Aragorn versus RotJ Vader

Originally posted by Robtard
Just as rediculous as you saying Vader's manhood wouldn't be factored into the prophecy, see?

Wait, he said "EU Vader" more specifically. If by "crush" you mean, crush his helmet, then yes, he just couldn't kill the Witch-king.

I believe he specified ROTJ Vader, meaning Vader is capable of doing what he did in that movie, with pre-set gimps in place.

No.

He could crush every bone in his body, crush his head, crush his penis and then crush anything around him to crush him some more. I guess you can argue that wouldn't kill him, but he'd still be kinda crushed.

Yeah, but as I said we didn't see him at his max. Why would Vader's holding back because Luke is his son apply to the Witch King?

Originally posted by Bardock42
No.

He could crush every bone in his body, crush his head, crush his penis and then crush anything around him to crush him some more. I guess you can argue that wouldn't kill him, but he'd still be kinda crushed.

Yeah, but as I said we didn't see him at his max. Why would Vader's holding back because Luke is his son apply to the Witch King?

Actually, it is just as ridiculous to say Vader isn't affected by the prophecy claus as it is to say With-king isn't affected by the Force since they're from different realms respectively.

I took crush as "soundly kill", but yeah, Vader probably could crush.

While I agree that Vader is more of a badass than what is seen, we do go with what is seen, so that's why I say Aragorn has the advantage here over a gimped Vader. Not sure what you're talking about there with luke/holding back/Withc-king.

Originally posted by Robtard
Actually, it is just as ridiculous to say Vader isn't affected by the prophecy claus as it is to say With-king isn't affected by the Force since they're from different realms respectively.

I took crush as "soundly kill", but yeah, Vader probably could crush.

While I agree that Vader is more of a badass than what is seen, we do go with what is seen, so that's why I say Aragorn has the advantage here over a gimped Vader. Not sure what you're talking about there with luke/holding back/Withc-king.

No, dude, it's kinda like saying "Vader can't be killed by anyone else because we know how he died".

We are in agreement then.

The point is we can't see how good Vader is in ROTJ. And my other point is that, even though we can't, what he shows in the final fight with Luke would still trump what Aragorn does.

Originally posted by Bardock42
No, dude, it's kinda like saying "Vader can't be killed by anyone else because we know how he died".

We are in agreement then.

The point is we can't see how good Vader is in ROTJ. And my other point is that, even though we can't, what he shows in the final fight with Luke would still trump what Aragorn does.

Na, what I said. You're saying Vader wouldn't be subject to the prophecy claus because he isn't of the LOTR realm. I say rubbish as it pretains to these Vs. fights.

Yes, physically crush, not kill.

We do see how good Vader is; he's rather slow and clumsy and wouldn't beat Aragorn, imo. But again, this is a gimped Vader.

Originally posted by Robtard
Na, what I said. You're saying Vader wouldn't be subject to the prophecy claus because he isn't of the LOTR realm. I say rubbish as it pretains to these Vs. fights.

Yes, physically crush, not kill.

We do see how good Vader is; he's rather slow and clumsy and wouldn't beat Aragorn, imo. But again, this is a gimped Vader.

Well, I am more saying that the prophecy was that not a man will kill him (and by extension that no man can kill him). I'd argue that a fight with Vader is an occurence that's not factored in in such a prophecy, because as we know how Vader died we could just argue "The Witch King can't kill him, because we know how he really died". Or, if you are bend on the prophecy part, we could argue "The Witch King can't kill ESB Vader since he has to bring Balance to the Force and did not, yet, ergo, can't die". It's ridiculous. If the Witch King had a skill that makes him invulnerable to what males do to him, then fair enough, he doesn't though, at least there's no prove of him having that anywhere in LOTR.

I tend to disagree. But, meh, Vader would beat him 11 out of 10 times.

H-how is he slow and clumsy, the fight in ROTJ is at least as fast as what Aragorn does...and again, that fight happened against his SON, an advantage that Luke had that the Witch King would not.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, I am more saying that the prophecy was that not a man will kill him (and by extension that no man can kill him). I'd argue that a fight with Vader is an occurence that's not factored in in such a prophecy, because as we know how Vader died we could just argue "The Witch King can't kill him, because we know how he really died". Or, if you are bend on the prophecy part, we could argue "The Witch King can't kill ESB Vader since he has to bring Balance to the Force and did not, yet, ergo, can't die". It's ridiculous. If the Witch King had a skill that makes him invulnerable to what males do to him, then fair enough, he doesn't though, at least there's no prove of him having that anywhere in LOTR.

I tend to disagree. But, meh, Vader would beat him 11 out of 10 times.

H-how is he slow and clumsy, the fight in ROTJ is at least as fast as what Aragorn does...and again, that fight happened against his SON, an advantage that Luke had that the Witch King would not.

I believe the prophecy works as a sort of protection.

11 out of 10 is probably right, just not kill him.

I watched that clip you posted of ROTJ, that swordsmanship isn't all that great and Vader seems blockish. Luke did have some fancy flips though.

Originally posted by Robtard
I believe the prophecy works as a sort of protection.

11 out of 10 is probably right, just not kill him.

I watched that clip you posted of ROTJ, that swordsmanship isn't all that great and Vader seems blockish. Luke did have some fancy flips though.

Fair enough, different views I guess.

-

Well, that's kinda my point, Vader didn't intend to kill Luke at all.

Well, with the Witch King: any sword, or attack that is done upon him would do absolutely nothing, by any man - according to the novels. Though this comes about by prophecy of Glorfindel, prophecy is pretty much gospel in LOTR, as it relies heavily on the influence of fate etc. As for the films, the insinuation is to be the that the same rules apply as the novels, as he summarises that rule himself.

The thing to be decided would be that if such a prophecy would apply to this fight; that would probably depend on where they actually had the fight.

Ha, German. Told you prophecy trumps Vader, it's like a power or special ability.

If you're giving Vader all his abilities and powers as in the EU, it's only logical to transfer all of the Witch-king's abilities and powers as well, ie Vader's Y-chromosome makes him inept when facing he who can not be killed by man, the Captain of Despair.

So what fallible third party character's say is fact now?

Maybe no man in the weak ass LotR universe can kill him, but an average Jedi with Force Powers in SW would crush him.

Seriously, you all should really stop using No-Limits fallacies and taking fallible third party character's words as fact.

Of course, I am well aware you are just trolling.

So stfu and gtfo.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
Vadar may have have augmented strength but i doubt that his strength is much greater than an Orakei's. Aragorn became a master warrior in a land where Humans are amongst the weakest beings.

I doubt that strength would have much to do in a battle against Aragorn and Vadar. With Vadar unable to use any of his sith powers i think this battle comes down to swordsmanship, endurance and agility. We can argue all day about Vadar's pre-cog capabilities but from what i've seen in the trilogies this has never been properly explained. I believe it is to vague to implement as an advantage for Vadar. The only concrete examples of pre-cog ability that i have seen in the MOVIE'S, is sensing emotions or thoughts from weak minds.

Endurance? Vader's great strength pushing against Aragorn will tire Aragorn quicker than Vader. Swordsmanship? Vader mastered all the skills of saber combat very quickly, and bested Count Dooku, one of the single best duelists in SW, in single saber combat. Agility Vader won' take, but I believe Vader makes up for it with his other attributes. Dude...Pre-Cog in the movies allows them to block lasers and deflect them.

Originally posted by Dark-Jaxx
You doubt it based on...What? From what I remember, Uruk-hai were more well known for stamina than raw strength. And none of the Uruks are quite as skilled or powerful as Vader from what I remember.

Well, no, they were known for both.

The issue here is whether the law of each world is carried with the character. As the law of Middle Earth is rather fate based, it has nothing really to do with the power of the character they face, it means more than that. So you going on about "weak ass characters" is unnecessary. Also, as there is no such thing as the "force" in Middle Earth, which I think is the most unimaginative and lame character trait ever, but that's opinion (just like yours about LOTR), should that count as a trait?

So the issue really isn't about the holes in narrative, but about the fact that each world is very different. In Middle Earth, it's a pretty complicated affair in which a lot has to be taken into account and metaphysical concepts play a part, it's different in Star Wars as it's more literal based.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Well, no, they were known for both.

The issue here is whether the law of each world is carried with the character. As the law of Middle Earth is rather fate based, it has nothing really to do with the power of the character they face, it means more than that. So you going on about "weak ass characters" is unnecessary. Also, as there is no such thing as the "force" in Middle Earth, which I think is the most unimaginative and lame character trait ever, but that's opinion (just like yours about LOTR), should that count as a trait?

So the issue really isn't about the holes in narrative, but about the fact that each world is very different. In Middle Earth, it's a pretty complicated affair in which a lot has to be taken into account and metaphysical concepts play a part, it's different in Star Wars as it's more literal based.

So because the LotR world is more complex in the..."confrontations" shall we say since it is fate based, but have not shown the power that SW characters have, what are you exactly saying? The Force does not exist in Middle Earth, true, but why should that matter? Wizards, Maiar, and Elves don't exist in SW, does that really make a difference in a vs. thread?

Each world is different, but fact is, in terms of the variety and magnitude of the powers of the specific character's in the fiction, they cannot compare to Star Wars.

The strongest in LotR like Morgoth or the Valar have not even compared to ones such as Palpatine in terms of magnitude of power when it comes to battle in all honesty.

I kinda see what you are saying though.

Sorry if I sounded kinda biased, it is just that some of the LotR fans I see tend to think far too highly of the power of their favorite fiction.

A question. Thread starter specified "no offensive force powers" for Vader, no question there. Offensive force powers, to me, are force lightning, force choke, force hold, attacks of that nature.

Is Vader relieving Aragorn of his sword with the force an offensive force attack?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
A question. Thread starter specified "no offensive force powers" for Vader, no question there. Offensive force powers, to me, are force lightning, force choke, force hold, attacks of that nature.

Is Vader relieving Aragorn of his sword with the force an offensive force attack?

An answer. Think clearly, if Vader relieves Aragorn of his sword, well there wouldn't be much of a fight at all, right? It just makes sense...

I think force powers shouldn't even be allowed.

Originally posted by Dark-Jaxx
How strong is an Uruk-Hai exactly?

So because the LotR world is more complex in the..."confrontations" shall we say since it is fate based, but have not shown the power that SW characters have, what are you exactly saying? The Force does not exist in Middle Earth, true, but why should that matter? Wizards, Maiar, and Elves don't exist in SW, does that really make a difference in a vs. thread?

Each world is different, but fact is, in terms of the variety and magnitude of the powers of the specific character's in the fiction, they cannot compare to Star Wars.

The strongest in LotR like Morgoth or the Valar have not even compared to ones such as Palpatine in terms of magnitude of power when it comes to battle in all honesty.

I kinda see what you are saying though.

Sorry if I sounded kinda biased, it is just that some of the LotR fans I see tend to think far too highly of the power of their favorite fiction.

Well, the Uruk Hai are stronger than Orks and also have increased stamina and a resistance to sunlight, making them pretty much hard as nails.

The fact is that such versus battles don't really allow for the subtlety of the characters to be fully examined, which is somewhat of a shame, but inevitable. If we can only take what is literally shown, we miss out on a wealth of possibilities, but so be it.

The difference the point about the force makes, is that the power of prophecy is of similar magnitude, but is understated and subtle. However, we are shown the power of prophecy in LOTR, just not in the instance of the Witch King (although he is never killed by a man).

Obviously, yes, a lot of LOTR fans are like that, Star Wars fans can be massively annoying as well, though - particularly when it comes to dismissing other works of fiction.

Originally posted by Scythe
An answer. Think clearly, if Vader relieves Aragorn of his sword, well there wouldn't be much of a fight at all, right? It just makes sense...

I think force powers shouldn't even be allowed.

Another thought I had was when the thread starter specified that Aragorn's sword was resistant to Vader's lightsaber, isn't this against movie versus forum rules? After all, a lightsaber can cut through steel blast doors and pretty much anything it comes in contact with, right?

Seems that whatever the combatants respective weapons can do in the movies, they should be able to do in this fight.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Agreed, 110%, but it has been stated that Vader cannot use offensive force powers. I would think disarming an opponent is a defensive force atttack.

Another thought I had was when the thread starter specified that Aragorn's sword was resistant to Vader's lightsaber, isn't this against movie versus forum rules? After all, a lightsaber can cut through steel blast doors and pretty much anything it comes in contact with, right?

Seems that whatever the combatants respective weapons can do in the movies, they should be able to do in this fight.

There has to be a great equalizer, otherwise these match-ups would be one sided.

Originally posted by Scythe
There has to be a great equalizer, otherwise these match-ups would be one sided.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Yes, but at what expense? Altering the capabilities of ones weapon?