Is it not canon narration was my question big buddy? The answer is yes it is correct? Even if we don't take it totally literally (which I agree in not doing) it's still high praise for Kenobi no matter how you slice it.
It was said by you that they are comparable rank and accolandes... others even claimed Fisto's were better than Kenobi... You would concede that having a rank of General is an accolade... Thus, Kenobi achieving a higher rank and put in charge of forces than Fisto wasn't... only strengthens the position that Keonbi has more accolades and given more responsibility and tough assignments for a reason. Further... last time I checked being Tactician can also play out in a duel not just commanding forces correct?
I would choose the phrase somewhat comparable over comparable when we look at the actual accolades.
Again being cunning and a great tactician can be and has been a part of a one v one fight. Thus kenobi being fisto decisive superior in this regard could make the difference in a battle between the two. Him being sent after the General is just another task and check in the column of kenobi. Bein given such tasks over another for whatever reason can only strengthen the case for kenobi, not just something you'd like swept under the rug. Doesn't work that way. That relative noob they sent kenobi to go after.. wasn't taken down and captured by Mace.. Fisto and a host of othe jedi and a thorn in their beloved republic. So clearly it was a tough task, and one that yet again, Fisto was given while kenobi was.
Sidious wasn't known about and what I said was spot on. The terms I used can be used to say they didn't know who he was, which is clearly true. They didn't know who he was and didnt know if he would strike. What they did know is that they needed to end a thorn in their side and needed that task accomplished. Period. If somehow that brought the sith master out of hiding.. well that's just icing on the cake. You act like the main point in sending Kenobi and yoda away was to bring him out... It wasn't. They needed tasks accomplished and also wanted to find out who Sidious was. Why not kill two birds with one stone if you can.
You can't have it both ways... You can't go well they wanted to send some of the best away so that Sidious would come out.. and then go.. well just cause they sent away Kenobi doesn't mean he's one of the best. No, that is exactly what it means when we follow your logical line of thinking you tried to present. That is EXACTLY what that means. People view Yoda as above Mace... So essentially they sent their very best away and had no hesitation in doing so. but of course they needed their second best aroudn in case he did come out which is why Mace stayed. Sending General kenobi away (also one of the best) WHILE also having him do a task that mace.. Fisto and many other jedi couldn't get done is a feather in kenobi's cap. No other way to look at it.
You can't use fisto not having enough exposure as a pillar for your argument that he's as good. Doesn't work that way. That might be the worst fallacy you've used yet. We go by feats on this site correct? That is the no. 1 variable in evaluating people in a vs. forum correct? People with less feats and less exposure... well that is just how the cookie crumbles as they won't have the feats to back up their case. You don't get to twist that into.. well if he would've gotten more exposure he would've done more. That is again assuming your own conclusion with facts not in evidence. Doesn't work that way. He wasn't given as many task and all we can gleam from that unless specifically stated otherwise is tha the wasn't as good as kenobi. Kenobi was given the tough jobs and carried them out. Fisto might have been able to but that is pure conjecture on your part. All we can go by is what what we have.. that is our evidence and how we build our case. We don't go... well if I had four arms i'd be the UFC champion is just didn't have that chance... well yeah but who cares I don't.
Using that line of thinking presents a slippery slope and a false dichotomy all wrapped into one. There is zero proof that fisto would've done better at all. In fact, he could've made himself look worse and like a weak feeb had he been given more exposure. I could argue jefferson Farfan (clearly made up) jedi didn't get exposure but ahd he.. he would've kicked ass and been one of the best ever. That isn't a valid argument as it would require somebody prove a negative. I don't need to disprove what Fisto could've done had he been give more exposure, neither do I need to use conjecture to theorize what he could've done. He didn't do it and that is all we can go by.
Bottom line is.. Kenobi has received more accolades... achieved a higher rank in a quicker period of time.... been given more tough task and responsibility.. and has beaten better people and has more feats. There is simply no way around those facts in evidence. No amount of red herrings.. assuming your own conclusion and uisng a false dichotomy can change those facts.
Again I see how Kenobi is compared by fight with Grievous. In that case should we conclude that Ashoka has comparable capabilities to Windu based on fight with Grievous?
Kenobi has defensive style. You will hardly see him overwhelming anyone offensively.
If we judge by defense, then Fisto got killed in seconds by Sidious despite Windu fighting along side him. While Kenobi alone had the longest fight with Anakin. And I will remind that per novel Anakin is the fastest:
"This is Anakin Skywalker:
The most powerful Jedi of his generation. Perhaps of any generation. The fastest. The strongest. An unbeatable pilot. An unstoppable warrior. On the ground, in the air or sea or space, there is no one even close. He has not just power, not just skill, but dash: that rare, invaluable combination of boldness and grace.
He is the best there is at what he does. The best there has ever been. And he knows it".
Last edited by Arhael on Aug 15th, 2013 at 05:37 PM
It's endorsement from a particular character about a particular character... it's certainly not an out-of-universe statement intended to be interpreted literally as you confess... no one denied it's high praise though... it's obvious that Obi-Wan is one of the best duelists in the order... no one ever denied that... but hyperbolic praise doesn't place him above Fisto... who is also wanked by Mace... and Obi-Wan himself...
With respect to combat prowess and station... their military honorifics are irrelevant with respect to their skill as swordsmen... otherwise Tarkin would be their equal in a fight and Finis Valorum, a Supreme Chancellor, would be their superior... Should I have clarified, I thought that was pretty straightforward...
Where...?
Obi-Wan allegedly receiving tougher assignments has no bearing on his skills as a swordsman vis a vis Kit's... which is what we're talking about here...
Comparable in this context meaning similar... similar doesn't mean identical... one can still have an edge and the two remain comparable...
Again, being cunning and a skilled tactician doesn't translate to superiority in the realm of single combat... else Darth "I manipulated you foolz for decades" Sidious would be unbeatable... and Mace "lol i was one of those foolz!" Windu wouldn't have beaten him... you're grasping at straws here...
Except Sidious, a known threat, was infinitely more dangerous than Grievous... and as has been proven, Obi-Wan wasn't sent after Grievous because he was the best fighter... but because he was cunning and had the most experience with Grievous...
They sent their very best away to lure out Sidious... they kept their 2nd best as a failsafe just in case Sidious arrived... and then they sent after Grievous the guy who has more experience than any other living Jedi fighting the cyborg... Meaning the Jedi's ultimate concern was Sidious... not Grievous... else they would have sent Mace or Yoda after him... compared to his Master, Grievous is simply a nonfactor...
Nothing you said contradicts my proven point: Kit not being selected to go after Grievous in no way reflects inferiority as a duelist compared to Obi-Wan...
This is pretty stupid, actually... the fallacy of blindly using feats has been debunked thoroughly... We knew per narration for years that Marka Ragnos was the most powerful of the ancient Sith despite his total lack of observable combat feats... making him more powerful than Naga Sadow and Ludo Kressh, whom we have seen fight...
If we had nothing by which to compare X with Y, then yes feats would have to suffice... but we know Obi-Wan and Kit were both Jedi Masters of the High Council... we know they can tool Grievous... we know both are considered among the very best swordsmen... We both know per George that neither of them can even compete with Sidious...
But what's more, we know that Kit was at one time Obi-Wan's better... despite his relatively insignificant exposure... We also know Obi-Wan himself considers Kit to be one of the best swordsmen ever...
In other words, the use of blind feats is debunked by canon itself... otherwise Ahsoka would be more powerful than Kit, Saesee, Agen, and the other Council Masters simply because we see her fight a lot more than we see them... ergo she has more and varied feats from which to draw...
You can pretend that Kit's some obscure character and I'm groping in the dark for comparisons... but that's simply not true... he has comparable feats (though much fewer in number)... he has comparable accolades... he is a Master like Obi-Wan and a member of the Council... who are considered the best of the order's fighters...
Bottom line really is... Fisto has received comparable accolades... some of them by Obi-Wan himself... Fisto performs superbly against Grievous, just like Obi-Wan... Fisto was confirmed to be Obi-Wan's better in the past, precluding the argument that he simply can't be better due to Obi-Wan's greater exposure... and Obi-Wan has simply never been noted, to my knowledge, to be that good that he simply overshadows everyone....
Obi-Wan may very well be better... but he's not that much better... and them's the facts, Jack.
Had to snip your last excerpt to satisfy the character limit...
Well if your whole argument this whole time has been Kenobi isn't significantly better... then I agree and have done so all along. I thought you were arguing that they are equals, which I don't agree with at all. So, it seems we really aren't that far apart on our thoughts. However, I'll just comment on a few things.
Being a higher rank in the military and being put in charge of forces can only be described as better than not being. It's really that simple. You act like being cunning and tactical aren't things that can decide a one on one saber battle. Is that your claim? I certainly hope not and doubt you would take such a stance. Thus, if Kenobi his fisto decisive superior in those areas, while being equal in sabers (dont' totally agree but they are peers).. then that would make the difference pretty much each and every time.
Shit, Yoda was in charge of military incursions throughout the AOTC and the clone wars. Thus, commanding forces and putting in charge of them isn't something reserved for the so so not important characers in the mythos. It clearly means something and that something fisto doesn't have.
You say allegedly given more task... there is no allegation there only facts. Kenobi has been given tougher assignments and put in charge of forces that Fisto never has. You can argue it means very little in a saber fight, but clearly it's better to be given those tasks by your superiors than to not be. No way around that.
You missed then point... nobody is saying Fisto has no feats... What you're arguing though.. is to extrapolate on what he does have and turn that into what he could've done had he been given a chance. Needless to say, and you know this, that is a fallacy and not sound thinking. There is no way to deduce what he could've done, which is why we go by what hey ACTUALLY did. What somebody actually did exponentially counts for more than what ifs. We go by feats on this forum.. that is the no. 1 variable in determining power. You can try and wish and believe fisto could've done more had he been given the chance.. but he wasn't and kenobi was. It's really and truly that simple. kenobi has the better feats.. better narration and achieved a higher rank in a shorter time. No amount of fallacies, what ifs can change that.
BTW stop using a SPARRING match among FRIENDS as proof of anything. I feel like Allen Iverson here and going "Practice.. are we really talking about practice here" ?
Aug 15th, 2013 04:20 PM
