Darth Vader's sith gauntlet

Originally posted by Nephthys
But if you insist.... its ****ing retarded to believe that the apprentice to the best duelist of the Jedi would be shit at dueling. You'd think that would probably have been something Lord Hoth would train him in. And he was able to hit Bane afterall.

But he was shitty... In fact, he was so shitty that, while boosted by battle-meditation, he was actually detrimental to his team while battling Zannah. Hell, in that passage he is even called mediocre.

Originally posted by Raptor22
I agree with everything except banes era. I like bane a lot but a major theme throughout the story was that the sith were weak due to their power being spread too so many. While that might not be the case in other eras such as vitates and krayts empires not being weakened by the watering down effect i think it was clearly the writers intent of the bane books that the sith of that time were weaker. The way i see it is Bane by the end of book 1 was badass but not nearly as powerful/skilled as later versions and already he was above every other sith alive by a good amount. Just think of everyone from tcw era that would be above bane at the end of book 1 and they would be above basically everyone from banes era.

Mm, fair enough, though Bane at least had Revan's holocron, and you can still get good saber skill- though not force skill- via raw experience.

3.

Originally posted by Intrepid37

As for Maul's literal stompage of him, I can't figure that out, but personally I'd wager it was due to his mechanical legs not being affected by it.

I personally just give Maul that one without question as it was his only Saber feat which really stood out since his return.

I'd like to think there's not the biggest difference between them.

I personally think it's a significant difference. Looking at their joint performance against Kenobi and later Sidious, Maul clearly did fair better than Opress in both fights.

I don't remember Savage fighting Kenobi alone, though it's possible I have missed an episode.

Look at Kenobi's fight against Ventress though, she disarmed him rather easily and then fought even with him throughout the fight.

I don't think there's a big difference at all between Ventress, Kenobi, Savage and Maul in swordfighting.

Have to put Maul and Kenobi a notch above Opress and Ventress though. In Sabers that is.

In the Force I'd put Maul and Savage a notch above Kenobi and Ventress.

There is some kind of pararity though. Ventress has shown that against Kenobi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e14jJ1KxiDQ

Yeah tbh I don't remember Kenobi ever soundly defeating Ventress. Although most agree he did win that fight you've posted.

I guess the fact that he's consistently shown he's "at least" on par with Maul in Sabers, and his stompage of Opress is what makes me put Kenobi above Ventress.

I'm not claiming she's above him. But I just don't think there is a significant difference between them and between Maul and Savage. They can all fight on par with each other and give good fights.

I don't think there's a big difference at all between Ventress, Kenobi, Savage and Maul in swordfighting.

That seems fair to me. 👆