Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Who wins?

ESB Luke wasn't fully trained, while Maul is a fully trained Sith. So Maul would win.

Maul would own. Luke was a mere child of the force in ESB. A better match up would be Darth Maul vs. ROTJ Luke.

this one lightsaber jedimaster2000

Luke would get force choked. he sucks in
ESB

This is where Luke gets his hand chopped off and brutally slaughtered.

Luke takes a royal spanking and a beating in ESB although against the Sith lord he did hold good ground. He even got 1 hit on Vader. though vader was being arrogant and going easy on him the whole time.

The battle would be under 2 minutes Maul abolishing Luke.

This is ridiculous. I don't care if it's Maul with a spork versus Luke ESB, Luke's a goner.

Is it a lightsaber like spork? lol
He would just ninja kick him in the face

Yes, the Sith lightspork. Feared by many a tabletop duellist, the Sith lightspork is excellent at getting those slippery little tomatoes in salads.

Maul, Lukes a weak jedi who got lucky againts Vader

lmao

I don't think it's fair to say he got lucky against Vader since Vader was filled with conflict. I mean, it's his son, that's the only thing he had left of Padme and his humanity, he truly didn't want to kill him and that's how he lost.
Back on topic, Luke would be like Iraq here, while Maul is the US
BOOOM

Well dude he will be only wins if Luke is without his arm.

Now, really saying Maul defeat Luke because he is already untrained by Yoda.

... I really really dislike the dancing banana animation and the laughing faces. Good thing I'm not paranoid schizophrenic, or I might attack the monitor.

And Maul wins.

Maul held a Jedi Master at bay with a single lightsaber in TPM (Tatooine fight). Who are the five people who said Luke would have a chance against Maul? I don't think they really thought about this. I know Maul would utterly destroy Luke just by thinking it.

I agree. Especially ESB Luke. Now if someone had said NJO Luke... meh.... bye, Maul.

luke would own maul

Maul would easily defeat ESB Luke, but I think ROTJ Luke could take Maul with his double bladed lightsaber.

I admit Luke could hold his own for a couple of minutes, but eventually Maul would get tired and kick his ass

Darth Maul would waste ESB Luke. It wouldn't even be funny, **** he probably fight with his robes and gear on like he did Qui Gon. Did you see the way he was fighting against Obi Wan with only one saber. RotJ Luke would put up a better fight but would still lose.

Necro....

This argument has been battled over recently, especially me putting a great effort argument on the powers of ESB and ROTJ Luke. ESB Luke is just a bit lesser than Qui-Gon, and Maul comfortably killed Jinn, therefore (not trying to make ABC argument here) Maul would more or less own Luke unfortunately.

As for ROTJ, I would say Luke would be much harder of a fight and it would a lot more closer.

Wait, how can ESB Luke be at Qui-Gon's level? He has trained for... like... half a week? Oh well.............

Well we had a thread on this and I argued my a&& off for ESB Luke, saying he won't get owned and that it'll be close. In terms of the argument, I believe I won, because I gave a much better argument than what Sexist and others believed. But yes, if you think aboubt, and consider Luke's current stage as a supreme godlike Force user, then yes, he probably he could QGJ a good run for his money back at his ESB stage.

Except you were the sole person to believe them to be close. Everyone else thought Qui-Gon would win and it wouldn't be close.

Maul would win, but if it was Luke (ep 6) - then Luke would win.

@ DS

Maybe so, but my arguments were better. Still some people actually started saying after that thread "so since we confirmed ESB Luke is close to QGJ". So I did do a good job!

maul, no contest.

Originally posted by Prodigal Knight
@ DS

Maybe so, but my arguments were better. Still some people actually started saying after that thread "so since we confirmed ESB Luke is close to QGJ". So I did do a good job!
Show me one person who said that besides you.

Originally posted by Kamikz
I thought we had put ESB Luke leagues below Qui-Gon. ROTJ Luke is not that far above ESB Luke, and Qui-Gon is not as good as AOTC Kenobi....

Lolz, ^look at what I did. I'm afraid you're gonna have to provide a link as well PK.

Wow, Crado, how pathetic! Honestly think I would lie.....here's the link, and you see kamikz's post there:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f86/t423479.html

Zomg, I'm quoted!!!!


I didn't even remember that. Hah

maul pawns. this would be fun to watch. maul uses force grasp and lifts luke into the air, drops him and slices him in half. i gotta write a short story seriously.

oh i forgot about after the slicing. he uses force push to throw the pieces. ok i think i'm done.

Darth Maul utterly demolishes Luke. I really don't see Luke giving Maul a decent fight, at all actually, considering the apparent ease of which he tooled Qui-Gon, who was fighting with a "ferocity not seen before" and using a "fresh reserve of strength". Even without considering that, it's obvious Maul is, by far, the better warrior, and Force user.

Originally posted by Advent
"ferocity not seen before"

Lying now, are we?
All I saw 'was He had found a fresh reserve of strength during his meditation, and now he was attacking with a ferocity that seemed to have the Sith Lord stymied.'.

Originally posted by The Planet
Lying now, are we?
All I saw 'was He had found a fresh reserve of strength during his meditation, and now he was attacking with a ferocity that seemed to have the Sith Lord stymied.'.

Look, Nebaris, if you are going to continue to sock, I suggest you do not blindly assume things, and quit being so rude. Assume things such as that because it wasn't in the novel "word for word", that it is not mentioned anywhere else.

All you saw was that? Well, I see the script:

"When the wall between QUI-GON and DARTH MAUL opens, QUI-GON is in a split second fighting the DARK LORD with a ferocity not seen before."

In addition, that line of the script corresponds with the novel's when referencing "ferocity", as it does state "he was attacking with a ferocity that seemed to have the Sith Lord stymied", so I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the script in this case.

And me lie? Yes, Nebaris, because my credibility has ever been contested. Puh-leaze. There's really no need to humor me at this point.

I will make mention though, that we all know your credibility has been shot to shit, as you've lied about, or rather, misrepresented Crado's power/status (in the Ultimate Survival thread), lied about your identity, and continue to do such when asked if you're a sock. And the sock ordeal has been ongoing; about six times now? Seven even? Wait, let's count.

If I recall, aren't you supposedly:

1. Count Kent (I know you were; and as Kent, you lied numerous times, making up sources).
2. l0rd?.
3. Blax XXX.
4. Kas'im.
5. Dessel.
6. The Planet.
7. *DoucheFace (seriously; same location, same setup, joined after you were last banned - may be coincidence).
8. Crado.

Nice, long list of socks; although, I may be missing one. But hey, on the bright side of things, you can contend with Numan for number of socks on the SWVF.

Script ain't canon, that destroys your argument.




You forgot Tek888!

But on a serious note, I'm not Nebaris, so unless you can prove that, please don't attack my credibility by posting what other members have said.

Originally posted by The Planet
Script ain't canon, that destroys your argument.

Script ain't canon? Pee Are Oh Vee Eee Eye Tee.

"Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelizations."

In any case, where does it make mention that the script isn't canon? Especially considering that line from the script corresponded to the novel's, while I'd admit there's obviously an inconsistency or two (as with all scripts, could be taken out last moment - actions, really, not words), it's - for the majority - on point, and because it made its way to the novel, we can assume correct for that line.

And even so, Qui-Gon was fighting with a "ferocity not seen before" if he had Darth Maul "stymied" (in this context, frustrated/confused/and preventing him from killing him by means of the aforementioned), in the sense that he had never done that before, and thusly was never seen by either of the two people present, etc. (Obi-Wan, Darth Maul, even viewers).



Serious note?



Oh, how I've heard those words a countless number of times.

Let see, quite a few times you've made a sock - I've called you out either via PM, or outright in a thread (recall, I called you Count Kent in a debate because you called me "Mokoto". Usually responded with "Huh? Who's that?", or "I have no idea what you're talking about".

Likewise, people have called you Nebaris when using the Crado name (among others), in which you've denied your true identity. So, please, that ridiculous line of "I'm not Nebaris" is far from trustworthy.



Except it's not what "other members have said", it's what you have said. You are Nebaris, and you make it all too obvious. You even used the "Unlucky" line at the end of one post, another Nebaris trait (among numerous other things, such as the setup, ridiculous attitude, and join date - which gives further suspicion).

Originally posted by Advent
Script ain't canon? Pee Are Oh Vee Eee Eye Tee.

"Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelizations."

In any case, where does it make mention that the script isn't canon? Especially considering that line from the script corresponded to the novel's, while I'd admit there's obviously an inconsistency or two (as with all scripts, could be taken out last moment - actions, really, not words), it's - for the majority - on point,


Refer to the .



lmfao. The word 'ferocity' made its way to the novel, not the whole fecking sentence.



This is all nice speculation, but that is all it is, speculation. Qui-Gon was past his prime by TPM, he was physically aging, and that's why that sentence doesn't make sense.



Wow, I didn't realise the words 'I'm not' were exclusive to Nebaris.



This is really fascinating, I have to say, but quite frankly, you're boring me now.
So unlucky.

Originally posted by The Planet
Refer to the .

Scripts are still canon, as noted by policy. Novelizations also have inconsistencies (several actually), and they thus "non canon"?

The answer: No, they are considered canonical, the inconsistencies are non-canon. I see no inconsistence in this instance.



You don't even understand what I am trying to relate to you? The word, and intensity written of his fighting at that point corresponds to what the script has written.

Does it have to be "word for word" for you to accept what I am saying? Of course, knowing Nebaris, I'll expect "Yes". Inferences, pal.



How does that it make "no sense" just because he was "past his prime" in TPM? All it is implying is the intensity fought with was greater than before. If you go by means of that Qui-Gon has a) never faced a Sith Lord, or has not been shown to fight a threat this extreme, b) Darth Maul is more skilled, and c) he was fighting for his life, then I fail to see how what you say is all that relevant (in the sense you use it, it seems to mean that it's the sole reason behind your argument).

Why would one not fight intensely or even savagely against one who is your true foe? And given that he's also never faced a Sith Lord before, I'd say the sentence does indeed make sense. And obviously in your eyes, it doesn't make sense, but then again - you have a blindfold on.



And I didn't realize that I said they were. What I said was that "I've heard these words before" from Nebaris, and being that I have a strong suspicion you are Nebaris (as others noted, too), your words aren't very credible concerning to that matter.



And? I am not here to entertain you.

(Hint: If you didn't already know, it's the other way around, so please get back to work, son.)

Yaya, my test worked. That post took pretty long Advent, I'd say you're losing your touch. But in response, the novels aren't canon either, because of the very same reason.



I understand perfectly, pal.



Xanatos, much?



lolz, the eyesight jab, I was waiting for that.



Go over this again Advent, you made a mistake with the wording.



Well it's a good thing that you're not, because you ain't doing a very good job of it.
(Hint: BURN!!)

Xanatos a sith lord, or as extreme as Maul? No........

Originally posted by kamikz
Xanatos a sith lord, or as extreme as Maul? No........

You're missing the point here and not seeing the big picture. Advent's argument is that Jinn would never have had any real reason to fight to his best like he did with Maul. Except, there was Xanatos.

Originally posted by The Planet
Yaya, my test worked. That post took pretty long Advent, I'd say you're losing your touch.

I beg your pardon?

So, because I took 20 or so minutes to respond, I'm "losing my touch"? I am no pizza delivery service, son. You get what I give at my leisure.

Furthermore, another strike on the list for Nebaris-esque attitude. And, to note, before I type I generally like to review what I wrote, so as it doesn't look like what you dish out, which is: shit.



Puh-leaze, Captain Planet. Novels are canon. Leland Chee states as much:

""...continuity "C" canon which is pretty much everything else. " By everything else I mean EVERYthing else. Novels, comics, junior novels, videogames, trading card games, roleplaying games, toys, websites, television. As I've mentioned earlier, any contradictions that arise are dealt on a case-by-case.

This has been our general approach to continuity since we began using the Holocron database to track it."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron Continuity database, January 24, 2004

Can we say "uninformed"? Or rather, blatently bullshitting, because you already knew that they were acknowledged to fit into continuity.



And since when was Xanatos ever a more formidable opponent than Darth Maul? When has Xanatos ever been dubbed a Sith? Oh? He's not? He just fell to the Dark side, you say?

Sith Lord that one is not, failure he is. More skilled Darth Maul than Qui-Gon is, Xanatos is not. And all is lost.

Translated: What does Xanatos have to do with what I typed? Where has he been stated or shown to be more powerful than Qui-Gon (if I recall, he killed himself instead of being captured)? Plus, he's not the polar opposite of what Darth Maul represents, and so on and so forth. He was also Jinn's former padawan, so I'd say that'd hardly generate the same amount of intensity in terms of pure fighting as it did when he battled Darth Maul (the extremities, at least, Qui-Gon notes that Darth Maul is what a Jedi Master should be like in terms of dedication, or something to that effect).

Elaborate, as making a feeble minded comment such as "Xanatos, much?" hardly qualifies for an adequate rebuttal.



For simpletons: Your. word. isn't. reliable.



No.



And all you say is "Xanatos". What of him?

, , - those are your clues, try to link them up, pal.



YES



Excuses...



LC is referring to novels in general, not the novels which contradict the highest form of canon in Star Wars.



You (as well as Kamikz) miss the point. You were implying that Qui-Gon would have never had reason to fight like he did against Darth Maul prior to TPM, and that's BS. Xanatos was a huge threat, he had caused lots of damage to the jedi and society, he was responsible for the death of a padawan at the temple, he had almost been successful in assassinating Yoda, and Qui-Gon knew that he must be stopped. In fact, by going easy on Xanatos, he would have been putting the life of Obi-Wan in jeopardy. Qui-Gon wasn't holding back any more than he was against Darth Maul, he was fighting as best he could, and this was in his physical prime. In TPM, he was getting old, slow, unfit.

In fact, from Jedi Apprentice 8: The Day of Reckoning, I seem to recall a 'He hit Xanatos in midair. Their bodies connected like mountains of hard rock. There was no give to Xanatos' muscles, no yielding in Qui-Gon. The clash was titanic.' - CH17. Seems pretty ferocious to me.

But this really doesn't matter anyway as 'fighting with a ferocity not seen before' is retconned.



This is a strike against you, not me. It's not my fault you're uninformed, as a SW fan, you're expected to know stuff.



No.







Read Jedi Apprentice.

Originally posted by The Planet
, , - those are your clues, try to link them up, pal.

Oh Lord, now we have some kind of moron who thinks patronizing my intelligence will help his argument. Hey, Nebaris, what do any of those "clues" have to do with me taking long to post? As that was why I typed "I beg your pardon?", you dolt.

But just to answer for you: they have nothing to do with it. I responded to what you typed. So, how about you get a clue?

Then again, that's just wishful thinking.



Then you truly are the epitome of idiocy.

If I take an hour or a day to respond, it doesn't mean it's affecting my debating in any way. Your implication of "if you take long to post, you must be dropping the ball" is sheer ludicrous. I'm no different from when I first started tearing shit up to now.



No, not at all. If your minuscule brain was able to comprehend that there are no set deadlines for when I must respond, then you'd realize I can take as long as I please. I'm not here to rush an argument, it's just Star Wars. So, please, quit acting like a jackass. By now, Nebaris, you should've learned it gets you nowhere (except banned, as you already have been six or so times).



"LC"? What are you, his best buddy now?

The novelizations of the film are canon. Accept it, your chum Leland Chee even notes further along in that same post that "contradictions are dealt with on a case-by-case basis".

And to further reinforce the fact through your thick, durasteel cranium:

"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, Jan. 26, 2004.

"The novelizations are written concurrently with the film's production, so variations in detail do creep in from time to time. Nonetheless, they should be regarded as very accurate depictions of the fictional Star Wars movies."

-- Steve Sansweet and Chris Cerasi, "Ask the Jedi Council", 2001.

Novelizations of the film are canon, which seems opposite to your implication and assertions that they aren't. So unlucky! You'll have to excuse me:



No, not really. You're just assuming that, among everything else, Ig.



No, not really. You're just assuming that, among everything else, Ig.



Oh, god. Someone stop the press. The man killed a padawan!



And you fail to realize the entire point, Ig. He wouldn't have to fight as intensely against an opponent who is weaker than himself, or rather, not stronger than. Yes, he'd be fighting hard as they are close, but no cigar as the old saying goes. You put more effort into fighting an opponent who is far stronger than yourself. As much is obvious.

He'd have to block harder, swing faster, and dodge quicker against an opponent of Darth Maul's caliber. Darth Maul is physically stronger than Xanatos, faster than Xanatos, and more skilled than Xanatos. All qualities which are inclusive of leading one to fight harder, because you need to break their defense.

And I never said he was going "easy", I was just implying that he'd actually know some of Xanatos' movements as he trained him, contrary to Darth Maul. Who was also a double bladed lightsaber user, something I don't recall Qui-Gon ever fighting against (again, it goes with falls into something unfamiliar to what Jinn is used to, hence he must be at his peak in terms of "game".



All good and well. It seems like an ardent battle to me, too. But, hey, I can do the same thing:

"Qui-Gon, surprised by the other's quickness and ferocity, barely blocked the blow with his own weapon, the blades sliding apart with a harsh rasp. The attacker spun away in a whirl of dark clothing, then attacked anew, lightsaber slashing at his intended prey, face alight with a killing frenzy that promised no quarter.

The Jedi Master and his adversary filled the viewscreen commanding the rampway entrance, faces tight with determination and streaked with sweat.

He breathed deeply, waiting for his pounding heart to quiet. He had barely escaped with his life, and the thought was worrisome. His opponent was strong and had tested him severely."

And that was only when Darth Maul was testing him. Very intense for such a short battle. Later on, it's obvious vigor would grow as the thought of a Sith Lord had become about, and Darth Maul more than likely wasn't holding back on Naboo (or to the degree he was). Still, you seem to think that you can determine a definite answer on how Qui-Gon's intensity against Xanatos was in comparison to against Darth Maul. There's not a good chance on that, as I already know Darth Maul > Xanatos. But, do tell some more, is Xanatos even as powerful as Qui-Gon? I don't recall him being as good, but I do recall him - instead of surrendering to Qui-Gon - killing himself.



My Buddha, are you really this dense? Nothing has been noted to retcon it, you are just assuming so because you think everything you say is gospel.

And for future reference: it's not.



A strike against me? I'm sorry, but anyone who considers themselves an able debater doesn't make short, asinine comments as you do.

"Xanatos, much"? How elaborate! Why don't you put what Xanatos did into context, how it applies, and the like? I'm sorry, but this is just ridiculous on your part to tell me I'm "expected to know stuff". And uninformed? Right.

I think someone (you) needs to go back to the hole of which they crawled out of, as spewing this type of senselessness isn't kosher.

Still don't get it? Wow...



I know you are but what am I?



Oh really? Care to back that up with some proof? Prove it, I dare you!



But it loses you man points.



Your debating the Planet bizatch, quicktime starts now.



We exchange love letters.



The movie novelisations were based on an early draft of the script, and contradict the highest form of canon on multiple occasions. They're not canon.



Making up words now, are we? What the hell is an Ig?



Hold up, you don't think murder is that big a deal? OK...



As long as he fights to the best of his ability, it really doesn't matter how skilled his opponent is, the fact that Darth Maul is more powerful than Xanatos doesn't mean that Qui-Gon would have to try harder. This would only be true if he wasn't fighting as hard against Xanatos as he was against Maul because he didn't need to, the point is, he was putting in 100% effort against both opponents.



Ad, you're missing the point, and looking at this in a very simple manner. Qui-Gon was fighting to the best of his ability against both opponents, just because Darth Maul was more powerful than Xanatos, it wouldn't mean that he would have to increase his efforts as how can he possibly put more effort into a fight than when he was fighting to the best of his ability. If you're fighting to the best of your ability, you can't increase your efforts, by definition that just doesn't make sense. By your logic, one cannot possibly fight to the best of their ability against a weaker opponent, because they wouldn't be forced to block as hard as they might have to against a stronger opponent etc. Seriously, this argument is very illogical. So are you saying that Sidious couldn't have possibly put as much effort as possible into killing the 'B team' because they were weaker? Seriously...



Again, you don't seem to understand that as long as he is fighting to the best of his ability, whoever his opponent is has no relation on his effort, because, by definition, when you are fighting at your best, you are putting in 100% effort. Unless you want to argue that he was putting in 100% effort against Xanatos, and 150% effort against Darth Maul... (LOL!)



I'm really not seeing what was so ferocious about Jinn here, this only speaks for Maul's ferocity.



Too bad the strength on your opponents had no relation the effort you put in if you are fighting to the best of your ability.



He's pretty much whack compared to Jinn. But that's irrelevant.



Script ain't canon, it renders it invalid.



Didn't realise being discrete was a bad thing. You're one of those people who thinks a longer answer to a question > a shorter answer, am I right? Are you the type of person who writes ten pages on an essay when they only need to write three? That's what I thought.

Anyways, as a SW fan, you're expected to know who Xanatos is, the very mention of his name should have made it clear as to my intentions to bringing him into the argument, it's not a strike against me, it's a strike against you.

Originally posted by Advent



""...continuity "C" canon which is pretty much everything else. " By everything else I mean EVERYthing else. Novels, comics, junior novels, video games, trading card games, roleplaying games, toys, websites, television. As I've mentioned earlier, any contradictions that arise are dealt on a case-by-case.

This has been our general approach to continuity since we began using the Holocron database to track it."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron Continuity database, January 24, 2004

I have to ask, then why in the Respect Anakin thread, when I mentioned feats he did in the game, that weren't contradicted by the movie, were they disregarded as non-canon, when Chee stated "video games" in that quote?

Just curious...

Lol!

You fail, kid.

http://www.lichtensteinfoundation.org/images/sock.jpg

And no, I'm not Polaski or whatever. It's funny though, I just met a new member named that on a Star Wars role play site I go to.

For the last time, I am not a fecking sock.

I'm not gonna bother reading anything because I'd think its plainly obvious that Maul owns all incarnations of Luke up until DE (at least in saber combat)

Originally posted by The Planet
For the last time, I am not a fecking sock.

Did I call you a sock?

no.

Originally posted by Blaxican
Did I call you a sock?

no.

'You fail, kid'?
A picture of a sock?
You did as good as calling me a sock, so please, stop. If you really want to get in a battle of wits with me, you will lose, so continue this if you will.

Dessel, i sense in you. He's the only one to start a respect thread. personally i dont give a shit.

What's up Advent, cat got your tongue?

No, not really. I'm just waiting for a question I asked to be answered before I respond. Although, I will address what Subjekt wrote:

In regards to what I said in that thread, I was clearly wrong about the game - as a whole - being considered non-canon. I hadn't delved into the subject of games that follow the movie were ranked. Apparently, only elements that contradict the film, and things that are strictly gameplay are non-canon.

At least, that's the answer I got when I asked in a thread on sw.com. So, whatever you mentioned in the thread that wasn't a contradiction (or gameplay), then it would seem it should stand. That was a mistake on my part.




"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, January 24, 2004.

"The novelizations are written concurrently with the film's production, so variations in detail do creep in from time to time. Nonetheless, they should be regarded as very accurate depictions of the fictional Star Wars movies."

--Chris Cerasi and Steve Sansweet, Ask the Jedi Council, 2006.

"We have what we call Canon, which is the screenplays, novelizations, and other works that are directly tied into continuity"

-- Allan Kausch, The Secrets of Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire.

"Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelizations. "

-- Sue Rostoni, Issue 23 of Star Wars Insider, 1994.

Well, I'm glad that you blatantly deny facts stated directly from two sources, Leland Chee being one of them. If you really believe this bullshit you spew, prove up. I'm rather sick and tired of you just being a phallus, and not accepting that you are clearly wrong.

In fact, you say "they're not canon" because they contradict on a few occasions, well if this is the case I'd ask why is SotME considered to fit in continuity? Leland Chee states that, as a whole, it's canon; the discrepancies are dealt with case-by-case. Even taking what I just addressed earlier in response to Subjekt's post, the video game contradictions to the movie are non-canon, whilst things that don't - aren't consider as such. So, that virtually destroys this part of the argument.

Moreover, by our canon policy, movie novelizations are canon. Leland Chee, who may I remind you maintains the continuity database of Lucas Licensing. states they are canon. Sue Rostoni states they are canon. Allan Kausch states they are canon. You? An unimportant, no-authority-to-make-the-call twit disagrees? BFD. You're wrong, I am right. Deal with it, son.

As a matter of fact, I doubt you'd find one source that says otherwise (as a whole, that is). And here's the kicker: the people who stated the aforementioned quotes all have theauthority to make the call, you do not. This is just plain ignorance and arrogance on your part. If you can't accept facts, then please stop debating with me right now. You're blatently disregarding authoritive quotes, and every time you post a reply: you're still wrong! The ridiculous assertion made by you has been defeated, that is a fact. Much like the facts novels are canon, and you are wrong.

I love how you think talk about logic, act as if you are a godlike debater, and think you're the smartest thing on the planet, yet you refuse to accept outright stated facts. Yes, you show very capable signs of being intelligent; so either you're just trying to be an ignorant jackass or you genuinely believe you think you can dictate canon over Leland Chee, and others who are employed by LFL. I'd say the former, probably. Nonetheless, it's annoying.

The rest, which really is only the matter of Qui-Gon and "ferocity", I will address later (in addition to the "much?" comment). This, which is a very simple thing to prove you wrong about, is just all I can give at this moment. I'm kind of busy, actually (writing a story, in fact), and am still awaiting an answer on something regarding this debate.

Maul wins easily.

Originally posted by Advent
No, not really. I'm just waiting for a question I asked to be answered before I respond. Although, I will address what Subjekt wrote:

In regards to what I said in that thread, I was clearly wrong about the game - as a whole - being considered non-canon. I hadn't delved into the subject of games that follow the movie were ranked. Apparently, only elements that contradict the film, and things that are strictly gameplay are non-canon.

At least, that's the answer I got when I asked in a thread on sw.com. So, whatever you mentioned in the thread that wasn't a contradiction (or gameplay), then it would seem it should stand. That was a mistake on my part.

OK thanks. Wasn't asking to be argumentative, i was seriously wondering about that. I mean debating isn't about who's right, it's about who can win, and i didnt know if you were just trying to win more or less, or what. But all good, no worries. Thanks for the response.

Originally posted by The Planet
'You fail, kid'?
A picture of a sock?
You did as good as calling me a sock, so please, stop. If you really want to get in a battle of wits with me, you will lose, so continue this if you will.

As good isn't actually doing it.

I never called you a sock. Technically.

And please kid, we'ev had this discussion before.

Originally posted by Blaxican
As good isn't actually doing it.

I never called you a sock. Technically.

Are you a moron? Whether you technically called me one or not, you made it clear that you believed I was one and wanted to point it out to everyone. My response 'For the last time, I am not a fecking sock' was a perfectly valid reply to you labelling me a sock, so if you're really trying to be a smartass, you're not doing a very good job of it. If I made the assertion that you directly called me one, then yes, you could say this, but my whole point was that it was clear that you were labelling me as one, so your smartass bs here really isn't working.



Who the fvck are you to call me a kid? Please, being the number 1 dumbass on these forums (that's right, number 1, I bet even Kadesh could out debate you lol!), I suggest you be quiet.

Originally posted by Advent
No, not really. I'm just waiting for a question I asked to be answered before I respond. Although, I will address what Subjekt wrote:

In regards to what I said in that thread, I was clearly wrong about the game - as a whole - being considered non-canon. I hadn't delved into the subject of games that follow the movie were ranked. Apparently, only elements that contradict the film, and things that are strictly gameplay are non-canon.

At least, that's the answer I got when I asked in a thread on sw.com. So, whatever you mentioned in the thread that wasn't a contradiction (or gameplay), then it would seem it should stand. That was a mistake on my part.




"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, January 24, 2004.

"The novelizations are written concurrently with the film's production, so variations in detail do creep in from time to time. Nonetheless, they should be regarded as very accurate depictions of the fictional Star Wars movies."

--Chris Cerasi and Steve Sansweet, Ask the Jedi Council, 2006.

"We have what we call Canon, which is the screenplays, novelizations, and other works that are directly tied into continuity"

-- Allan Kausch, The Secrets of Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire.

"Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelizations. "

-- Sue Rostoni, Issue 23 of Star Wars Insider, 1994.

Well, I'm glad that you blatantly deny facts stated directly from two sources, Leland Chee being one of them. If you really believe this bullshit you spew, prove up. I'm rather sick and tired of you just being a phallus, and not accepting that you are clearly wrong.

In fact, you say "they're not canon" because they contradict on a few occasions, well if this is the case I'd ask why is SotME considered to fit in continuity? Leland Chee states that, as a whole, it's canon; the discrepancies are dealt with case-by-case. Even taking what I just addressed earlier in response to Subjekt's post, the video game contradictions to the movie are non-canon, whilst things that don't - aren't consider as such. So, that virtually destroys this part of the argument.

Moreover, by our canon policy, movie novelizations are canon. Leland Chee, who may I remind you maintains the continuity database of Lucas Licensing. states they are canon. Sue Rostoni states they are canon. Allan Kausch states they are canon. You? An unimportant, no-authority-to-make-the-call twit disagrees? BFD. You're wrong, I am right. Deal with it, son.

As a matter of fact, I doubt you'd find one source that says otherwise (as a whole, that is). And here's the kicker: the people who stated the aforementioned quotes all have theauthority to make the call, you do not. This is just plain ignorance and arrogance on your part. If you can't accept facts, then please stop debating with me right now. You're blatently disregarding authoritive quotes, and every time you post a reply: you're still wrong! The ridiculous assertion made by you has been defeated, that is a fact. Much like the facts novels are canon, and you are wrong.

I love how you think talk about logic, act as if you are a godlike debater, and think you're the smartest thing on the planet, yet you refuse to accept outright stated facts. Yes, you show very capable signs of being intelligent; so either you're just trying to be an ignorant jackass or you genuinely believe you think you can dictate canon over Leland Chee, and others who are employed by LFL. I'd say the former, probably. Nonetheless, it's annoying.

The rest, which really is only the matter of Qui-Gon and "ferocity", I will address later (in addition to the "much?" comment). This, which is a very simple thing to prove you wrong about, is just all I can give at this moment. I'm kind of busy, actually (writing a story, in fact), and am still awaiting an answer on something regarding this debate.

Really Advent, you have your opinions, I have mine, we'll have to agree to disagree. One thing I will say is, while I strongly believe the novelisations not to be canon, I know that the fight scenes in the novelisations are not cannon - direct contradictions to the movies, so to stem back to the original point, you definitely can't use anything from the fight scenes of the novelisations, which renders your earlier points invalid.

then i'd invite you to go read ush's canon thread, and then come back.

and how do you come to conclusions about other people's debating skills after only a week and a half? You'd have to be around a little bit longer to know that.



man, i tore a hole in my sock....Planet, can i have one of yours?







j/k...

That's cute man.

Originally posted by The Planet
Really Advent, you have your opinions, I have mine, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Oh, yes. Of course I have my opinions, and you have your's. But, there's quite a difference in mine regarding this point, and your's.

Mine: Backed up by Leland Chee. Several quotes that disprove your ridiculous assertion that "novels aren't canon".
Yours: ...?

Really, there's nothing to "agree to disagree" about. I have authority backing me up, you don't. You can think (key) you're right, but the overall fact remains that I defeated this asinine point of yours.

Quite honestly, I've never met one more dense than you are.



And that belief comes from where exactly? Obviously, I could see where you're coming from if you put aside quotes from Leland Chee, Allan Kausch, our own canon policy, and Sue Rostoni they are. However, this is a type of debate where we don't leave authorities' quotes out of the issue, ergo your "belief" is quite frankly wrong.

It's comical at best that you know you're wrong, yet won't admit it. If anything, I'd just like to ask why you disregard quotes from Leland Chee? And also if you really are incapable of understanding "plain as day" things?



You know? Then time to prove up.

If a line in a novel contradicts the fight scene, then that line and that line only is counted as non-canon. Leland Chee has stated that discrepancies are dealt with case by case. So, try again.



No, they aren't.

Again, anything that contradicts is dealt with case by case, anything seen or elaborated on in the movie is canon, anything that clearly didn't happen whatsoever is non-canon.

For example,

"Dooku's red blade stabbed hard into his left shoulder, and as he lurched back, Dooku retracted the blade and stabbed along its original course, digging into Obi-Wan's right thigh." (Attack of the Clones, Chp. 24)

"he used his last burst of dark power to continue his spin into a blindingly fast wheel-kick that brought his heel against the point of Kenobi's chin with a crack like the report of a huge-bore slugthrower, knocking the Jedi Master back down the stairs. Sounded like he'd broken his neck." (Revenge of the Sith, Chp. 3)

The former doesn't contradict from the movies, it's canon and in a fight scene (as is majority of the fight scene in the novel of AotC). The latter, however, clearly never happened and is thus non-canon. But the point is that only that single contradiction is non-canon, not the entire scene.

And that's already been long established from my part using quotes from employees of LFL. Your side hasn't confirmed jack shit, except that you believe they are non-canon. You, who doesn't work for LFL, and has offered no proof whatsoever.

You really did lose on this point, and there is no "agree to disagree". You're simply wrong.



It does not render my points invalid because you are:

1. Wrong.
2. Pulling shit from your ass.
3. And flinging it around like a monkey.
4. Ignoring official quotes.
5. Ignoring facts.

You can use anything that isn't contradicted from a fight scene, as things that do contradict (another example, Maul doing a back flip over the melting pit) are non-canon and are dealt with "case-by-case" to ensure that the rest of the novel is canon.

Ok, it seems this topic is running for his original porpuse. Anyway, i think malak easily takes this one. In ESB Luke was not that great, in fact i doubt he could beat the most of jedi masters from the jedi order before the order 66...

Maul easily wins this one with his skill and ferocity. Also, if he need he could just use force push on luke just like he did on obi-wan, who had much more years to practise his lightsaber skill and his powers then luke.

No, the difference is, I actually base my assertions off logic; when a source constantly contradicts the highest form of canon, it shouldn't be considered credible. You, on the other hand, have listed a bunch of quotes from different Lucasarts officials, but haven't provided an explanation of how they prove that the movie novelisations are canon. Why? I'm guessing it's because you can't, as none of those quotes prove that the movie novelisations are canon, and I'll explain why now.



This is great and all, but LC never said that the novelisations were canon (he actually kinda skirted the question, didn't directly respond), just that the parts that came from Lucas are. Now here's where your problem lies: whenever using anything from the novel, you have to prove that it actually came from Lucas, otherwise it simply can't be counted.

So unlucky, because this point goes nowhere in proving that the novelisations are canon.



I agree that they should be regarded as accurate depictions, but that doesn't neccesarily make them canon. I can write a book based on the SW movies, I can make it so that it accurately depicts the movies, doesn't make it canon now does it. The point is, saying that the novels accurately depicts the movies =/ saying that the novels are canon.

So unlucky, because this point goes nowhere in proving that the novelisations are canon.



This is referring to novels in general, not specifically the movie novelisations, so moot point.

So unlucky, because this point goes nowhere in proving that the novelisations are canon.



Refer to the point ^.



So as you can see Advent, none of those points above prove that the movie novelisations are canon, I've perfectly explained why. If you want to continue this, you're going to have to explain how, point by point, those quotes make the movie novelisations canon. Now please, providing quotes without an explanation is not how things are done here Advent, and it's quite funny coming from you, considering how you made such a big deal when I didn't elaborate on the Xanatos issue. So no, unlucky, but you didn't defeat any points, and I was quite happy to save you the humiliation of losing in a debate, but seeing as you're so against us agreeing to disagree, you're gonna have to get pwned.





^Contradicting yourself now? seriously...



The novelisations contradict the highest form of canon on too many occasions, it's based on an early draft of the script. It is illogical to assume that they're canon, and seeing as there's no proof on your side....



Those quotes prove nothing, I've already explained why.



I do not believe the novelisation to be canon, period. But to counter this point, I'll work under the assertion that they are.

Now you clearly seem to be having difficulty applying your logic and intelligence (as I'm not going to lie, I won't deny that you're very intelligent), I can only assume you don't understand how swordfighting works.

Every action that takes place in a swordfight (every movement, every strike, every parry etc.) leads into another action. Everything that happens is dependant on what happens just before it. So when you break a chain, in other words when any aspect (can be minor as hell) of an entire fight is changed, it results in a chain reaction where everything after it is altered, resulting in a change in the eventual result.
^That is why any minor contradiction in a fightscene renders the entire fightscene invalid. So no Advent, you are wrong, and you were really asking to get proven wrong there.



O RLY?
Face it Advent, you've been owned, badly; you've lied, misinterpreted basic concepts, read quotes and wrongly interpreted them... Concede, and you retain a bit of dignity.

Originally posted by The Planet
Are you a moron? Whether you technically called me one or not, you made it clear that you believed I was one and wanted to point it out to everyone. My response 'For the last time, I am not a fecking sock' was a perfectly valid reply to you labelling me a sock, so if you're really trying to be a smartass, you're not doing a very good job of it. If I made the assertion that you directly called me one, then yes, you could say this, but my whole point was that it was clear that you were labelling me as one, so your smartass bs here really isn't working.

I wasn't even implying. I just felt like posting a picture of a sock.


Originally posted by The Planet
Who the fvck are you to call me a kid? Please, being the number 1 dumbass on these forums (that's right, number 1, I bet even Kadesh could out debate you lol!), I suggest you be quiet.

Kid doesn't have to refer to your age. It can also be used as slang. And besides your mentality is pretty childish, so I may be correct in saying "kid" when I address you.

Oh my days, why is this schmuck still talking to me?



1. You have called me a sock on other threads.
2. You were clearly referring to me with that picture, given the 'you fail kid'.
3. As strange as you are, I really don't think you'd just post a picture of a sock for no apparent reason.



Did I say that? All I said was 'who the **** are you to call me a kid'. Seriously dude, this whole smartass thing really isn't working, you're not doing it properly, go back to school.

Originally posted by The Planet

This is great and all, but LC never said that the novelisations were canon (he actually kinda skirted the question, didn't directly respond), just that the parts that came from Lucas are. Now here's where your problem lies: whenever using anything from the novel, you have to prove that it actually came from Lucas, otherwise it simply can't be counted.

So unlucky, because this point goes nowhere in proving that the novelisations are canon.

Are you a moron? How did he never say the novels were canon?

"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, January 24, 2004.

Anything created by the author would be C-level--when asked about the novelizations of the films. That's pretty obvious. He didn't skirt around anything. He went on to further explain that anything written or said GL would be G-level. I don't see how you could possibly misconstrue the statement at all.

Originally posted by Darth Subjekt
Are you a moron? How did he never say the novels were canon?

"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, January 24, 2004.

Anything created by the author would be C-level--when asked about the novelizations of the films. That's pretty obvious. He didn't skirt around anything. He went on to further explain that anything written or said GL would be G-level. I don't see how you could possibly misconstrue the statement at all.

Are you a moron? I didn't misconsture shit. You clearly lack the reading comprehension to understand what I said. I can see that LC stated that anything that came form Lucas that is inside the novel is canon, the only problem for you and Advent now is proving what came from Lucas.

No dumbass, he said anything created by the author is C-level canon and anything by Lucas is G-level canon. THAT"s what he said. He didn't say only the parts of the novel that were from Lucas were canon period, he explained the two different levels. We don't have to prove that shit came from Lucas, cause that's not the issue. The issue is a remedial tool, trying to argue with official statements and twisting words around to fit your pathetically weak argument.

And by the way, you hardly pwned Advent, so stop spouting that shit in other threads.

Originally posted by The Planet
No, the difference is, I actually base my assertions off logic; when a source constantly contradicts the highest form of canon, it shouldn't be considered credible.

Here's where the problem lies: going by what you call "logic", Splinters of the Mind's Eye isn't canon. It contradicts the movies on some several levels (as well as other books), but when asked in the Holocron database continuity questions thread about the overall canonicity of the book, Leland gave this answer:

"Vader using Force lightning is non-continuity. And like the films, certain parts get icky when you know that Luke and Leia are siblings. There are probably a few other bits that also are non-continuity, but as a whole it is"

Now, by your logic, SotME isn't canon at all (because the novels aren't, going by your "logic". Leland Chee says otherwise. So, this would give indication that any small discrepancies between the novelizations and the film are considered "N"-canon, but like SotME, as a whole it is canon.



Most likely because Leland Chee's intial quote of "anything created by the author is C-level" was self explanatory, but now I'd surmise that it's not clear and cut due to your difficulty understand the basic language of English.



ORLY?

I'll explain to you, most likely condescendingly so as I can get my point across easily.



Incorrect.

As Subjekt already pointed out (and quite frankly, destroyed your point), he clearly states that whatever comes from the author is C-level. C-level, in other words, "canon as any other novel, comic, etc."

That's quite crystal clear. He didn't skirt anything, actually. He directly answered and explained that things such as, for example, the "shuura fruit" is G-level since it was exactly depicted in the film.

Moreover, he words a question regarding the Visual Dictionaries the same exact way:

"Theses books are treated no differently than any other books; anything created by the author would be C-level." (and yes, he did misspell "these"; Holocron continuity thread.)

If anything created by the author is C-level, and he states "no differently than any other books", then it would give implication to what he said regarding novels is that they are also "C" canon. The "G" canon elements are things that are clearly depicted in the movie; the rest is "C" canon.



Can we say "bullshit"? I'd surmise you can't, but of course, me and the rest of the world who isn't devoid of logic can.

Let me break this down simply. In the Holocron continuity thread, Chee states this:

" the "shuura fruit" mentioned in the AOTC novel would be G because you see it in the film, although the author came up with the name."

Now, using this as my example, I'll explain how it's quite simple to deduce the novels are canon. He says that even though the name was the idea of the author, it's still "G"-level because we see it in the movie. That could not be if the novel wasn't already "C"-canon. Why? Let's take a look to what Leland Chee writes in his blog regarding continuity:

"Similarly, any "C" canon entry that makes it into the films can become "G" canon."

As you can see, since the "shuura fruit" was a "C-canon entry" (from the AotC novel), and it did make it's way into the film, it's counted as "G" canon. To reinforce, if the title of "shuura fruit" came from an Infinities, perhaps, or something "N"-canon; it wouldn't be counted as "G", going by what Chee has said.



Obviously. I'd concede to that point, however, they are canon.



Oh, my, no. How could you forget to add the part that you don't work for LucasFilms, Ltd. or have any ties to anything stemming from George Lucas' Star Wars and Lucas Licensing. The difference between say, Matt Stover writing a novelization and you is that he has the authority to do such, and his books come with a seal.



You do realize that the quotes mentions "radio dramas, screenplays, films" beforehand? This would give indication that it's talking about the film novelizations. Why? Simple. The radio dramas were expanded radio adaptations of the original films, the screenplays are scripts of the films, the films of course, are the films.

Do you see a pattern yet? If not, then I'm really at a loss for words. The point isn't moot because you misinterpreted the quote. Furthermore, I'd surmise that if it was referring to novels in general, it would've listed comics as well (as those are canon), but it didn't. Which gives supplementary indication.



If you "perfectly explained" how they aren't canon, then a) I wouldn't be contesting them (I can concede when I'm wrong; see: Ush, Janus, etc.), and b) they wouldn't be wrong.



Captain Planet, puh-leaze. Humiliate me? First of all, losing in a debate over Star Wars (or even haven't shit torn apart) isn't very embarrassing; of course, not that I even lost in this one, but I've had defeats before, as hard as that is to imagine. Secondly, I haven't seen any "pwnage" served to me via your posts, and I doubt I ever will.



^See above points, see below points.



Ha. No.

There's ample proof on my side, actually. On yours, however? "They contradict the movies sometimes!", so does SotME. Yet SotME is canon overall(which demolishes your argument). The inconsistencies, as I've already relayed to you numerous times, are dealt with case-by-case:

"Q: How do you deal, *officially*, with a conflict between say, the movies and the novelizations?
A: All contradictions are dealt with case-by-case"

By doing that, it ensures that novelizations' are still counted as canon. Likewise, he states that the "case-by-case" determination is always in effect, no matter what the sources are.



Wow, Captain Planet, I'm actually surprised an assumption coming from you is correct. Although, the rest aren't.

And I'll address the bit about the whole fighting scene descriptions being non-canon as soon as my damn question gets answered. I'm not going to lie either, I don't know anything about melee fighting, and regarding the novels, there's an obvious answer which I do not believe is inclusive of them being consider "N"-canon, but I'll share that later as said.



YARLY!
I haven't been owned, nor even anything vaguely like it. The one thing that irks me is "read quotes and wrongly interpreted". I really find this humorous at best, considering you misunderstood simple quotes. In any case, I do not feel the need to acquiesce, and my dignity would actually be gone if I did so. Considering I'd be agreeing to an argument with many faulty claims.

Did you really think that the powers of earth, fire, wind, water, and heart combined could stop me, Captain Planet? Ha.

See...thats what you would call minor pwnage, douche bag. Being able to somewhat articulate your arguments, in no way makes you a good debater, especially when you try to argue canon, official quotes and statements, and more importantly, common sense. Who the hell are you to say you pwned anyone, or even down talk kadesh or JJ? You are not SHIT. Trust.

Originally posted by The Planet
Oh my days, why is this schmuck still talking to me?

Because I want to. If you don't like me, then put me on ignore. I doubt you will though as most people find me to be cheap entertainment.




Originally posted by The Planet
1. You have called me a sock on other threads.
2. You were clearly referring to me with that picture, given the 'you fail kid'.
3. As strange as you are, I really don't think you'd just post a picture of a sock for no apparent reason.

A) But we're talking about in this thread, not in the vs. forum as a whole.

B) Got any proof for this statement? Links? Quotes from official sources? I want GL's opinion on the matter.

C)I'm pretty strange. You'd be surprised.



Originally posted by The Planet
Did I say that? All I said was 'who the **** are you to call me a kid'. Seriously dude, this whole smartass thing really isn't working, you're not doing it properly, go back to school.

Who's trying to be a smart ass? I'm just being annoying.

The initial subject material of this thread deteriorated at light speed.

This is obviously a technological advancement which we can use as proof in the EU thread that, There WILL be a Star Wars.

One question, does anyone actually have proof that Tasty Taste is Leland Chan? I'm guessing he's a poser.

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/6617/lchh6.jpg http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/8489/stafflelandchanvl1.jpg

Get it right now. The guy on the left is Leland Chee a.k.a. Tasty Taste, Leland Chan (right) is a Senior Vice President at CBA.

"Wizards: Thanks for your time, Leland. If anyone out there would like to talk with Leland, he's a frequent poster to the Books, Comics and Television forum on the message boards on starwars.com, under the screen name "Tasty Taste." (The Go-To Guy, Wizards.com, 12/4/03.)

He was probably offended that you called him that, lol.

lol, I'm thinking he was, but I don't know why, Leland Chan's quite the looker, Leland Chee? Not so much. He should have taken it as a compliment.

But anyways, all that proved is that this poser duped wizards.com as well as the sw.com message boards, I still don't believe it's him, if it was, why would he spend so much time on a starwars message board? Wouldn't he be busy doing whatever the hell LFL officials do (hang out at the Skywalker ranch?).