Fighting impressive characters is not the only way of determing a characters skill. Just because a character hasn't faced an impressive character doesn't mean he can't. If you are talking about Gnost he man handled the lower opponents like a high level character would, he has accolades estabshing as an impressive fighter and has a quote that say his soresu is perfect. None of that is speculation or opinion.
Originally posted by Nephthys
No, they don't though. Being called one of the best ever just isn't as impressive as you take it to be. It's a vague as balls accolade that could apply to any number of people. Being one of the best of any era should logically make you one of the best of all time. It's not far better than the Barsen'thor "embodying true skill" or Jadus being held as the 2nd most powerful Sith of the era, unless you choose to believe it is.
It's not vague, it's a very straight forward statement, and should only apply to those who are deserving of the title, and logically should be a very hard position to fill, otherwise the title wouldn't make sense at all. The title suggests that they stand out in a history that has seen billions of jedi. And yes, it's a far better accolade and isn't nearly as vague as "embodying true skill."
Being one of the best in an era in it's prime, according to both George Lucas and Luke Skywalker, would logically make being one of the best an even harder position to fulfill than in a lesser era, which is why Satele's hype in itself doesn't hold more merit.
"Embodying true skill" and being considered "perfect" are actually far less quantifiable than being considered one of the best duelists of an era. The latter is a means of demonstrating that the character receiving the accolade is better than other characters - and in the case of the PT era, there are many impressive characters to be better than or ranked alongside.
Being called perfect, or another popular one, "unparalleled", doesn't literally mean they are faultless as combatants, it just denotes a good level of skill which can't be quantified.
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
It's not vague, it's a very straight forward statement, and should only apply to those who are deserving of the title, and logically should be a very hard position to fill, otherwise the title wouldn't make sense at all. The title suggests that they stand out in a history that has seen billions of jedi. And yes, it's a far better accolade and isn't nearly as vague as "embodying true skill."Being one of the best in an era in it's prime, according to both George Lucas and Luke Skywalker, would logically make being one of the best an even harder position to fulfill than in a lesser era, which is why Satele's hype in itself doesn't hold more merit.
It's vague due to its unquantifiable nature. Being among the best in a history that as you say has seen billions means what? Top hundred? Top million? All your qualifications for your statement apply to mine as well. Embodying true skill should only apply to those who deserve it and logically be hard to achieve. Embodying a virtue definitely suggests they stand out even among others who possess that virtue in great amounts.
Era bias so lame.
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Being one of the best at one point obviously doesn't translate to being one of the best there's ever been.
But it does though. Because being one of the best theres ever been is so vague you can apply it as such easily.
Originally posted by ILS
"Embodying true skill" and being considered "perfect" are actually far less quantifiable than being considered one of the best duelists of an era. The latter is a means of demonstrating that the character receiving the accolade is better than other characters - and in the case of the PT era, there are many impressive characters to be better than or ranked alongside.Being called perfect, or another popular one, "unparalleled", doesn't literally mean they are faultless as combatants, it just denotes a good level of skill which can't be quantified.
And why is that different from "one of" the best ever? That can't be quantified either.
And why is that different from "one of" the best ever? That can't be quantified either.Because it is quite literally telling us that the character is better than the vast majority of competition out there. It doesn't need to be boiled down to an actual numbered ranking for it to be seen as more impressive than "Embodying true skill", which does nothing other than say the character is skilled with flowery language.
To put it simply - saying someone is skilled because they are better than others, is better than saying someone is skilled because they are skilled.
Originally posted by ILS
Because it is quite literally telling us that the character is better than the vast majority of competition out there. It doesn't need to be boiled down to an actual numbered ranking for it to be seen as more impressive than "Embodying true skill", which does nothing other than say the character is skilled with flowery language.To put it simply - saying someone is skilled because they are better than others, is better than saying someone is skilled because they are skilled.
Theres hardly any difference there. Embodying true skill also tells us that the person is better than the majority of the competition out there. Most people aren't so skilled that they embody the very attribute.
And I disagree with your premise. Someone being more skilled than others doesn't suggest they're more skilled than someone who also has an accolade suggesting incredible skill. Since the second quote also suggests their skill is extraordinary and above most others.
Originally posted by EmperordmbSimply being a named character isn't an accolade, lol.
Same can be said for just about any high ranking Sith/Jedi significant enough to be named.
Originally posted by NephthysNo. Embodying true skill tells us that the characters embodies true skill. An accolade like that might help when debating against a character who doesn't have a flowery accolade to match it - but against someone like Agen Kolar who is objectively one of the best duelists of an era filled with skilled duelists, it just isn't going to stack up. Your argument that someone being impressive already puts them ahead of the majority doesn't work - we don't know who's in the majority. For all we know any random Joe could "embody true skill" - the fact of the matter with Kolar's accolade is that there is no doubt about how skilled he is unless you want to be as meticulous as a top 10 list.
Theres hardly any difference there. Embodying true skill also tells us that the person is better than the majority of the competition out there. Most people aren't so skilled that they embody the very attribute.And I disagree with your premise. Someone being more skilled than others doesn't suggest they're more skilled than someone who also has an accolade suggesting incredible skill. Since the second quote also suggests their skill is extraordinary and above most others.
Feel free to disagree, because honestly I think relying on statements in place of feats is a bad move to begin with. And I think we should all focus less on Era and more on individual characters. Set aside that X is a PT character fighting a TOR character, and just compare their feats side by side without even mentioning their era.
...unless of course it's to do with discussing how far-stretching an "best of __ era" is.
"Embodying true skill" is just a fancy way of saying the person is very skilled. It is by no means as straight forward as being termed "one of the best in history." There is nothing unquantifiable about it, other than how many jedi hold the position, but the very straightforwardness of the term suggests that not many jedi hold that title compared to how many jedi have been in the order period. Being termed as such separates them from the very vast majority of jedi history has seen. This is really simple logic, Neph, and, TBH, I think you know it is, so why are you arguing against it?
"Embodying true skill" was just an example btw. I'm not saying that I hold it as high as being one of the best era, just pointing out that it can easily be argued as highly and proving that the "one of the best" accolade really isn't as great as people think it is.
Originally posted by ILS
No. Embodying true skill tells us that the characters embodies true skill. An accolade like that might help when debating against a character who doesn't have a flowery accolade to match it - but against someone like Agen Kolar who is objectively one of the best duelists of an era filled with skilled duelists, it just isn't going to stack up. Your argument that someone being impressive already puts them ahead of the majority doesn't work - we don't know who's in the majority. For all we know any random Joe could "embody true skill" - the fact of the matter with Kolar's accolade is that there is no doubt about how skilled he is unless you want to be as meticulous as a top 10 list.
And what does a character embodying true skill tell us? 😬 Embodying an attribute suggests peerless possession of that attribute. You're not just skillful, you are Skill itself. It's only your opinion that it doesn't stack up. If I disagree then you have no way to actually refute my own opinion. Both of these statements are subjective. We don't know who's in the majority in either case. And we don't know how exactly skilled Kolar is based on that quote. You're making a judgement call that you find it more impressive than the quote I'm bringing up. I'm just making the point that it really isn't some amazing accolade that shits on everything else as S66 is suggesting. He just thinks it does.
Originally posted by ILS
Feel free to disagree, because honestly I think relying on statements in place of feats is a bad move to begin with. And I think we should all focus less on Era and more on individual characters. Set aside that X is a PT character fighting a TOR character, and just compare their feats side by side without even mentioning their era....unless of course it's to do with discussing how far-stretching an "best of __ era" is.
👆
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
"Embodying true skill" is just a fancy way of saying the person is very skilled. It is by no means as straight forward as being termed "one of the best in history." There is nothing unquantifiable about it, other than how many jedi hold the position, but the very straightforwardness of the term suggests that not many jedi hold that title compared to how many jedi have been in the order period. Being termed as such separates them from the very vast majority of jedi history has seen. This is really simple logic, Neph, and, TBH, I think you know it is, so why are you arguing against it?
Just because it's more flowery doesn't make it more vague. Both quotes are ultimately just saying the person is skilled in a fancy manner, don't BS me. And no, your quote is unquantifiable both in how many hold the position and in what position Kolar possesses. Is he the 99th most skilled duelist ever? The 999999th? And embodying true skill can be said to separate a Jedi just as much, just as easily. Theres no intrinsic superiority at play here. Your accolade doesn't "shit" on others.
I'm arguing against your logic because you're taking a vague, not particularly worth much quote and arguing that it shits on other accolades. Which I genuinely disagree with.
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
For any attempt to lowball Tiin, the fact that Tiin is regarded as being one of the greatest duelist in an era Lucas refers to as the jedi in it's prime and Luke also referring to the era of jedi as the most powerful, would put Tiin above most by default.
See that logic doesn't really stick with me, if an era - is by default above every single era that came before them, does that mean that any jedi from the PT -for argument's sake let's say, Stass allie or any other relatively unknown Jedi you can think of, since the jedi are regarded as in their prime, does that mean Stass Allie or X person could give someone like Kao Cen Darach trouble?
Alright, so yes Tiin is regarded as one of the greatest duelists of his era, however, are we really going to ignore the simple fact that jedi like Shaak Ti, Plo Koon, Ki-Adi Mundi and Depa Billaba(circumstantial or not) have feats that far surpass what Saesee Tiin has done?
Again, Saesee Tiin has praise, great that's awesome, however, Cin Drallig has been called a great swordsmen as well in the same era as Tiin, does that mean Cin Drallig could defeat warriors like Exar Kun, Ulic, Malak and Revan? simply because he is regarded as a powerful duelist in era where the Jedi at their prime?
Not to mention that he was stated to have one of the most powerful force abilities of his time, and has been implied to have raw power that rivals Windu--a master who could nearly disintegrate a group of battle droids with a mere force push. Also, Tiin's ability to navigate ships in hyperspace with the force alone would suggest immense strength and command of the force (though I think the feat was performed during meditation, but still...).
I'd just like to state right now that, that is impressive, his force prowess is something I recognize, my problem with him is his lack of dueling feats.
Not to mention his speed feats such as forming a shield from his blade to deflect waves of blaster bolts. It's not that Tiin lacks the hype/accolades/feats to suggest he is pretty high up their and far, far beyond average, it's the fact that Sidious took him out so ridiculously easy that people don't want to accept Tiin's superiority, because just by taking Tiin out alone so easily, would make it far too difficult for the TOR fan's to debunk the notion that Sidious could take out most of the TOR wanked characters just as easily, but that's if someone wanted to enforce Sidious's speed in this forum.
Those speed feats are quite common in the SW universe, though I am curious about the source of "forming a shield with his his blade to deflect waves of blaster bolts" A source would be appreciated.
The fact remains, Accolades are only one part of a VS discussion, the second - and in my opinion the most important part as well, is the Feats and accomplishments section of debates. Again, let's go back to Drallig. He has the hype, yet would he be able to go up against Ulic, The Exile, Darth Nyrris or Darth Traya?
Let's face it, if Silver were to come here, and make such a notion, no one would be able to counter him, because the minute someone brings up "well no Sidious can't do that to so and so because they are powerful," Silver would counter it with the fact that Tiin, too, is powerful. Not to mention that this "being powerful" logic you TOR supporters use to counter any notion of Sidious blitzing, is logic that can be used against your count claims. If speed is determined by power, the fact that the council members that Sidious did blitz are all regarded as some of the greatest swordsmen produced by the order, immense speed would be something they would have to have at their disposal. Speed is just as important in a saber duel as technical skill. If one lacks the speed to put his/her technical skill in good use, they wouldn't be referred to as top duelist by jedi standards. So prodigious speed would be a must, which would logically mean that they are force powerhouses.
That's the thing, Tiin has Implied power, yet nothing to show for it, it doesn't make Sidious' feat any less impressive as he fought against four Jedi masters and took them down single-handedly. I agree that the wanking of TOR characters is a bit ridiculous at times, however some have good feats and accolades going for them - an example would be Darth Nyrris and Satele Shan.
If speed is determined by power, the fact that the council members that Sidious did blitz are all regarded as some of the greatest swordsmen produced by the order, immense speed would be something they would have to have at their disposal. Speed is just as important in a saber duel as technical skill. If one lacks the speed to put his/her technical skill in good use, they wouldn't be referred to as top duelist by jedi standards. So prodigious speed would be a must, which would logically mean that they are force powerhouses
This is the speculation that i disagree with. We simply cannot assume, that just because they are considered the best duelists, they have above and beyond average speed - An exception to this would be be Mace and probably Fisto as they are much more established than Kolar or Tiin, again, just because they have such hype, doesn't Necessarily mean they have to be particularly strong in all areas of the force and it's combative areas, a good example would be Raskta Lsu, a powerful weapons master who was incredibly skilled, yet her force defenses and force offense were quite lacking. Your argument very much filled with speculation in my humble opinion.
Regardless, majority of the TOR characters that are wanked on these boards don't even have the feats to put them above the likes of Tiin, Kolar or Fisto. In a hype/accolade contest, most of which are relied on here to elevate TOR characters, these three jedi master council members shit all over most. The strike team assembled to take on Sidious, is one of the best strike teams (perhaps the best) that as ever been assembled to take on a powerful foe.
Tiin has feats that are easily replicated by most Jedi, Kolar and Fisto as well, the only exception to this is Mace. Quite honestly, all of B-team barring mace have feats that have no doubt been replicated and perhaps even surpassed by many Jedi/Sith/Force users in many of the EU literary works. In the end, there will always be characters better than the B-Team, the TOR protagonists, Etcetera- the only two exceptions to this rule are Sidious and Luke Skywalker