Darth Traya's Drain vs Darth Thanaton's Force Storm

Originally posted by nfactor1995
Tbh that's kind of like saying that Traya's attack against the 3 Jedi Masters is superior to the Outlander's Valkorion enhanced attack against Arcann that took like 30-40 seconds to do anything to him. Which we know is nonsense (...right?). In that case, that is a fantastic feat by Arcann to block the attack for so long, but that doesn't take away from the fact that it's an extremely impressive showing for the Outlander/Valkorion as well.

That feat would be ****ing irrelevant for both parties if not for the effect it had on surrounding ships...

Originally posted by nfactor1995
Tbh that's kind of like saying that Traya's attack against the 3 Jedi Masters is superior to the Outlander's Valkorion enhanced attack against Arcann that took like 30-40 seconds to do anything to him. Which we know is nonsense (...right?). In that case, that is a fantastic feat by Arcann to block the attack for so long, but that doesn't take away from the fact that it's an extremely impressive showing for the Outlander/Valkorion as well.

The only reason that feat's impressive is because we get a scope of how devastating the Lightning itself is. If we didn't (as is the case here), then it's not that amazing.

But we already know generally how powerful the lightning is since we know a single casual blast is enough to create an explosion against stone.

I'm pretty sure any competent Sith's Lightning would create such an explosion.

In any case, the question is which showing is a superior display of power? And I'd assume the one that provides the most results and requires the least assumption and calculation would be that one.

Why would you say that? Malgus's lightning seems to not even be fatal. And he's far more powerful then a competent Sith.

For results I'd say it depends on who the technique was attempted on.

Malgus kills several Jedi with it in Deceived.

Ah, you're right. Was thinking of the scene with Aryn Leneer.

Regardless his casual blasts did not have the effect either Thanaton's or Dooku's did as of Decieved. Perhaps a more relevant example is Wyyrlok's who's lightning at best crumbled stone but was unable to produce actual combustion.

Originally posted by SunRazer
I'm pretty sure any competent Sith's Lightning would create such an explosion.

In any case, the question is which showing is a superior display of power? And I'd assume the one that provides the most results and requires the least assumption and calculation would be that one.

This whole results and outcome focus as the primary measuring stick of Force feats is kind of bothering me a bit. Let's try this. Would you consider Count Dooku's lightning attack on Anakin in AOTC to be superior to Thanaton's display?

My thoughts: The sheer magnitude of the Force storm that Thanaton created and the fact that he used it on a far superior combatant than AOTC Anakin (to address the whole it didn't effect Nox argument) would lead me to believe that Thanaton's is solidly superior. But then, Dooku's actually fully incapacitated Anakin while Thanaton's didn't incapacitate Nox.

Thoughts?

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Ah, you're right. Was thinking of the scene with Aryn Leneer.

Regardless his casual blasts did not have the effect either Thanaton's or Dooku's did as of Decieved. Perhaps a more relevant example is Wyyrlok's who's lightning at best crumbled stone but was unable to produce actual combustion.

Whereas Dooku's Lightning failed to affect the stone ceiling other than burning off some of the edges?

That speaks more towards the integrity of the structure.

Originally posted by nfactor1995
This whole results and outcome focus as the primary measuring stick of Force feats is kind of bothering me a bit. Let's try this. Would you consider Count Dooku's lightning attack on Anakin in AOTC to be superior to Thanaton's display?

My thoughts: The sheer magnitude of the Force storm that Thanaton created and the fact that he used it on a far superior combatant than AOTC Anakin (to address the whole it didn't effect Nox argument) would lead me to believe that Thanaton's is solidly superior. But then, Dooku's actually fully incapacitated Anakin while Thanaton's didn't incapacitate Nox.

Thoughts?

We'll make it simple. Out of the instances you listed, Thanaton's Lightning would be more devastating if both were used on the same target, for instance.

Dooku's feat was better for obvious reasons.

Just to be clear, that doesn't mean Thanaton has more potent Lightning than Dooku, since you cited an instance of Thanaton gathering energies on a DS nexus as opposed to Dooku effortlessly sending out a stream on neutral ground.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
That speaks more towards the integrity of the structure.

Or perhaps just a different depiction of the power.

Ah, I see what you're saying. You're saying that of the results of the actions in question Traya's was superior but not necessarily the power demonstrated.

Originally posted by SunRazer
Or perhaps just a different depiction of the power.

I operate by physics. Lightning that caused a combustion trumps lightning that hits an object and dissipates in regards to energy use.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Ah, I see what you're saying. You're saying that of the results of the actions in question Traya's was superior but not necessarily the power demonstrated.

Well the power demonstrated is completely incomparable.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
I operate by physics. Lightning that caused a combustion trumps lightning that hits an object and dissipates in regards to energy use.

Lightning that only burns off small layers of stone is inferior to Lightning that outright destroys it, lol.

Originally posted by SunRazer
Well the power demonstrated is completely incomparable.

Yeah. They're very different uses of the Force.

Originally posted by SunRazer
Lightning that only burns off small layers of stone is inferior to Lightning that outright destroys it, lol.

The lightning didn't outright destroy it. It crumbled it. Causing cracks in stone and causing it to crumble isn't as good as disintegrating stone.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
The lightning didn't outright destroy it. It crumbled it. Causing cracks in stone and causing it to crumble isn't as good as disintegrating stone.

He only disintegrated the "skin" of the stone. It's nowhere near as good.

I guess I could get them calc'ed on SB or Naruto forums if you'd like.