So how powerful was Darth Malak on the Star Forge?

Originally posted by shinkoryu
Not convinced.

Originally posted by shinkoryu
Hardly any individual you can't debate with?

The real answer is hardly anybody wants to engage in a debate with you, considering your over zealous attempts to downplay any source that works against your favour.

To put it shortly : You're friggin delusional.

And by the way, I get ample debates. Sometimes, I don't have time for them.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
How about you prove your accusations first?

This seems like a desperate attempt of personal attack on me. You are wasting my time.

And by the way, I get ample debates. Sometimes, I don't have time for them.

Originally posted by shinkoryu
The evidence is all over the place, the problem is that you choose to not except it.

Originally posted by shinkoryu
The evidence is all over the place, the problem is that you choose to not except it.

What I am 100% sure is that Kit Fisto will die from first lightsaber blow.
Also, in lightsaber combat Malak doesn't stand a chance against Obi-Wan but Obi-Wan might embarrassingly loose by being force choked.

So Obi-Wan is ranked higher than Malak in saber combat? I wasn't aware any source made this connection definitive.

Malak is an unknown in terms of lightsaber abilities. Obi-Wan on the otherhand is well established as being extremely skilled. Known to be skilled >>> Unknown imo.

So here's what I'm seeing:

P1. Malak is an "unknown", which apparently means that despite having an obvious reputation and standing in a Sith Empire based entirely on Force mastery and martial prowess, he didn't swing his glowstick on a television screen and therefore cannot be quantified.

P2. Obi-Wan, while being the lovable underdog of damn near every fight but Grievious (who isn't a Force user), notoriously turtles in combat and has easily and conclusively defeated no Sith Lords (Anakin was an epic struggle which he barely won, Maul outclassed him early on and left himself open to bisection, Dooku and Sidious were well beyond Obi-Wan's level, Ventres routinely challenged him and sometimes outclassed him, etc.), but is a "known" by virtue of being in live media with tons of exposure.

Conclusion: Characters with more live media showings always beat characters who do not benefit from this kind of exposure. This is more reasonable than saying "Not enough data is present to conclusively put Obi-Wan over a Sith Lord, even though Obi-Wan has a great spanning record of either being dominated by or barely beating Sith Lords through PIS".

Also, by this kind of logic, Obi-Wan beats Revan, Malgus, and Meetra Surik in saber combat alone. New debating fallacy: Arguing the Unknown as Conclusively Inferior.

Mothafvcka did I use the word 'conclusively?' estahuh

I said that IMO someone with actual quatifiable showings should be ranked higher than someone with jack diddly squat. Also Malgus can be quantified in saber combat noob. As to the other two, yeah, I see nothing wrong with saying that based on what they've shown (or rather, havn't) Obi-Wan is superior.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Mothafvcka did I use the word 'conclusively?' estahuh

I said that IMO someone with actual quatifiable showings should be ranked higher than someone with jack diddly squat. Also Malgus can be quantified in saber combat noob. As to the other two, yeah, I see nothing wrong with saying that based on what they've shown (or rather, havn't) Obi-Wan is superior.

A has an unknown value. B has a value of 10. Therefore, B is greater than A.

I'm so glad you agree. 😐

All I'm saying that Malak is an Unknown and if we are using him in threads even though we shouldn't be we can't assume he's higher than a master swordsman like Kenobi. In a versus thread when one side has shown a high degree of competence and the other hasn't, yes, I'm inclined to side with the former.

I don't see people disagreeing with the idea that Palpatine can beat Vitiate because the latter has never shown anything with a lightsaber.

The retardation on this page alone is giving me a headache.
I'll point out some of the silliness tomorow, after I get off-work. Ugh, though. Ugh.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I'm so glad you agree. 😐

All I'm saying that Malak is an Unknown and if we are using him in threads even though we shouldn't be we can't assume he's higher than a master swordsman like Kenobi. In a versus thread when one side has shown a high degree of competence and the other hasn't, yes, I'm inclined to side with the former.

I don't see people disagreeing with the idea that Palpatine can beat Vitiate because the latter has never shown anything with a lightsaber.

Example:

Exar Kun lifts his lightsaber less than ten times in the comics. Never once in animation, where his "speed" and technique can be easily examined.

Obi-Wan Kenobi has countless lightsaber showings. While not all impressive (he is outclassed by many big names and all Sith in the storyline), his exposure is immense.

According to arbitrary decision, Exar Kun's limited showings are negligible, despite the fact that he was a "master swordsman", and none could defeat him in combat.

Obi-Wan, on the other hand, fares relatively poorly in combat against true Sith and major players, but wins through sheer luck and pluck rather than better skill, despite exposure.

Conclusion. Exar Kun is arbitrarily an unknown, therefore Obi-Wan wins.

Sub in "Malak" or "Malgus" for "Exar Kun", same argument. Either you accept that Sith Lords who head meritocratic orders founded on tenets of "killing ****ers who have higher titles than you if you can" are "better than Obi-Wan who gets knocked about like a handball 9 times out of 10", or you ascribe to the philosophy that "Oh, they haven't done enough for me to judge; therefore their standing is irrelevant AND Obi-Wan wins despite inconclusive evidence IMO".

It's like having your cake and defiling it too.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Example:

Exar Kun lifts his lightsaber less than ten times in the comics. Never once in animation, where his "speed" and technique can be easily examined.

Obi-Wan Kenobi has countless lightsaber showings. While not all impressive (he is outclassed by many big names and all Sith in the storyline), his exposure is immense.

According to arbitrary decision, Exar Kun's limited showings are negligible, despite the fact that he was a "master swordsman", and none could defeat him in combat.

Obi-Wan, on the other hand, fares relatively poorly in combat against true Sith and major players, but wins through sheer luck and pluck rather than better skill, despite exposure.

Conclusion. Exar Kun is arbitrarily an unknown, therefore Obi-Wan wins.

The fact that you need to continue to talk about people other than Malak just proves that you can't think of any evidence to support the notion that he's in Obi-Wan's league. Your example is flawed because we actually do have evidence of Exar Kun's lightsaber prowess in both that 'master swordsman' line and with his duel with Uliq Qel-Droma, who is himself a brilliant swordsman capable of holding off an enraged Jedi Master while cut off from the Force and after 13 years without practise. So no, Exar Kun is not an unknown. Try again.

By contrast, who exactly has Malak defeated? Amnesiac Revan. Bastila. Carth. Two random jedi who had just fought through the Star Forge. Oh no wait, none of that was with a lightsaber! Well he got his ass kicked by untrained Force Sensitive Jarael while sparring once. But I doubt thats a point in his favor. Hmmm. mmm

Nope, can't really think of anything else. Of course though being the head of the Sith Order means that he's clearly superior to Kenobi. I mean he had such opposition in the form of...... Bandon? The headmaster on Korriban?

BTW, your stance is also faulty in that you assume that I'd see declaring Exar Kun an Unknown as some giant fallacy. If the scenario really was as you described it and there really was limited evidence of Kun's lightsaber abilities, then I'd have no problem with it at all. Just like I'd have no problem with saying that Obi-Wan has shown himself to be more impressive than, say, Marka Ragnos has. But of course thats absurd. Its not as if Marka Ragnos was defeated by a padawan who received basically no training or anything.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Sub in "Malak" or "Malgus" for "Exar Kun", same argument. Either you accept that Sith Lords who head meritocratic orders founded on tenets of "killing ****ers who have higher titles than you if you can" are "better than Obi-Wan who gets knocked about like a handball 9 times out of 10", or you ascribe to the philosophy that "Oh, they haven't done enough for me to judge; therefore their standing is irrelevant AND Obi-Wan wins despite inconclusive evidence IMO".

It's like having your cake and defiling it too.

Yes Master, please teach me the ways of Teh Logicks. I've already learnt to mock my opposition when they disagree with me to make my argument look better. Aren't I a good little Padawan? :wag tail:

umad bro?

Also, Obi-Wan is considered a "master swordsman" of his era too. So apparently he is an equal with Exar Kun, unless Kun is arbitarily declared to be an unknown.

The point of the argument was not to make an objective argument for/against Kun or even for/against Malak, but to indicate how ridiculous it is to apply the title "unknown" to something and therefore conclude it is "inferior".

Vene was making fun of this with his argument:

A has an unknown value. B has a value of 10. Therefore, B is greater than A.

It would be relatively simple to establish that Darth Malak is a big dog in his era, and that his lightsaber skill is likely second only to Revan, who himself is an unparalleled duelist and the strongest Jedi evah of that era according to the novel. By virtue of being a powerful Sith Lord, formerly Jedi Guardian, war veteran, and rocking a purple half-cape, Malak holds a claim to being "inherently dangerous in saber combat". The fact that he can spam high level Dark Side powers is simply an added bonus that would factor into any normal battle anyways.

It is relatively difficult to establish Obi-Wan as being above anyone in saber prowess in his era unless you include almost tertiary Jedi Masters, padawans, Coleman Trebor (there's a bar there - Jango Fett), etc. The list of people above Obi-Wan include: Dooku, Yoda, Mace Windu, Ventress (for a good while), Anakin Skywalker, Sidious, possibly Maul, and before RotS, Kit "Sidious killed me in seconds" Fisto.

Let's talk about the people who are conclusively better than Malak in KotOR.

1. Revan.
2. ?
Wait, no that's about it.

You're free to "IMO" all you'd like. I just find it incredibly hilarious how Malak is written off as an "unknown". He seems pretty important and powerful in his own setting, compared to Obi-Wan who is "above average" and has lost many battles against "Sith Lords".

Yes Master, please teach me the ways of Teh Logicks. I've already learnt to mock my opposition when they disagree with me to make my argument look better. Aren't I a good little Padawan? :wag tail:

This is adorable, however.

Sources say that Obi-Wan is one of the greatest duelists of his time, "his skill with a lightsaber rivaling even Yoda and Mace Windu". I think he proved it by surviving fight with Anakin and it was surprisingly long and fierce fight. I mentioned Force choke because it was the only reason why Dooku was able to beat him. But combat wise Obi was more than capable to take him down.

Originally posted by Nephthys
By contrast, who exactly has Malak defeated? Amnesiac Revan. Bastila. Carth.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Two random jedi who had just fought through the Star Forge.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Oh no wait, none of that was with a lightsaber!

Malak clashed with Revan using his lightsaber on several occasions and survived. Is this not an indication of his skill?

Originally posted by Nephthys
Well he got his ass kicked by untrained Force Sensitive Jarael while sparring once. But I doubt thats a point in his favor. Hmmm. mmm

Also, Jarael did not defeat Malak through her skills in melee combat. She knocked him out through a gun.

And Malak was actually training her. It was not a life and death situation and neither Malak was trying to kill her.

Meritocratic order? Didn't Malak get the job in the first place by attacking Revan with a capital ship? mmm

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
umad bro?

No, I was just high on coke at the time. So I was a little jittery.

Coke Cola that is.....

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Also, Obi-Wan is considered a "master swordsman" of his era too. So apparently he is an equal with Exar Kun, unless Kun is arbitarily declared to be an unknown.

Well I think its pretty illogical to assume that all master swordsmen are equal in skill. 😬

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
The point of the argument was not to make an objective argument for/against Kun or even for/against Malak, but to indicate how ridiculous it is to apply the title "unknown" to something and therefore conclude it is "inferior".

I don't see it as being ridiculous at all. As I've stated numerous times though that I don't think that the question should really even be raised, as Malak's lightsaber abilities are completely unknown. However, if we are arguing them, indeed if we are ranking them, then Obi-Wan gets placed higher due to the simple fact that he's actually done something. If it was up to me then Malak wouldn't even be on the list in the first place. However, we are discussing this. In which case I say that since Obi-Wan can actually back up his skills rather than just having some speculation about his abilities, then I say he's superior based upon what we know.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Vene was making fun of this with his argument:

A has an unknown value. B has a value of 10. Therefore, B is greater than A.

It would be relatively simple to establish that Darth Malak is a big dog in his era, and that his lightsaber skill is likely second only to Revan, who himself is an unparalleled duelist and the strongest Jedi evah of that era according to the novel. By virtue of being a powerful Sith Lord, formerly Jedi Guardian, war veteran, and rocking a purple half-cape, Malak holds a claim to being "inherently dangerous in saber combat". The fact that he can spam high level Dark Side powers is simply an added bonus that would factor into any normal battle anyways.

Oh man, I forgot about his purple cape. Ok, discussion over, I conceed!

(Also Revan is hardly an unparelled duelist last I checked. Dude has done nothing with a lightsaber beyond killing some Non-Force Sensistives)

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
It is relatively difficult to establish Obi-Wan as being above anyone in saber prowess in his era unless you include almost tertiary Jedi Masters, padawans, Coleman Trebor (there's a bar there - Jango Fett), etc. The list of people above Obi-Wan include: Dooku, Yoda, Mace Windu, Ventress (for a good while), Anakin Skywalker, Sidious, possibly Maul, and before RotS, Kit "Sidious killed me in seconds" Fisto.

Let's talk about the people who are conclusively better than Malak in KotOR.

1. Revan.
2. ?
Wait, no that's about it.

You're assuming that since Malak was the second greatest combatant of his era then he's automatically one of the greatest ever. Thats hardly logical at all. I mean, look back at my comment about Marka Ragnos. Greatest Sith Lord of his era, the Golden Age of the Sith, taken out by a padawan. You're assuming that the era's are always comparable. The Clone Wars era just happens to have a lot of well documented, powerful combatants. Kotor? Lol, not so much. I would put every single person you mention as being above Obi-Wan above Malak as well.

Also Revan was able to defeat Malak despite him being amped by the Star Forge and able to revive and rejuvenate himself multiple times, after fighting through the Star forge and defeating Bastila. Don't act as if only being weaker than Revan is impressive, because he was ALOT weaker than Revan and other than that there really were not that many impressive combatants in KotOR.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
You're free to "IMO" all you'd like. I just find it incredibly hilarious how Malak is written off as an "unknown". He seems pretty important and powerful in his own setting, compared to Obi-Wan who is "above average" and has lost many battles against "Sith Lords".

Again, there is nothing but speculation about how skilled Malak really was. When theres such a difference between the feats of two combatants, theres a greater burden is on the one defending the lesser known combatant to establish why exactly he can compete with the more well-established and greater displays of the second. You've been very dismissive of Obi-Wan's abilities in this discussion, so if you want I could explain why exactly he's considered a skilled swordsman. Or I could if you didn't know damn well why that is already. So instead I ask you, why do you think he can compete? Because he was a Sith Lord in a time when there were no notable combatants besides himself and Revan? Because he 'seems' powerful? Seriously, I'm not seeing it.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Malak defeated them simultaneously.

You can't tell, but I assure you that the clap I'm currently doing is both sarcastic and dismissive.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Malak defeated them simultaneously.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Your argument is flawed.

Malak clashed with Revan using his lightsaber on several occasions and survived. Is this not an indication of his skill?

Considering theres no idication of Revan's skill either, nope!

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Untrained Jarael? This is far fetched. She is a very skilled combatant. Have you even read the comics?

Also, Jarael did not defeat Malak through her skills in melee combat. She knocked him out through a gun.

And Malak was actually training her. It was not a life and death situation and neither Malak was trying to kill her.

I meant untrained in the ways of the Force.