is dependant on the choice of the player. As is the reaction of Uthar. So what do you want to do here ? Neither did Revan canonically say that line nor did Uthar reply with the other. Urm. And that also pretty much destroys that assumptions you were drawing from that quote.

Originally posted by Advent
Nonsense. Simply because Revan said it (I want to see the quote, by the way) doesn't make it true. I suppose Darth Sidious must really have "UNL1MITED POWAH!!/!1ONEELEVEN!!" simply because he says so.

Furthermore, how could Revan have said that if it's possible to just run past them and pull the lever? Oh? What's that? You just got owned? Quod erat demonstrandum, *****.

Additionally, one could note that there's no canonical evidence that Revan even killed those terentateks, because as I said, it's possible to run past them and pull the lever. Ergo the fact that Revan supposedly said he killed them "easily" (which is bullshit; where's the quote?) is entirely irrelevant.

Aside from the fact that even if he did, it still wouldn't matter.

See the above lines and try the game gain, if you have time.

See the above points and try removing your blinders, if you have time.

Your so called "owned" declaration will fall at your own face.

Not really, since your point is still invalid.

Surprisingly, Revan himself told Uther that he easily killed those two Terentateks in the Tomb of Naga Sadow.

Originally posted by Borbarad
OMG !
How many pointless stuff can a single person but into one single post ?

The dialog and the reaction to it is dependant on the choice of the player. As is the reaction of Uthar. So what do you want to do here ? Neither did Revan canonically say that line nor did Uthar reply with the other. Urm. And that also pretty much destroys that assumptions you were drawing from that quote.

Originally posted by Advent
Nonsense. Simply because Revan said it (I want to see the quote, by the way) doesn't make it true. I suppose Darth Sidious must really have "UNL1MITED POWAH!!/!1ONEELEVEN!!" simply because he says so.

Furthermore, how could Revan have said that if it's possible to just run past them and pull the lever? Oh? What's that? You just got owned? Quod erat demonstrandum, *****.

Additionally, one could note that there's no canonical evidence that Revan even killed those terentateks, because as I said, it's possible to run past them and pull the lever. Ergo the fact that Revan supposedly said he killed them "easily" (which is bullshit; where's the quote?) is entirely irrelevant.

Aside from the fact that even if he did, it still wouldn't matter.

There is always a possibility about my assumption to be true but I am willing to drop it.

I've never denied that anything you said wasn't a possibility, Legend, but when you assert it as true, you're making the assumption naked. Ergo, it

The point is that you have no sound reason to suggest that why those Jedi did not used the Force against those monsters.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Every Jedi thinks differently and fights differently.

You've defeated your own point.

Just because you said that all those 3 jedi did not chose to use the Force against those monsters, does not makes your point true.

Parroting my words to you ("just because you say it, doesn't make it true) is rather asinine, especially considering you're quoting out of context, a logical fallacy.

And really, what you're saying in no way refutes my point, because your misconstruing my argument:

Originally posted by Advent
By this type of ridiculous logic, I could question why they didn't indirectly use the Force. Are they immune to that as well?

Answer: No. Ergo simply because a few, young Jedi didn't opt to use the Force doesn't mean they are completely resistant. Or alternatively, I could inform you that to generalize because one batch of fighters didn't use the Force, it means everyone else is thusly incapable is fallacious.

Keep using reasoning like that and you'll find yourself getting laughed at.

Refute it or drop the point. Clearly you don't understand this simple concept.

Every Jedi thinks differently and fights differently.

Which is a point in favor of my position.

Let me explain further, so even you can understand. What you're saying is absolutely true, therefore to suggest because the group of Jedi knights didn't use the Force means that they are immune is fallacious. For all we know, they weren't strong in the Force, or they simply didn't use it for unknown reasons. It is not correct to say that this adds to your standpoint because it means jack shit.

But against those Terentateks, we see every Jedi using only a melee weapon against those monsters

Originally posted by Advent
By this type of ridiculous logic, I could question why they didn't indirectly use the Force. Are they immune to that as well?

Answer: No. Ergo simply because a few, young Jedi didn't opt to use the Force doesn't mean they are completely resistant. Or alternatively, I could inform you that to generalize because one batch of fighters didn't use the Force, it means everyone else is thusly incapable is fallacious.

Keep using reasoning like that and you'll find yourself getting laughed at.

Refute it or drop the point. Clearly you don't understand this simple concept.

which supports my assertion that Terentateks are immune to the Force attacks or lets say most kind of Force attacks.

No, it doesn't, Legend.

But what I actually said is that our actions in the game are not canon because every person plays the game and uses different choices.

Again, irrelevant. See above.

I will try the game again sometime and will see that how many Force powers affect those monsters. But even in the game, the resistance level of Terentateks to Force attacks is being kept very high - "190 points" out of a total of "200 Points", which means that most of the Force attacks should not work on them, unless there is some sort of bug in the game.

Last time I checked "190/200" doesn't equate to completely. So, what's your point? And what section of your ass did you pull this numbers out of?

Regardless, the point is Force attacks works. Which means that I was right, and you were wrong.

Even in the canon comic "Shadows & Light", no Jedi is shown using Force attacks on Terentatek beasts however those Jedi can and will use the Force offensively in any fight, if necessary.

Originally posted by Advent
By this type of ridiculous logic, I could question why they didn't indirectly use the Force. Are they immune to that as well?

Answer: No. Ergo simply because a few, young Jedi didn't opt to use the Force doesn't mean they are completely resistant. Or alternatively, I could inform you that to generalize because one batch of fighters didn't use the Force, it means everyone else is thusly incapable is fallacious.

Keep using reasoning like that and you'll find yourself getting laughed at.

Refute it or drop the point. Clearly you don't understand this simple concept.

So that explains my point very well.

No, it doesn't. It doesn't even so much as add to it. And to say that it does is a logical fallacy (which would render it invalid, anyways).

Only one source is stating that. Others are not

Such as? Prove up.

And any source you've provided thus far is unofficial, ergo it can't be used. If it is used, it'd result in me calling an appeal to authority, like I have been doing.

And the actual source material (the game), suggests that they are not completely immune, so you really don't have a point anyways.

people tend to follow the rule of "majority is authority".

In a debate? No, they don't, because to suggest something like that would be a case of appealing to the majority, another fallacy.

This is not a debate on a serious or real life issue. We should not call each other lairs in this kind of debate.

But you are a liar, and you've made stuff up in almost every single post thus far. I didn't realize the fact that this isn't a debate on anything important would change the fact that you can still lie.

You are stating this as if I am a professional liar, which I am not.

No, I'm not. Because being a "professional liar" would imply that you're good at lying. Which you are not.

I have stated some assumptions and if you do not agree with them, you are free to do so.

Skirting the point again, Legend? Prove that you're not allowed to carry explosives in the tombs or it isn't true.

We can access all those weapons because "Game Mechanics" allows us to do so. The rest of the case have alteady been explained above.

No, it hasn't. You haven't provided any proof that suggests it's unacceptable to carry mines, grenades, etc. So, given your history of aggrandizing and blatantly making shit up, I'm going to assume it isn't true until I see viable evidence.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
I admit that we do not know the whole story of this fight but it has never been stated in any source that it was a hard fight for Revan.

Which means precisely dick. Turning your own logic around, no [official] source has stated that Revan and co. easily killed Bandon, does that means it was hard? Absolutely not. It's unknown, and no proper guess could be made on the matter.

To say something like "X killed Y, it was never said it was hard, ergo it was easy" is completely and utterly fallacious reasoning. I'd advise not using it.

In fact, one of my sources claim that Revan killed Yusanis easily. This shows your lack of interest in checking out the information of that source, but I will quote the lines for you

Good Buddha, pull your head out of your ass.

I'm going to go over this one final time. And in an accommodating manner for someone of your intelligence, who can't seem to get the point through his thick cranium.

Your. Source. Is. Unofficial.

Because of that, I'd call an

Appeal. To. Authority.

Which means,

Your. Source. Holds. No. Value. As. Fact.

Do you understand yet? If not, I'll have to bash it into your skull. The source of information you're using is a third party site, which means an appeal to authority would make using it in a debate purely inadmissible as proof of your assertion.

In other words: it can't be accepted. Furthermore, look at the website heading:

"The Completely Unofficial Star Wars Encyclopedia", so it looks like your argument for Revan "destroying" Yusanis holds no water.

QED.

I do believe otherwise but I will speculate on it no further unless there is some official news about it.

Good, you're finally wising up.

But the funny thing is that even you cannot prove that they just most likely passed blades or they never engaged in a Saber Duel.

Here's the kicker: I'm not trying to prove anything as "most likely", nor definitively. My position during this entire argument has been simple, and that would be that there's no accurate assumption to make the matter. It's unknown, which is what I've said multiple times.

I've had this discussion with you, in which I said the same exact thing, and you're doing the same exact thing in this case as you were in the other (assuming I'm arguing definitively).

Twisting my position around will do you no good, only make yourself seem like more of a moron than you already are.

So your case is also weak.

Actually, it's the strongest one, because I'm not arguing a definite or likelihood.

I just posted my assumptions and you disagreed

Uh. Yeah, I disagreed with them because you've been trying to state them as truth, which there's no proof for.

but even your counter-assumptions are no more reliable then mine.

They're not suppose to be, because the sole purpose for me posting them is to demonstrate the fact that there's no evidence to suggest any specific case happened, due to the mystery surrounding the event.

I've been saying this the entire argument, Legend. Equip your spectacles.

And the funny thing is that some of my assumptions are supported by some sources

Such as? Point out which assumptions are supported by official sources. So far the only one has been that a lightsaber duel ensued, which is something I never questioned.

so I am not pulling everything out from my @ss.

...Yeah, you are.

ahahaha! this is getting more funny now!

I know, you're losing, and it's so funny to see you grasp at air.

And that specific reason does not makes you sure about your point?

I can't even decipher this sentence, but I'll give it a try. The two seconds is within reason (and heavily in favor of your argument because it suggests I'm not denying a saber duel happened) because Duron's vision only shows Revan with his saber drawn.

I'll reiterate my original point: it doesn't show how long they dueled for, which for all we know was two seconds, or how Malak was killed. Ergo, my standpoint is absolutely sturdy.

Once again, you need to go back to the drawing board on this point, as there is absolutely no connection between my quote and your question (nor comedy). Are you drunk?

I agree that we do not know for sure that how long that duel took place.

So then, you're admitting that my position was right? Good to know, the idiot finally puts up the white flag on an argument he couldn't win to begin with.

But my point is that Revan indeed killed a skilled warrior with his blade.

And no one ever denied that.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Do you think that Anoon was more skilled swordsman then Yoda, Dooku and Windu or even compared to them in that regard?

He's directly stated by the omniscient narrator as having lightsaber skills "second to none" in the entire Jedi Order, a few sentences later Yoda is declared as having skills "second to none" within the Jedi Council, so it's apparent that the author took into acknowledgement Yoda's talents, but Anoon was simply the best (because the Council is part of the Order). So to answer your question: yes, and to argue against a narrator would be asinine.

And Kenobi was a Padawan at that time when fought against the Maul and he alone managed to give him a hard fight

Try giving all the details out next time, such as Maul was injured before the duel even took place, Obi-Wan tapped into the dark side to fuel his powers (and because of that, caught Maul off guard), that Maul had less time to replenish his strength, and had to do more work than Obi-Wan the entire duel. Oh, and then add the fact Maul was regaining the upper hand.

Nice job stating all the circumstances.

and Maul was forced to use the Force to over-power him.

According to both the novelization and the script, Maul was regaining the upper hand before they even went into a deadlock.

"But Darth Maul was the stronger of the two and was driven by a frenzy that surpassed even the frantic determination that fueled Obi-Wan. Eventually, the Sith Lord began to wear the young Jedi down. Bit by bit, he pressed him back, carrying the attack to him, looking to catch him off guard. Obi-Wan could sense his body weakening, and his fear of what it would mean if he, too, were to fall, began to grow. " (The Phantom Menace, Ch. 21)

"DARTH MAUL seems to have the upper hand as OBI-WAN grows weary." (The Phantom Menace script).

You were saying?

So if an enraged Padawan can give Maul a decent fight in a Saber Duel, Revan can surely do better.

By this logic, the best lightsaber duelist in the Order should be able to kick Maul's ass, but he didn't. So your point holds no water.

Also see above, listing a few circumstances that are in favor isn't smart.

I have already mentioned the information about this fight from a source in the above post.

The source is unofficial, ergo holds no water.

An emotionally disturbed Jedi or a Jedi without a clear mind will never fight very well because such things will limit his focus. Anakin is a clear example of this. His precognitive abilities were there but he fought with limited focus due to an obvious reason that I have mentioned before.

Are you a Jedi? No. Are you Revan? No. Is it a fallacy to assume it limited his focus? Yes.

Correlation does not imply causation, therefore to say that it definitively caused a hindrance on his fighting abilities would be faulty (and a fallacy). Moreover, you're not Revan. So, you have absolutely no idea how he would've handled the situation.

You yourself have admitted that such emotions will limit his concentration and focus.

Right, but you're not understand what I'm saying: correlation does not imply causation, and you have no idea what was going through Revan's head at the time, because you're not Revan!

And this is what my point is and when this happens, a Jedi no matter how powerful can fail because he can do more mistakes in such a state. Anakin's case again rings some bells.

Are you a Jedi? No. Are you Revan? No. Is it a fallacy to assume it limited his focus? Yes.

Correlation does not imply causation, therefore to say that it definitively caused a hindrance on his fighting abilities would be faulty (and a fallacy). Moreover, you're not Revan. So, you have absolutely no idea how he would've handled the situation.

And your assumptions are better then mine? At-least some of my assumptions are supported by some 3rd party sources.

I lol'd.

Third party sources mean jack shit in debates, so you have no proof. Furthermore, my side isn't supposed to be making assumptions that are any better than yours. My side is supposed to be proving that there's too many unknown circumstances around the majority of Revan's battles to say "Revan did A in situation B". Which I've accomplished, as you've been conceding on many points.

A few names does not makes PT period to be the strongest in the Jedi Order history

I never said it did, George Lucas did.

because most of the Jedi in that period were not battle-hardened and many were practitioners of a Niman Form and they got killed in the major battles.

Irrelevant. By this logic, the soldiers who fought in the Revolutionary War must be greater than soldiers now. I find that unlikely considering the advancement in training, tactics and the like.

However being the "Prime of Jedi" can refer to other factors as well like education, reformed teachings, expansion of Jedi infrastructure etc.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Lucas said it was the prime and golden age of the Jedi. The EU implemented that. AOTC novelization? ROTS novelization? Power of the Jedi? Wanna argue against them too? AOTc novelization makes a little mention of the Jedi order being at its strongest, which worries Yoda that they've gotten too complacent. ROTs novelization mentions the Jedi order is toppled at its strongest, Power of the Jedi says much the same

So now the PT is the strongest era of Jedi.

Fallacious reasoning aside, now. I'm gonna take the canon above anything you say.

So, no, you're blatantly wrong. Notice Lucas made the reference to fighting?

And you can't say for sure that their were no duelists in the old times, who could match the likes of Yoda, Dooku and Mace in a Saber Duel.

I don't need to know for sure, because absolutely no evidence suggests that any Jedi from the KotOR-era are on par, or even close to the three aforementioned individuals in a saber battle (Revan's a possibility, but even his duel against Maul is up in the air).

Really? You just did above.

No, I didn't; see above.

That was an interesting thought by him but I need more evidence that Anoon was > Yoda, Mace and Dooku in Saber Skills.

Uh, the evidence in that post outright states him to be the best. A declaration from the omniscient narrator trumps any proof of the contrary. So you don't need any more, because it's already been provided.

He would be good, specially after all that verbal fellating. But TPM Kenobi showed that Maul was not unstoppable.

Already been addressed, see above. And no one ever said that Maul was "unstoppable" anyways.

And Maul's case has been made weaker by TPM Kenobi.

Already been addressed, see above.

Revan might not have used Jar Kai on Star Forge, but he is possibly among the greatest practitioners of that Form.

Just because you type it out doesn't mean it's true. And your original claim was that he was "among the greatest", since you can't prove that, and because "possibly" means jack shit, you lose.

There was no such thing mentioned as "he practised Jar Kai". He was shown using Jar Kai style and that's it. But since he was a skilled swordsman, so it is assumed that he mastered that Form.

Assumed? By who? You? What you think means very little, simply because he was "a skilled swordsman" does not mean he mastered it.

However we do not know that for how long, Revan used that Form.

I've already said as much, thanks for repeating me and supporting my position.

My original assertion is that Revan is believed to be among the greatest "practitioners" of Jar Kai.

Which there's absolutely no proof for. Being shown to wield two sabers =/= being "believed to be among the greatest".

Advent, learn to remain civil or shall I assume that your parents never taught you any manners?

Assume what you will, I really don't care what you think. And I'll "remain civil" once someone exterminates all the noobs and idiots on this forum (which includes you).

The rest is just ridiculous, because I will never see you outside of the intraweb, and if I do, I'll probably laugh at you.

<edit>

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
And move on, girl! This is just a debate on a fiction issue.

Then quit responding to my posts, you're clearly not winning or proving your point. </edit>