Sabers V.S. Force

Hello again everyone, so this time I have a simple question for you to voice your opinion.

In your experience debating, which category of skill/power comparison is easiest for you to debate? The technical aspects of light-saber skill, or raw Force power?

As always, your thoughts and opinions are appreciated.

Force power. Sabers is more fiddly with all the forms and hyperbolic descriptions of skill.

Depends on who you are debating.

I think it's easy to develop the claim of technical saber superiority but that the actual combat implementation ends up being subordinate to raw Force Power.

It depends on the character.

For Example, Jaden Korr is, at first glance, a Force 'powerhouse' in SW terms, I can easily debate his superiority against most characters, but his Saber skill is still wanting and difficult to debate against due to his lack of feats in that area, or rather the ambiguous nature of that area.

Similarly, Depa Billaba is easy to compare with most people due to her mastery of the sword, but of course, like Jaden, she has a side that has virtually no feats of note, thus making it difficult for people(or in this case me) to use her against force tanks.

Force easily. When a character lifts something we can pretty easily assess their power. By contrast, how fast a character is far more difficult to assess as descriptions in books are typically hyperbolic (“faster than thought”) and in comics it’s almost impossible to tell. Technical skill is just as hard to argue as when a character is described as a “master swordsman” or some other such description are they more in line with say Fisto or are they more on Dooku’s level? It’s pretty much impossible to tell and is why it’s so difficult to argue lightsaber duels cross era.

Yeah like people argue over the Mace vs Sidious Saber fight, but no one disagrees Sidious is more Powerful in the Force.

Sober fights are too complicated to judge with it leading to A>B>C>A all too often. No real issues like that with Force Powers though.

Sabers. Look at Anakin and Obi-Wan!

Lightsabers easily. All you have to do is memorize the different advantages the forms have over eachother and then use dueling feats from said characters your debating. Their duel only ended 1 of 3 ways. A draw, a loss or a win. It's the force powers that muddle things up with relative "power scaling."

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Sober fights are too complicated to judge

If a character is officially identified as a master swordsman and also has some feats to complement this accolade then it becomes easier to debate in favor of this type of character against most people across the boards.

Unfortunately, few understand the fact that 'command of the Force' is an equally important factor in assessing a character's potential in a strictly melee duel.

For example, Revan does not have much official hype for his melee capabilities but he stomped an Imperial Guardsman (a Jedi-level combatant), overwhelmed Yusanis (arguably top echani warrior), defeated Mandalore the Ultimate, outdueled Darth Malak and killed two Terentateks simultaneously. All of these are examples of melee-oriented confrontations. These examples indicate that 'command of the Force' is an important factor for determining effectiveness even in martial aspects of combat.

Revan may not be as skilled as Kit Fisto but the former may outduel the latter in a strictly melee-oriented confrontation and stomp the latter in an all-out confrontation, keeping in the mind the holistic disparity in the capabilities of the two. However, some may argue against these type of assertions.

Generally speaking, people love to cite feats of characters in discussions. It is easy to debate in favor of a character whose capabilities are explored in great detail or who have lot of feats under his belt.

Though feats are not the only way to judge a character's superiority. A lesser-known character can be outright stated to be superior to a well-known character at official capacity. Though some may ignore this revelation due to personal bias.

Quality of expressions can also make difference in a debate sometimes. For example, KMC member Nai is a gifted debater. He can argue his case very well in most circumstances.

Originally posted by Stigma
Nah. I'd say drunk figths are too complicated to judge.

You just couldn't help yourself

Bow V.S sword.. It win unleash the sword carrier have a shield....
And force can povide shields.

It depends on the disparities of each, each character's dependencies on sabers vs Force, and so on. It basically depends on who the characters are, and sometimes who you're debating against.

A dude that mastered soresu without having any force power get ass kick by a force user with no light saber, a well train Jedi with tough telekinetic defenses win...

Saber vs Force ,well both are easily hyped and explored to the fullest.
I have to say Saber,bc if you land a crippling blow to the right area of contact its O.V.
I don't care how powerful you claim to be.

example The Ones,they weren't killed by Force Powers,
just a dagger and a well placed lightsaber stab.

If someone discovers the Ysalamiri on Myrkr,brings them to say,Coruscant,its O.V.
for Vader,Palpatine,any Force weilder. Older Palpatine (vulnerable)
(younger) Palpatine,a fight to the death.

So I say saber. who knows what your enemy will bring to the fight.
especially if they found out about the Ysalamiri or other Force blocking methods.
IF you're not trained in fighting and living without the Force
like Bane's Order of Sith. It's O.V.

You can't feel or use any Force (light or dark) if its being blocked by 1 or a colony of Ysalamiri.
Saber or a WESTAR 34 pistol.

O.V. means over.