Originally posted by Nephthys
Again, no-one's saying you can't draw on OCW. Just that it's not representative of the character's true abilities.
Perhaps it's not representative of a character's canonical abilities. The legends/canon distinction renders the entire discussion of what is and what is not canonical moot.
All I've been saying is that OCW feats are as valid as any other to draw on when discussing these things. 👆
Originally posted by The_TempestI'm applying this way of thinking specifically to character abilities, because in a vs. debate you can't consider differing variations of a single character as equally valid, or you'll inevitably run into contradictions. e.g. their is a stark contrast between OCW Grievous and Grievous' portrayal in other sources.
That approach most certainly does help my argument. Until you're prepared to apply your way of thinking across the board {i.e. to all things that "contradict" canon}, I'm not prepared to entertain this specific example.
OCW Grievous > most Jedi Council Members. Canon Grievous doesn't. But by your logic OCW is just as valid as any others source. Making it impossible to conclude whether Grievous can beat a Jedi Council Member or not.
In that respect you either establish some sources as inaccurate, or only consider feats from one source. You can't treat them as all equally valid.
He's right: Nothing in this particular OCW event contradicts canon anyway, beyond the fact that it falls under a Legends source.Multiple OCW potrayals of character abilities are problematic, including Anakin's, given that we can't expect any of them to be accurate.
Nonetheless even if you believe OCW a perfectly accurate source, you can't pretend that Canon potrayals of characters haven't in some ways contradicted their portrayal in Legends sources. They have, and that issue has to be confronted.
Only if we examine things under the outdated model, which I've already demonstrated no longer exists.I'm perfectly aware of that, but what you don't understand is that the new Disney model is incompatible with Legends + Canon debates.
Then by your definition, that canon "true story" doesn't include things like SWTOR or TFU or Legacy or Dark Empire or Darth Plagueis and so on ad infinitum.👆 Absolutely, all of that has been rendered Legends/non-canon.I disagree with your stance categorically, but take even greater issue with how selectively you're applying it here.
But this isn't my stance, I'm explaining the result of approaching these continuities as mutually exclusive as you suggest. Which demands that you choose one occurrence or continuity, and in the process falsify the other. They can't both be true.
There is no cohesive continuity other than canon. {In fact, Legends notoriously contradicted itself all the time.} No one is suggesting that Legends feats and Legends sources are canonical or let alone that the overrule canon.But by accepting OCW are valid, your overruling contradictory potrayals of Windu, Yoda, Grievous, Anakin and others in Canon.What is being suggested is that this forum allows users to draw on material from both domains and OCW isn't some magical exception to that fact. 👆
Fact is you simply can't treat every source as equally valid, as there will come a point when one potrayal contradicts another, and as of yet, you've failed to provide a means of resolving those contradictions.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
Perhaps it's not representative of a character's canonical abilities. The legends/canon distinction renders the entire discussion of what is and what is not canonical moot.All I've been saying is that OCW feats are as valid as any other to draw on when discussing these things. 👆
No, I didn't say anything about canonical abilities either. They are incongruous with all portrayals.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
I'm applying this way of thinking specifically to character abilities, because in a vs. debate you can't consider differing variations of a single character as equally valid, or you'll inevitably run into contradictions. e.g. their is a stark contrast between OCW Grievous and Grievous' portrayal in other sources.
The nebulous contradictions you cite existed long before the Legends/Canon split. As I say, Legends was notorious for contradicting even itself. How many times did we see a character's abilities fluctuate in either direction for the purposes of the plot?
Because most of these things couldn't be reconciled, the general rule of thumb around here was that we use a character's peak performance as the standard unless otherwise specified.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
OCW Grievous > most Jedi Council Members. Canon Grievous doesn't.
According to what source? He defeats a group of exhausted Jedi in their first encounter. His fight with Shaak Ti is similarly revealing: he confronts her only after she's fended off a horde of MagnaGuards.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
But by your logic OCW is just as valid as any others source. Making it impossible to conclude whether Grievous can beat a Jedi Council Member or not.
The issues posed by Grievous's fluctuating abilities are no more egregious than any other example of a Legends character's abilities fluctuating due to plot stupidity.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
In that respect you either establish some sources as inaccurate, or only consider feats from one source. You can't treat them as all equally valid.
That happened all the time before the Legends/Canon distinction. The issue for you is that it isn't a seamless, uncomplicated portrayal. I agree: but the canon/legends dichotomy hasn't changed that. Even within canon, we see disparate displays of power.
{As an example: Dooku is held hostage by a group of pirates in season 1; in season 3, Savage {whom Dooku just thoroughly spanked} flattens a swarm of surrounding droids. In that same episode, Dooku, Anakin, and Obi-Wan are kept prisoner against their will in the same cell; in season 5, Savage destroys a Mandalorian cell with the Force by flexing his arms.}
If you're looking for consistency, you've come to to the wrong place, even now. 👆
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Multiple OCW potrayals of character abilities are problematic, including Anakin's, given that we can't expect any of them to be accurate.
Because they're inconsistent? As I've demonstrated, consistency has yet to be achieved here.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
I'm perfectly aware of that, but what you don't understand is that the new Disney model is incompatible with Legends + Canon debates.
👆 Absolutely, all of that has been rendered Legends/non-canon.
Then the moment you disallow debates that involve Legends elements {e.g. no Vitiate vs. Yoda}, I won't challenge you anymore on this issue {but we'll still disagree}.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
But this isn't my stance, I'm explaining the result of approaching these continuities as mutually exclusive as you suggest. Which demands that you choose one occurrence or continuity, and in the process falsify the other. They can't both be true.
But by accepting OCW are valid, your overruling contradictory potrayals of Windu, Yoda, Grievous, Anakin and others in Canon.Fact is you simply can't treat every source as equally valid, as there will come a point when one potrayal contradicts another, and as of yet, you've failed to provide a means of resolving those contradictions.
The fact is that you're looking for and expecting consistency. The problem is that I could literally bury you with examples of inconsistency in either the Legends or canon domains. Before and after this split, consistency has not been achieved.
So ultimately I remain exactly where I began: unless an OP specifies against the use of such sources, I'll be citing OCW feats in arguments just as much as feats from TFU, Dark Empire, Legacy, SWTOR, KOTOR, ad infinitum. 👆
I can understand where you come from, however when it comes to characters with Canon portrayals, I think consistency can be achieved by using Canon as a measuring stick by which to judge everything else, which is effectively what I'm advocating.
You appear to differ in this respect, but I believe Canon in and of itself, to be pretty consistent bar PIS, which can be easily isolated. And Disney/Lucasfilm has claimed that all future material will share that level of consistency.
On the other hand treating everything as equally valid doesn't solve the problem, it just makes it worse, because if you don't isolate these inconsistencies and resolve them, and instead just pretend they don't exist, those inconsistencies are going to manifest in the form of illogical and unreasonable arguments.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
The nebulous contradictions you cite existed long before the Legends/Canon split. As I say, Legends was notorious for contradicting even itself.
Not really. I mean yes, there were a few contradictions sure, but overall "Legends" was incredibly consistent.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
How many times did we see a character's abilities fluctuate in either direction for the purposes of the plot?
Well duh. Of course they fluctuate, that's only logical. NOBODY performs at their absolute best all the time. Even Beckham has bad games sometimes.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
The issues posed by Grievous's fluctuating abilities are no more egregious than any other example of a Legends character's abilities fluctuating due to plot stupidity.
By "plot stupidity" you mean logic and common sense, not to mention differing circumstances.
Originally posted by chilled monkeyWell duh. Of course they fluctuate, that's only logical. NOBODY performs at their absolute best all the time. Even Beckham has bad games sometimes.
Yea, I think some people underestimate how much there's fluctuation.
That's why there's a lot of fights where I'll specify one wins most of the time while other people are saying "X dominates/X blitzes," because maybe X *can* do that on a good day, but Y on a good day can defend against it and make it a fight, and X on a bad day and Y on a good can produce an unlikely upset.
An example would be, say, Aurra Sing, who's no stronger than Aayla Secura, almost beating Qui-Gon *and* Kenobi at the same time.