Originally posted by Q99
It's the same logic you use.If, say, a half-dozen characters fighting each other as well as a variety of other foes gets tossed out, you're clearly just misusing the words feat/featless to mean 'the characters I like/the characters I don't like.'
Originally posted by Intrepid37
Uh, what? If they're featless they're featless.
*Laughs*
"Sure, they've each done a half-dozen things, and fought other people who've done more, but it doesn't count, because all those things are featless!"
You keep using that word. It does not mean what you think it means 🙂
Originally posted by Intrepid37
And then I ask again: what has Kun done?
Originally posted by Intrepid37
What's that?
Originally posted by Intrepid37
Feats for those massassi warriors?
Originally posted by Intrepid37
Not really a skill feat.
Who cares? Its a combat feat. Uliq fought her in combat, not a fencing competition. Uliq had to fight someone capable of wiping out an entire colony of car-sized man-eating bugs without using the Force. That he did so indicates great skill.
Originally posted by Intrepid37
Strength feat, not skill feat.
Again, what does that matter. It demonstrates superhuman attributes, which Qel'Droma would have to deal with in their duel.
Originally posted by Intrepid37
Right, he had to rely on his skill to beat Sylvar, who's beaten a few warriors and a big musquito?😐
Yes.
Originally posted by Intrepid37
This is extremely poor. I've never and will never ocnsider Windu a prodigy because he created Vaapad, I'll consider him a prodigy because of his feats and status as one of the most skilled Jedi ever.
Well I do and so do the Jedi order: "I am called a great swordsman because I invented a lethal style."
Developing a form obviously displays massive technical mastery and knowledge. Merely learning a form does not display the same grasp of lightsaber combat as developing your own form of lightsaber combat.
Originally posted by Intrepid37
Luke's not featless.
But you've been saying that beating people who're featless means someone counts as featless, and thus beating them just means someone is featless.
Which is completely silly, but that's what you've been arguing.
Originally posted by Intrepid37
But... they aren't.Likewise, I would never say Kolar beating Quinlan Vos would be enough to declare him PoD Bane's superior, because Vos is featless. But the combination of beating Vos and being regarded as one of the best is something else.
Vos isn't featless either. He's fought not only Kolar, but Sora Bulq and a few others. He's actually got a good deal more feats than Kolar.
This is silly. You're silly. Stop calling stuff featless, you're using the word wrong.
Featless is if someone has actually done nothing. If you've been in a fight, you've got a feat. Even getting your butt kicked by a mook is a feat. Getting in multiple combats against multiple force users who've in turn gotten into multiple fights means someone has many feats establishing them.
An example of actual combat featlessness is Darth Caba. Darth Caba's only known actions are gathering intelligence reports for the TOR Sith Empire.
Stop just calling people you don't like featless even if they've done a lot, save it for people ike Darth Caba.
Keto doing that and dark side blasts in general aren't necessarily just pure power. They are from Sith Magic, which in general makes spells/incantations cause a chain reaction on whatever the spell is tied to by "calling" unto the dark side on whatever you desire to affect, in this case vaporizing people down to skeletons. Like Zannah's dark tendrils.
Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
kk. Luke/Sidious are basically featless 😉
#failedlogic
Well, not really, you see. I do see your logic, but it's incorrect, I too have pondered this.
If you go down the line long enough, everyone is featless in terms of who defeated who. But somewhere in the line, their power is gauged not by a fight, but by an accomplishment of skill or power. Such as lifting a ship, or moving fast enough to deflect rain drops. These are feats, and defeating someone who has achieved feats is a feat in itself.
So no, it's your logic that is flawed.
Originally posted by Q99
But you've been saying that beating people who're featless means someone counts as featless, and thus beating them just means someone is featless.Which is completely silly, but that's what you've been arguing.
Vos isn't featless either. He's fought not only Kolar, but Sora Bulq and a few others. He's actually got a good deal more feats than Kolar.
This is silly. You're silly. Stop calling stuff featless, you're using the word wrong.
Featless is if someone has actually done nothing. If you've been in a fight, you've got a feat. Even getting your butt kicked by a mook is a feat. Getting in multiple combats against multiple force users who've in turn gotten into multiple fights means someone has many feats establishing them.
An example of actual combat featlessness is Darth Caba. Darth Caba's only known actions are gathering intelligence reports for the TOR Sith Empire.
Stop just calling people you don't like featless even if they've done a lot, save it for people ike Darth Caba.
I'm saying it because it's a lot easier to call them featless than explaining that the kid he beat doesn't have any feats.
Originally posted by NewGuy01
If you go down the line long enough, everyone is featless in terms of who defeated who. But somewhere in the line, their power is gauged not by a fight, but by an accomplishment of skill or power. Such as lifting a ship, or moving fast enough to deflect rain drops. These are feats, and defeating someone who has achieved feats is a feat in itself.
Beating someone in a duel is a feat in itself, regardless of whether they've done anything more than pass their Jedi exams. So is taking out a trio of bandits. Or TKing a pencil.
Let's not devalue the word feat by making it mean "only acts of sufficient size for me to count," ok? Especially when it comes to lightsabers, where any duel against a forceuser involved defeating a precog with a plasma sword.
Something someone has done is a feat. You then argue size of feats. Featless is reserved for someone who actually does not have feats, not just because you don't want to count someone's feats.
Defeating a Stormtrooper is a feat, just a very minor one. Defeating a group of non-force using but powerful warriors, like Mandalorians or Vong, is a reasonable feat. Defeating a big group of force users in a single battle is a darned good feat even if the opponents are no-named warriors who's only feats are killing other people in the same battle.
Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
My analysis of the battle: In sabers, Dooku would take this, as he has better speed feats,
This is misleading. Dooku has speed feats in moving media; Kun exists only in comics and in novels. This reminds me of Gideon attempting to force me to prove someone was faster than Yoda when the former existed in similar media format. Since speed is implied with movement lines and hearsay, this isn't a good measurement to reply upon. For all we know, Exar Kun moves so fast he can't be seen by most Force users. Or perhaps he is indeed slower. There's no way to measure this. Kun is depicted as healthy and mobile in combat, and able to outmaneuver any opponent except for Ulic once he becomes DLotS.
and his lightsaber style is very efficient against other lightsaber wielders.
True. However, Makashi mastery is not ultimate mastery. Experience, skill, and Force power apply as well. This is why Yoda using one of the most aggressive and exposing saber forms credited for Qui-Gon's defeat more than held his own against the Count.
Another reason is the fact that he has defeated other legendary lightsaber duelists.
In the PT era? The era of relative peace? The era where Sith are limited to 2 and have not been fought for a thousand years? That era? You might as well say he's the best swordsman in Illinois with that benchmark.
Kun does have the element of surprise with his unique weapon, so he isnt hilariously outclassed in this area.
Considering Kun is a historical figure and basically laid the foundation for double bladed sabers which were norms for both sides throughout time, I don't see how his weapon would give him any advantage. To his credit, Dooku can fight off Ventress and her oddball weapon without any real issues.
In the force, both are quite even, as Kun has his powerful amulet blasts, and Dooku has powerful TK.
Kun killed a Jedi Master of great age and power with a wave of his hand after shrugging off an attack created and perfected to divorce Sith Lords from their Force powers. He later overpowered a Sith sorceress who was powerful enough to create mass illusions. Oh, and that amulet which is part of his standard adventuring gear? It explicitly amplifies his rage and power exponentially. It's not a question of natural ability here, of which Kun has in spades (everyone admits as much), it's that he's so overpowered because of the amulet that no one can contend with him in the Force.
In the all out, it would most likely start out as a saber battle, with dooku taking the slight edge. Kun would then resort to his amulet blasts, while Dooku would attempt to ragdoll Kun with TK. Ultimately, Exar Kun would triumph 6/10, as Dooku would be completely unfamiliar with Kun's amulet blasts, though he could grab an advantage with his TK. I declare Exar Kun the winner.
In a Force battle, Kun breaks Dooku. In a saber battle, it may be closer, but again Kun has tremendous augmented strength and his speed could be anywhere from good to better depending on evidence we don't have readily available. I doubt it would be a complete stomp, but Kun could certainly spank Yoda if he had too. Dooku would not be a stretch by comparison.