Connor McLeod vs Aragorn

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
!V! duels are dwarfed when compared to multi-duels that he completely owns. At least i would think. Anytime you see aragron fighting more than one enemy, he is destroying the competition. Atleast when we compare McCloud. McCloud never fights more than one opponent. Or, atleast when he does, he is getting his ass beat. Argorn, has showcased, MULTIPLE times where he takes one numerous enemies on his own and rocks them. If you, REALLY want proof, i will provide. McCloud NEVER takes on more than ONE enemay alone. ;-)

So let me know because i know Aragorn aways beats McCloud.

And they're fodder.

And this isn't a 1 vs. many match. It's 1 vs. 1, so obviously the person who has more experience in duels has an advantage.

After all, how many skilled opponents has Aragorn dueled one on one? There was Lurtz and then?

Originally posted by KingD19
The superhuman ranger that's 90 years old but is still around his early 30's, and one of the best swordsman in a world of superhuman swordsman.

True, I believe he lived to be 210

Which still makes him a couple centuries younger than Macleod.

Mcloud. More experienced. Been doing these 1v1's much longer. A shit ton more durable with his healing factor and damage soak.

Aragorn needs the decap which he isnt even aware of. They are probably close skill wise, and while aragorn is quite the beast, Connor has absorbed power, strength, skill, from plenty of other immortals to put him as a solid match.

Connor after a good fight. He will land a killing blow at some point while simply outlasting Aragorn.

Does Aragorn not have knowledge about the decap? Basic opponent knowledge and all that?

Also I don't see Aragorn being outlasted considering he was in constant action for all 3 movies and never once even seemed tired.

If this was book version Aragorn wins. He had the blood of the Numenoreans and never, once in the entire books was unsure of himself or in real danger. He pretty much destroyed everything he fought. He could run for weeks without stopping.

Movie version though MIGHT go to Highlander.

Movie version is the exact same version.

Originally posted by KingD19
Movie version is the exact same version.

Not that it matters as this is movie Aragorn.

Aragorn wins.

Originally posted by CPT Space Bomb
NO, it's not. Not even remotely close. Did you read the LOTR? At all? Like, Ever?

Not that it matters as this is movie Aragorn.

Yep, read all 3 books. Read the Hobbit. Read the Silmarillion. Next question?

It's not close because they can't do everything on screen they can do in the book, but it's as close as they could get and is a pretty faithful interpretation.

Originally posted by KingD19
Yep, read all 3 books. Read the Hobbit. Read the Silmarillion. Next question?

It's not close because they can't do everything on screen they can do in the book, but it's as close as they could get and is a pretty faithful interpretation.

Anyway, my point is not just that Movie Aragorn is weaker than his book counterpart (which he is), but his entire portrayal is different. I like the movies for the most part...and I even like Viggo's Aragorn as it works for general audiences and makes for a more relatable hero.

But aside from the physical differences, Aragorn in the books never doubted who he was. He never shied away from duty or responsibility. He knew he was the baddest mofo around and let everyone know it. He was borderline cocky.

They did a lot of stuff different in the movie. Not sure why. Like how he never had the pieces of Andúril with him. They just gave it to him fully forged and were like, "Here you go." His self doubt is another movie only thing. I can't pick Jackson's mind about that but it was always weird to me.

I was saying they changed a lot, but he's still the same Aragorn, or tweaked I suppose but still Aragorn. And while not near as strong as his book counterpart, I think he still has plenty enough for this fight.

Originally posted by KingD19
They did a lot of stuff different in the movie. Not sure why. Like how he never had the pieces of Andúril with him. They just gave it to him fully forged and were like, "Here you go." His self doubt is another movie only thing. I can't pick Jackson's mind about that but it was always weird to me.

I was saying they changed a lot, but he's still the same Aragorn, or tweaked I suppose but still Aragorn. And while not near as strong as his book counterpart, I think he still has plenty enough for this fight.

Aragorn, and with minor difficulty

What I can't understand is why people are thinking Aragorn is more skilled than Macleod. Whom has Aragorn fought that isn't fodder? Only Lurtz from what I recall and he had a hard time with that, almost lost if I recall.

Also, why is everyone ignoring the fact that Macleod has a healing factor and a lot more durable than Aragorn.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I'm going to try and go through a few Highlander videos when I get the chance. But just pulling from memory, I know the immortals were easily breaking off steel and iron pipes or grills here and there. Either to use as weapons or to just get out of their way. Their swords swings were usually enough to cut through chain and slim steel poles.

In the end though when fighting with swords, it's more skill and speed that will count and not so much strength, unless there is a huge difference in strength.

The Kurrgan had slight superhuman strength

Originally posted by FrothByte
What I can't understand is why people are thinking Aragorn is more skilled than Macleod. Whom has Aragorn fought that isn't fodder? Only Lurtz from what I recall and he had a hard time with that, almost lost if I recall.

Also, why is everyone ignoring the fact that Macleod has a healing factor and a lot more durable than Aragorn.

Mostly because Duncan simply wasn't that impressive in his fight sequences, nor were the people he fought. TBH, most times as I recall (been awhile since I watched the movies), he struggled quite a bit in his final fights. Even winning through other trickery besides a straight up sword fight.

I'm certainly not saying he's not skilled, the problem is, I just seen Aragorn as more skilled going by their fights. I'm not sure why you thinking one v one fights proven more than One vs. many. It's actually the opposite. Think about the preposition that Aragorn would've struggled more if he fought one v one compared to fighting hundreds. It makes no sense. It's much harder to fight multiple people off than one v one. Aragorn has that in spades, Duncan, not so much. That to me is the difference here.

Duncan isn't in this thread.