Originally posted by Wolverine2179
What makes you think qui-gon jinn is a low tier duelist when during an all out sparring match mace windu, the same guy who tooled sidious in a duel couldn't break through qui gons defences?And stop acting like ventress beating anakin actually means anything considering that in ROTS when eh achieved a clarity of mind he made a joke of dooku(the same dooku that constantly smashes ventress in a saber duel).
Qui-Gon is strong, but he wasn't alive when Mace created Vaapad, the style he used to defeat Sidious.
And Anakin can advance quickly in 6 months.
Originally posted by Anakin4Ever
Qui-Gon is strong, but he wasn't alive when Mace created Vaapad, the style he used to defeat Sidious.And Anakin can advance quickly in 6 months.
Wow, you have got to be one of the most biased guys on here. When did Mace create Vaapad? And why must Luke suck after four years of training yet Anakin can "advance quickly in 6 months."
Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
out of curiosity where was this stated?yeah he is low-tier by the time of the clone wars he is low-tier. what did he do in his lifetime that would put him on the level of non-low tier people as of RotS? What feats does he have that puts him that makes him that good?
It's called logic. If he can fight Mace Windu to a draw and trained Obi Wan Kenobi, plus he managed to retain his consciousness after death, then he is definitely great.
By low tier you are saying that he's below the average master, as in the average, nameless random masters in the order? It was stated that Qui Gon would've been on the JEDI COUNCIL had it not been for his maverick attitude. Jedi on the high jedi council aren't "low tier".
Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
yeah. he was a great philosopher. or maybe its a great fighter. thats the thing about "great". there are many things you can be great at and not one of them has to be combat.
Kinda the problem with using the "Golden Age" of the Jedi argument as proof of their superiority in combat...
Originally posted by Ms.MarvelIn real life, yes. But in Fiction----in where the abilities, feats, and all around happenings of the Universe are reliant solely on the statements and descriptions of real-word authors----it's different.
i agree. people need to stop relying on quotes and statements to serve as proof of someones strength. the only thing that matters is actual accomplishments and feats imo.
palpatine didnt think ventree to be worthy of the name sith yet made maul his apprentace that should tell u something right there. and there is no way qui-gon is a low tier duelest. the only reason he lost to maul was because he was around 70 and exausted. he was even all sweaty and out of breath even after meditating inbetween those dividers midway through.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
In real life, yes. But in Fiction----in where the abilities, feats, and all around happenings of the Universe are reliant solely on the statements and descriptions of real-word authors----it's different.
That's just a difference in interpretation, then. I think what Lucas put in the movies is the all-ruling canon. What he says on his own time though, doesn't weigh to heavily with me. That's true for the authors who contribute. If they wanted to make that point, they should have put it in the literature.
Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
That's just a difference in interpretation, then. I think what Lucas put in the movies is the all-ruling canon. What he says on his own time though, doesn't weigh to heavily with me. That's true for the authors who contribute. If they wanted to make that point, they should have put it in the literature.
Da Rulez
Anything George Lucas says about the Star Wars universe is incontestable. We kinda take that as a point of common sense.
You are very right about the authors though. That's exactly how I feel.