Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
I don't know why more is made out of this fight than need be... Sids didn't even need ONE saber to beat these two. It was a non fight. Doesn't mean maul or opress aren't powerful or a force together or alone.. it's just that Sids is THAT good and one of the best ever in the mythos. Nor harm there, but let's stop making this out to be more than it is.
So do you think Maul can defeat Kenobi without a Lightsaber?
Originally posted by DARTH POWERMaul put up a good fight in the few seconds they dueled one-on-one. In no way/shape/form does that mean his skills were equal to Palpatine's overall. Example: during TPM, Kenobi put up a good fight against Maul for a bit(after witnessing Qui-Gon's death), but his saber-skills were still vastly inferior to Maul's overall.
And you don't think they showed equal skill in that last fight?
So yeah, I saw Maul put up a good saber fight before ultimately being overpowered by Palpatine. That's what I saw.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERPalpatine: "Do not worry. I'm not going to kill you. I have... Other uses for you. MWAHAHAHAHA!!"
He never said he simply didn't "want" to. Or that "he never planned" on killing him. Maul was never a part of his plans, and if he's going to make use of a defeated Maul then it's just a situation he's taking advantage of.
Palpatine obviously had some sort of premeditated plans for Maul, imo-- otherwise he would have simply killed him with the force when he first arrived.
Originally posted by Galan007So yeah, I saw Maul put up a good saber fight before ultimately being overpowered by Palpatine. That's what I saw.
That's all I'm saying. (I also think the 2 on 1 was a good Saber fight.)
Originally posted by Galan007
Palpatine: "Do not worry. I'm not going to kill you. I have... Other uses for you. MWAHAHAHAHA!!"Palpatine obviously had some sort of premeditated plans for Maul, imo-- otherwise he would have simply killed him with the force when he first arrived.
Not sure if that's the best determination seen as he didn't kill Opress at that point either. Yet we know he was there to kill him at least.
As for premeditated plans, the Official site makes it clear he saw Maul as "a rival to be destroyed."
That was clearly his priority. Any extra use of him would be secondary. Let's not pretend we know for sure that he desperately needs him alive.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERClearly the site is wrong. If Maul were truly a rival to be destroyed, then Palpatine would have, you know, destroyed him. 😛
As for premeditated plans, the Official site makes it clear he saw Maul as "a rival to be destroyed."That was clearly his priority. Any extra use of him would be secondary. Let's not pretend we know for sure that he desperately needs him alive.
Obviously Palps didn't "desperately" need Maul alive. He simply kept him alive because he has other plans in store for him. However, you're acting like Palps deciding to spare Maul was something he thought of at the last second. However, given Palpatine's history of extensively planning out each and every move he makes well in advance of making it, I highly doubt that was the case-- Palps likely decided that he wanted to keep Maul alive from the moment he first (re)discovered him.
Originally posted by Galan007
If you interpret "destroyed" as "beaten", then yes, Palpatine destroyed Maul.
Merriam Webster lists "neutralize" as one of the few definitions for that term. When Sidious came to Mandalore, Maul was a rival; when Sidious left, Maul was no longer. The website is absolutely correct.
Originally posted by Galan007
Hence my above statement. 👆However, some people(inc. myself) may have interpreted "destroyed" by one of its other definitions-- ie. "to put out of existence: kill."
Hopefully you have seen the error of your ways and exchanged your faulty interpretation for the proper one.
And then, you shall kneel before me.
Originally posted by Galan007
Clearly the site is wrong. If Maul were truly a rival to be destroyed, then Palpatine would have, you know, destroyed him. 😛Obviously Palps didn't "desperately" need Maul alive. He simply kept him alive because he has other plans in store for him. However, you're acting like Palps deciding to spare Maul was something he thought of at the last second. However, given Palpatine's history of extensively planning out each and every move he makes well in advance of making it, I highly doubt that was the case-- Palps likely decided that he wanted to keep Maul alive from the moment he first (re)discovered him.
Sidious did technically destroy Maul. Maul was shaping up to become a third player in Palpatine's war. Sidious chose to nip Maul's budding power before he could become a potential "rival" as he put it. I suspect taking Maul alive was a possible but not really important objective as crushing the third party.
Had I seen the quote in context(ie. on the site itself) it would have made things much clearer from the get-go.
You see, based on DP's usage of that statement, he obviously equated "destroyed" to "killed"-- and given that he *seemed* to have seen the site-quote first hand, I assumed he knew what he was talking about, and went with it. Shame on me for assuming he was correct.
Originally posted by Galan007
Had I seen the quote in context(ie. on the site itself) it would have made things much clearer from the get-go.You see, based on DP's usage of that statement, he obviously equated "destroyed" to "killed"-- and given that he *seemed* to have seen the site-quote first hand, I assumed he knew what he was talking about, and went with it. Shame on me for assuming he was correct.
A dangerous assumption indeed for anyone who's read anything he's posted ever. You are forgiven, my son.
Rise, Lord Galan. Do what must be done. Do not hesitate, show no mercy.
Originally posted by Galan007
However, you're acting like Palps deciding to spare Maul was something he thought of at the last second. However, given Palpatine's history of extensively planning out each and every move he makes well in advance of making it, I highly doubt that was the case-- Palps likely decided that he wanted to keep Maul alive from the moment he first (re)discovered him.
That's the thing. We have no idea when he made that decision. He never even knew Maul was alive until the Jedi mentioned it. So he was never a part of his original plans. And Filoni confirms this. But he will just use new factors to his advantage where he can.
He could have actually made a decision on the spot if he was impressed by his combat performance.
Originally posted by Galan007You see, based on DP's usage of that statement, he obviously equated "destroyed" to "killed"-- and given that he *seemed* to have seen the site-quote first hand, I assumed he knew what he was talking about, and went with it. Shame on me for assuming he was correct.
I never said it meant killing him. I said that was his priority for being there. To destroy his rival. Any other usage of him would be secondary.
So I'm against this idea that Sidious's performance was somehow hindered simply because after defeating him he said he won't kill him. His priority was to destroy his rival as confirmed by the official site.
Not to mention Arhael's given a thorough and convincing argument that as long as your willing to go for limbs in a sword fight, your performance will not be hindered to a significant degree.
You're right, we don't know the exact point in which Palpatine decided that he did not want to kill Maul-- and because of that, all we can do is take into consideration Palpatine's character history. That said:
Given Palpatine's extensive history of planning out each and every move he makes well in advance of making it, I highly doubt that was the case-- Palps likely decided that he wanted to keep Maul alive from the moment he first (re)discovered him.
🙂