Still: I dunno... Those three were just standing there. No Jedi reflexes, extremely long response time. Honestly, that whole Jedi Order in the PT looked like a bunch of sleepy old men unable to understand or feel or see what was happening around them. That scene with Sidious proved how 'asleep' the Jedi were. Luke and Leia certainly don't look 'asleep' in the OT.
Originally posted by queeq
Still: I dunno... Those three were just standing there. No Jedi reflexes, extremely long response time. Honestly, that whole Jedi Order in the PT looked like a bunch of sleepy old men unable to understand or feel or see what was happening around them. That scene with Sidious proved how 'asleep' the Jedi were. Luke and Leia certainly don't look 'asleep' in the OT.
They're still Jedi Council members who should be fast enough to block blaster bolts at Geonosis. Luke or Leia do not have that level of reflexes. Sidious would blitz them easy.
Originally posted by Vensai
In ROTJ? Make it a thousand Luke and Leias and they still get stomped by Sidious...
Well if we go purely by the films then "a thousand" of anyone might be too much for any Jedi/Sith (assuming they're all armed).
Originally posted by Vensai
They're still Jedi Council members who should be fast enough to block blaster bolts at Geonosis. Luke or Leia do not have that level of reflexes. Sidious would blitz them easy.
The assumption is that those Council Members should be better than ROTJ Luke.
But that doesn't necessarily make them faster/stronger than Luke. His natural force potential may make him faster/stronger. So he may last a bit longer than them.
Still the guy did defeat Boba Fett pretty quick and did legitimately defeat Vader (well that was the original intention anyway).
Seeing the prequels is whats made us assume Vader would have been holding back. Although I still don't see why Vader would let Luke chop off his hand.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Well if we go purely by the films then "a thousand" of anyone might be too much for any Jedi/Sith (assuming they're all armed).The assumption is that those Council Members should be better than ROTJ Luke.
But that doesn't necessarily make them faster/stronger than Luke. His natural force potential may make him faster/stronger. So he may last a bit longer than them.
Still the guy did defeat Boba Fett pretty quick and did legitimately defeat Vader (well that was the original intention anyway).
Seeing the prequels is whats made us assume Vader would have been holding back. Although I still don't see why Vader would let Luke chop off his hand.
I thought the holding back idea was because Luke mentioned that Vader couldn't being himself to kill his son.
Originally posted by VensaiYou think Palpatine's swordsmanship during RotJ would have been on par with what it was during RotS? I doubt he so much as touched a light saber during that 23 year span of time. /shrug
If Sidious can blitz three jedi council members with ease, Luke and Leia stand no chance.
He'd still smoke Luke, though. No doubt.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERLets be honest, the saber skills of a CW-era Padawan were vastly beyond those of RotJ Luke. That said: assuming 3 elite CW-era Jedi Masters weren't any better than RotJ Luke is a drastic, and completely unwarranted, overhype of Luke's prowess, imo. Remember, force potential is utterly inconsequential without the proper skill/know-how in which to apply said potential--- and Luke had barely began to scratch the surface of his christ-power at the time of RotJ.
The assumption is that those Council Members should be better than ROTJ Luke.But that doesn't necessarily make them faster/stronger than Luke. His natural force potential may make him faster/stronger. So he may last a bit longer than them.
Still the guy did defeat Boba Fett pretty quick and did legitimately defeat Vader (well that was the original intention anyway).
Seeing the prequels is whats made us assume Vader would have been holding back. Although I still don't see why Vader would let Luke chop off his hand.
Luke's 'defeat' of Boba Fett was laughable at the very least.
The prequel films had nothing to do with why I believe Vader was holding back. We saw the conflict in him during ESB. We saw even more conflict in him during RotJ. Luke said it best: "You couldn't bring yourself to kill me before and I don't believe you'll destroy me now."
The Return of the Jedi duel, while great, wasn't a legitimate "fight". The only purpose of the duel was to trigger Luke's descent to the dark side and force him to turn. Vader and Palpatine both were attempting to egg on Luke to turn, and as such, they had no real intent of killing him (at least not at first). And the only time Luke had Vader on the ropes was when Luke momentarily gave in to his darker emotions and overwhelmed his father.
In a "real" fight, Vader would have curbed him. Palpatine even more so.
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
The Return of the Jedi duel, while great, wasn't a legitimate "fight". The only purpose of the duel was to trigger Luke's descent to the dark side and force him to turn. Vader and Palpatine both were attempting to egg on Luke to turn, and as such, they had no real intent of killing him (at least not at first). And the only time Luke had Vader on the ropes was when Luke momentarily gave in to his darker emotions and overwhelmed his father.In a "real" fight, Vader would have curbed him. Palpatine even more so.
This thread alone is why I despise the prophecy of the Chosen One and I have my own retcons for canon. In the OT, Luke was supposed to defeat the Emperor, but Anakin turned good and did it as a suprise.
With the PT, Anakin is the only person who can defeat Palpatine, and Luke is just a catalyst to redeem him, meaning that Luke or Leia could never kill Palpatine, because only Anakin could do it. That's a lame idea.
Originally posted by Galan007Lets be honest, the saber skills of a CW-era Padawan were vastly beyond those of RotJ Luke. That said: assuming 3 elite CW-era Jedi Masters weren't any better than RotJ Luke is a drastic, and completely unwarranted, overhype of Luke's prowess, imo. Remember, force potential is utterly inconsequential without the proper skill/know-how in which to apply said potential--- and Luke had barely began to scratch the surface of his christ-power at the time of RotJ.
I'm not saying your wrong, but like I've already pointed out it's the Prequels that have brought us to this conclusion. But every available evidence pre-prequels had Luke and Vader as peers.
Originally posted by Galan007The prequel films had nothing to do with why I believe Vader was holding back. We saw the conflict in him during ESB. We saw even more conflict in him during RotJ. Luke said it best: "You couldn't bring yourself to kill me before and I don't believe you'll destroy me now."
Originally posted by Vensai
I thought the holding back idea was because Luke mentioned that Vader couldn't being himself to kill his son.
Why's everyone forgetting that Luke had no desire at all to fight Vader? At least Vader wanted to fight him to turn to the Dark Side. Luke didn't even want to fight his Father.
Anyway if you read the ROTJ novel (written and edited before the prequels) it was always perfectly clear that Luke was legitimately fighting Vader as an equal. And worst of all Vader was trying.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERVader was always conflicted, and there was always good in him. These facts were driven home time and time again. Even before the prequels were released, I never believed Luke and Vader were peers--- I thought it was made abundently clear that Vader was holding back because he never truly wanted to kill his son.
I'm not saying your wrong, but like I've already pointed out it's the Prequels that have brought us to this conclusion. But every available evidence pre-prequels had Luke and Vader as peers.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERAfter Vader mentioned turning Leia to the dark side, Luke stopped holding back.
Why's everyone forgetting that Luke had no desire at all to fight Vader? At least Vader wanted to fight him to turn to the Dark Side. Luke didn't even want to fight his Father.
Originally posted by Galan007
Vader was always conflicted, and there was always good in him. These facts were driven home time and time again. Even before the prequels were released, I never believed Luke and Vader were peers--- I thought it was made abundently clear that Vader was holding back because he never truly wanted to kill his son.After Vader mentioned turning Leia to the dark side, Luke stopped holding back.
Yeah Luke obviously wasn't holding back in that final frenzy attack. But what about the rest of the fight? They were fighting pretty evenly.
And it was always made just as clear that Luke was holding back just as much (if not more so) "I will not fight you Father," "You are unwise to lower your defenses!"
Like I said read the novel. It makes it clear they were peers. Which of course makes no sense at all now.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERThey were both holding back initially. The difference is that Luke stopped holding back after Vader's attempt at mind-phuckery, while Vader never seemed to go all-out.
Yeah Luke obviously wasn't holding back in that final frenzy attack. But what about the rest of the fight? They were fighting pretty evenly.And it was always made just as clear that Luke was holding back just as much (if not more so) "I will not fight you Father," "You are unwise to lower your defenses!"
Originally posted by DARTH POWERImo the film(which supersedes the novel in terms of canonicity) is clear. The good in Vader prevented him from wanting to slay his own son, thus he was constantly holding back-- Lucas drove that point home multiple times via character statements.
Like I said read the novel. It makes it clear they were peers. Which of course makes no sense at all now.
Originally posted by Galan007
They were both holding back initially. The difference is that Luke stopped holding back after Vader's attempt at mind-phuckery, while Vader never seemed to go all-out.
Yeah I agree.
Originally posted by Galan007
Imo the film(which supersedes the novel in terms of canonicity) is clear. The good in Vader prevented him from wanting to slay his own son, thus he was constantly holding back-- Lucas drove that point home multiple times via character statements.
True, but like I said the exact same holds for Luke (minus his final frenzy attack).
Originally posted by Galan007
They were both holding back initially. The difference is that Luke stopped holding back after Vader's attempt at mind-phuckery, while Vader never seemed to go all-out.Imo the film(which supersedes the novel in terms of canonicity) is clear. The good in Vader prevented him from wanting to slay his own son, thus he was constantly holding back-- Lucas drove that point home multiple times via character statements.
👆
Originally posted by DARTH POWERRight, but again: the difference is that Vader, unlike Luke, never got pissed and went all-out during their battle(a 'final frenzy attack', as you call it.) He held back the entire time, because deep down, he was good. Remember, that entire scene was ultimately about the redemption of Vader-- about him turning from the dark and going back to the light-- about him converting from Darth Vader back to Anakin Skywalker.
True, but like I said the exact same holds for Luke (minus his final frenzy attack).
Here are a few pertinent comments Luke made during RotJ:
"I know there is good in you, the Emperor hasn't driven it from you fully."
"Search your feelings, Father, you can't do this. I feel the conflict within you. Let go of your hate."
"Your thoughts betray you, Father. I feel the good in you, the conflict."
"You couldn't bring yourself to kill me before and I don't believe you'll destroy me now."
Originally posted by JakeTheBankGlad to see you back... And especially in this forum. 👆
👆
Originally posted by Galan007
Right, but again: the difference is that Vader, unlike Luke, never got pissed and went all-out during their battle(a 'final frenzy attack', as you call it.) He held back the entire time, because deep down, he was good. Remember, that entire scene was ultimately about the redemption of Vader-- about him turning from the dark and going back to the light-- about him converting from Darth Vader back to Anakin Skywalker.Here are a few pertinent comments Luke made during RotJ:
"I know there is good in you, the Emperor hasn't driven it from you fully.""Search your feelings, Father, you can't do this. I feel the conflict within you. Let go of your hate."
"Your thoughts betray you, Father. I feel the good in you, the conflict."
"You couldn't bring yourself to kill me before and I don't believe you'll destroy me now."
Glad to see you back... And especially in this forum. 👆
QFT
And thanks, man! I've actually decided to check out the other forums outside of the comic book ones for the first time since I've registered. 😂
But yeah. Even going by the Original Trilogy's intent and barring the "retcons" from the Prequels, Vader held back the entire time. The only time Luke got the upper hand was because he briefly gave in to the Dark Side, which was why Palpatine got all orgasmic over it.
If RotJ Luke fought Vader in a "forum battle" devoid of plot, Vader would have likely best him. Palpatine would obliterate him.
Originally posted by JakeTheBankLol, odd as it sounds, this forum is actually a breath of fresh air. The intelligent poster/idiot poster ratio here isn't nearly as bad as it is in the CBF.
And thanks, man! I've actually decided to check out the other forums outside of the comic book ones for the first time since I've registered. 😂
"Now, suppose, here's the question. Could Luke Skywalker have done it directly, by killing the Emperor too (and not just Vader, he could kill Vader possibly, he almost did) and saving the galaxy from them?"
You ask several questions here, but the base of all of them is could Luke "defeat"/kill the Emperor? The reason he threw his saber away was because he knew he was trapped. If he killed Vader, he would become an agent of evil and ruled by Palpatine, if he killed Palpatine he would continue down the Dark Path with his father at his side. Even when Anakin redeemed himself by killing the Emperor, he knew the only escape for him was death, he chose that path to save his son.