Darth Malgus vs Ki Adi Mundi

Avatar image for thevivas
TheVivas

21076

Forum Posts

58734

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#1  Edited By TheVivas
No Caption Provided

vs

No Caption Provided

-Fight takes place outside the Jedi Temple

-Morals on, in character

-Both fighters have basic knowledge of each other

-Win by death, KO, incapacitation

Who wins?

Avatar image for thevivas
TheVivas

21076

Forum Posts

58734

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Avatar image for icecold14
icecold14

6767

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

well from what i seen i see Ki Adi Mundi taking most of the wins 6/10

Avatar image for shootingnova
ShootingNova

25785

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Ki-Adi is actually underrated. He at least rivals Malgus in speed, exceeds him in agility, would likely not be overwhelmed in strength, is noticeably more skilful, and at least comparable in power (though Malgus is more violent). The only area where Malgus is unquestionably superior is resiliency.

Avatar image for icecold14
icecold14

6767

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for deactivated-5e8a1f5fafc4e
deactivated-5e8a1f5fafc4e

26473

Forum Posts

2126

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Backing Mundi 7-8/10, Malgus getting some wins solely because of his skill and potency with Force lightning.

Avatar image for jkbart
JKBart

633

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Mundi has a decent, very clear skill advantage against Malgus. His martial skill and general lightsaber mastery simply surpass Malgus in virtually every category. While his physical attributes are inferior (particularly strength), the ability to utilize strength properly to overpower an opponent is simply a part of properly centered technique and general martial ability in utilizing it to maximize its efficiency in combat. Mundi is more skilled and seasoned in his lightsaber mastery, he is simply a better duelist, and that lowers Malgus's possibilities of utilizing more of his strength advantage - at least, in general, it should work that way. With letality of lightsaber hits and Malgus's armor offering no specific protection against them, their constitution just doesn't matter.

Still, while Malgus is approachable for Mundi, I believe Malgus to be more powerful in the Force overall. Yes, Mundi achieved impressive telekinetic showings while wounded, but Malgus utilized extremely powerful telekinesis, even with mortal effects against other Force users while extremely wounded by Shan on Alderaan, and the rest of their showings are similiar, or suggest Malgus's advantage, although if you stand by the theory it's the benefit of Malgus's better resilience, I can't logically discuss against it, as it's equally legit theory. With the Force's tie to life it's legitimate to imply that with wounds disrupting life's flow within the person, the Force's flow is also disrupted. Of course, the ability to mentally draw on the pain, user's perception of the pain is equally important, as it is the mind that is the key when regarding Force abilities, so it's just partial indication - but in Malgus's state even that part makes it highly suggestive.

It doesn't matter much though. Even though I believe Malgus to be clearly more powerful, more versatile, his advantage isn't large enough to win directly via Force abilities. Sure, his destructive potential can aid him when TK'ing Mundi in moment of weakness and imbalance, but given Mundi's better martial skill and being clearly superior to his opponent, it's unlikely that Malgus can find such a moment.

I will give Mundi 7/10.

Avatar image for shootingnova
ShootingNova

25785

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@jkbart: The Third Lesson indicated that Malgus was still able to draw upon his pain from the wounds Satele inflicted upon him so as to support and then blow away falling rubble consisting of parts of two buildings.

Avatar image for georgewbush
GeorgeWBush

12638

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Malgus takes this in a good fight

He's more powerful, has better combat TK feats, he's just as fast, and considerably stronger.

I'm not seeing where people are claiming Mundi is "more skilled", has he ever beaten anyone actually? He's fought evenly with Ventress for a few scans, lost to Grievous, and killed fodder droids/clones. But has he ever actually beaten anyone to suggest he'd do anything more than put up a good fight?

I

Avatar image for shootingnova
ShootingNova

25785

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@burnface said:

Malgus takes this in a good fight

He's more powerful, has better combat TK feats, he's just as fast, and considerably stronger.

You more or less brought up the same point twice just to accentuate Malgus's edges.


I'm not seeing where people are claiming Mundi is "more skilled", has he ever beaten anyone actually? He's fought evenly with Ventress for a few scans, lost to Grievous, and killed fodder droids/clones. But has he ever actually beaten anyone to suggest he'd do anything more than put up a good fight?

Obviously you wouldn't see where Ki-Adi is more skilful, because you couldn't see the context in his showings and immediately decided that his loss to Grievous made him automatically inferior to Malgus. The fact that Ki-Adi lasted the longest out of the group against Grievous, and deprived the General of one of his three blades whilst contending against him for a considerable amount of time, is an impressive showing considering that Ki-Adi was already exhausted from a prior battle, was unfamiliar with Grievous's hybrid unorthodox style (whereas Grievous knew his Ataru), and his Ataru form is not very well suited to combating somebody with multiple lightsabers, as was with the case with Grievous.

Malgus has no showings of that class, so yes, Ki-Adi is more skilful.

Avatar image for georgewbush
GeorgeWBush

12638

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11  Edited By GeorgeWBush

I never implied his loss to Grievous made him less skillfull than Malgus, only that I was curious to see who he's actually beaten.

@shootingnova said:
@burnface said:

Malgus takes this in a good fight

He's more powerful, has better combat TK feats, he's just as fast, and considerably stronger.

You more or less brought up the same point twice just to accentuate Malgus's edges.

I'm not seeing where people are claiming Mundi is "more skilled", has he ever beaten anyone actually? He's fought evenly with Ventress for a few scans, lost to Grievous, and killed fodder droids/clones. But has he ever actually beaten anyone to suggest he'd do anything more than put up a good fight?

Obviously you wouldn't see where Ki-Adi is more skilful, because you couldn't see the context in his showings and immediately decided that his loss to Grievous made him automatically inferior to Malgus. The fact that Ki-Adi lasted the longest out of the group against Grievous, and deprived the General of one of his three blades whilst contending against him for a considerable amount of time, is an impressive showing considering that Ki-Adi was already exhausted from a prior battle, was unfamiliar with Grievous's hybrid unorthodox style (whereas Grievous knew his Ataru), and his Ataru form is not very well suited to combating somebody with multiple lightsabers, as was with the case with Grievous.

Malgus has no showings of that class, so yes, Ki-Adi is more skilful.

Malgus holding his own against HoT/Barsenthor is more impressive than Mundi losing to Grievous. The fact that Malgus can hold his own with two of the most Powerful Jedi, is at least equal or above anything Mundi has shown.

Avatar image for shootingnova
ShootingNova

25785

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#12  Edited By ShootingNova

@burnface:

Malgus holding his own against HoT/Barsenthor is more impressive than Mundi losing to Grievous. The fact that Malgus can hold his own with two of the most Powerful Jedi, is at least equal or above anything Mundi has shown.

We have no idea how much power was incorporated into that, and that's pretty stupid. Malgus briefly overpowering the Jedi with his powers (or the Sith) indicates that he is well above Vitiate, which is nonsense (and several canonical sources have placed Vitiate as the superior, as he should be). So those are inconsistent showings, which is commonplace in the TOR period.

Avatar image for georgewbush
GeorgeWBush

12638

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13  Edited By GeorgeWBush

@shootingnova said:

@burnface:

Malgus holding his own against HoT/Barsenthor is more impressive than Mundi losing to Grievous. The fact that Malgus can hold his own with two of the most Powerful Jedi, is at least equal or above anything Mundi has shown.

We have no idea how much power was incorporated into that, and that's pretty stupid. Malgus briefly overpowering the Jedi with his powers (or the Sith) indicates that he is well above Vitiate, which is nonsense (and several canonical sources have placed Vitiate as the superior, as he should be). So those are inconsistent showings, which is commonplace in the TOR period.

That feat was likely only achieved after he gained "oneness" , and it is not as impressive as Vitiate taking out that strike team unamped. There is no comparison between the force power of Vitiate and Malgus, and Vitiate's superior feat has no bearing on Malgus's own ability and neither does your disavowal of that feat. Don't you usually rally against "inconsistent showings" in the SW mythos to begin with, how is it an "inconsistent feat" for Malgus when Mundi's feat with Grievous when he's (half tired) in Tartakovsky CW can be pointed to as just as "inconsistent" due to his lack other dueling feats and the nature of Tartakovsky CW which you've criticized.

Avatar image for deactivated-5e8a1f5fafc4e
deactivated-5e8a1f5fafc4e

26473

Forum Posts

2126

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@burnface: Don't you usually rally against "inconsistent showings" in the SW mythos to begin with, how is it an "inconsistent feat" for Malgus when Mundi's feat with Grievous when he's (half tired) in Tartakovsky CW can be pointed to as just as "inconsistent" due to his lack other dueling feats and the nature of Tartakovsky CW which you've criticized.

If Mundi lacks other dueling feats, then there's nothing to contradict the Grievous fight - so how could it be inconsistent?

Avatar image for shootingnova
ShootingNova

25785

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#15  Edited By ShootingNova

@burnface:

1. Malgus's Oneness was only short-lived (as with all instances), and the idea of Malgus achieving Oneness through the dark side is again, just appalling writing.

2. Vitiate never fought that strike team. Did you even play the game?

3. Yes, there is a comparison, because the HoT alone defeated Vitiate in combat and was able to not get wrecked by his powers. Malgus sending him and the Barsen'thor flying with his powers is nonsense.

4. I criticized nothing, and why in the world would it be inconsistent if Ki-Adi has no other feats to contradict it?

And you still have no proof that this is a valid skill showing. It's inconsistent to begin with, and Malgus appeared to be showing off power at least as much as skill. Malgus has only beaten featless opponents. Some of them are notable fighters, but that hardly puts Malgus ahead of Ki-Adi in skill.

Avatar image for ssjdarthplagueis
SSJDarthPlagueis

2750

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16  Edited By SSJDarthPlagueis

Malgus. But not sure on the majority on this. Could go either way imo.

Avatar image for dominis
DOMINIS

167

Forum Posts

200

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@burnface:

1. Malgus's Oneness was only short-lived (as with all instances), and the idea of Malgus achieving Oneness through the dark side is again, just appalling writing.

2. Vitiate never fought that strike team. Did you even play the game?

3. Yes, there is a comparison, because the HoT alone defeated Vitiate in combat and was able to not get wrecked by his powers. Malgus sending him and the Barsen'thor flying with his powers is nonsense.

4. I criticized nothing, and why in the world would it be inconsistent if Ki-Adi has no other feats to contradict it?

And you still have no proof that this is a valid skill showing. It's inconsistent to begin with, and Malgus appeared to be showing off power at least as much as skill. Malgus has only beaten featless opponents. Some of them are notable fighters, but that hardly puts Malgus ahead of Ki-Adi in skill.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't you used Malgus's performance against the strike team in vs threads?

Regardless, I'm not sure the feat is exactly "invalid," considering the emphasis placed on it. Inconsistent? Sure. I view it as a one off feat, similiar to Anakin's easy defeat of Dooku once he focused his rage with clarity. To me, they are both one-off feats and shouldn't be used in vs threads unless specified that they are in the same state of mind, but the feats are demonstrations of sheer raw power and what they are capable of under very rare circumstances. I agree that it was bad writing, but it's not something that I would consider as what I call 'ignorant writing.' Ignorant writing is when someone like Hondo can hold his own against Skywalker with there being no explanation as to how a random mook can fight someone who has superhuman speed and reflexes/battle precognition (a being capable of seeing things before they happen and seeing/perceiving time in slow motion). At least with Malgus's performance we're given an explanation, which indicates that the writer is at least aware that Malgus shouldn't be able to pull off a stunt like that under normal circumstance, regardless of it being a horrible explanation.

Also, Vitiate isn't much of a combatant to begin with. He relies on his powers to overwhelm or keep his opponents at a distance. If, however, a combatant can defend against Vitiate's offensive force attacks then Vitiate is very prone to being defeated even if his opponent isn't as powerful as he is, so a comparison between him and Malgus as far as combat is like comparing apples to oranges. Vitiate is confirmed as being more powerful than Malgus, but that quote which confirms Vitiate's superiority doesn't apply to how well they could do against the same opponent since their approach as far as combat is a bit different. Furthermore, Malgus sending both HoT and the Barsen'thor flying doesn't exactly contradict the fact that Vitiate is a more powerful force user. Savage has sent both Skywalker and Kenobi flying more than once, whereas Dooku never has, but that doesn't mean Savage is more powerful than Dooku when we consider the very difference circumstances regarding their respective performances against the same duo. Besides, we don't know what all took place during Vitiate's fight with HoT, considering a large portion of it takes place during game play. IMO, Vitiate has a better display of power than Malgus's one-time feat of briefly overpowering the jedi with his powers when he [Vitiate] dominated a group of the orders best with two force two attacks, without even being touched by his opponents.

Overall, though, I get your point about it being useless in a vs match. However, I'd like to see a case about Mundi being comparable to Malgus in the force.

Avatar image for pharoh_atem
Pharoh_Atem

45284

Forum Posts

10114

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 13

Malgus.

Avatar image for shootingnova
ShootingNova

25785

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@dominis:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't you used Malgus's performance against the strike team in vs threads?

No, I haven't, but if I did, it would have been long ago and it isn't my standpoint now.

Regardless, I'm not sure the feat is exactly "invalid," considering the emphasis placed on it. Inconsistent? Sure. I view it as a one off feat, similiar to Anakin's easy defeat of Dooku once he focused his rage with clarity. To me, they are both one-off feats and shouldn't be used in vs threads unless specified that they are in the same state of mind, but the feats are demonstrations of sheer raw power and what they are capable of under very rare circumstances. I agree that it was bad writing, but it's not something that I would consider as what I call 'ignorant writing.' Ignorant writing is when someone like Hondo can hold his own against Skywalker with there being no explanation as to how a random mook can fight someone who has superhuman speed and reflexes/battle precognition (a being capable of seeing things before they happen and seeing/perceiving time in slow motion). At least with Malgus's performance we're given an explanation, which indicates that the writer is at least aware that Malgus shouldn't be able to pull off a stunt like that under normal circumstance, regardless of it being a horrible explanation.

If it's inconsistent, it would be invalid. And I think that does qualify for ignorant writing because clearly the writer had no idea how Oneness could be attained.

Also, Vitiate isn't much of a combatant to begin with. He relies on his powers to overwhelm or keep his opponents at a distance. If, however, a combatant can defend against Vitiate's offensive force attacks then Vitiate is very prone to being defeated even if his opponent isn't as powerful as he is, so a comparison between him and Malgus as far as combat is like comparing apples to oranges. Vitiate is confirmed as being more powerful than Malgus, but that quote which confirms Vitiate's superiority doesn't apply to how well they could do against the same opponent since their approach as far as combat is a bit different. Furthermore, Malgus sending both HoT and the Barsen'thor flying doesn't exactly contradict the fact that Vitiate is a more powerful force user. Savage has sent both Skywalker and Kenobi flying more than once, whereas Dooku never has, but that doesn't mean Savage is more powerful than Dooku when we consider the very difference circumstances regarding their respective performances against the same duo. Besides, we don't know what all took place during Vitiate's fight with HoT, considering a large portion of it takes place during game play. IMO, Vitiate has a better display of power than Malgus's one-time feat of briefly overpowering the jedi with his powers when he [Vitiate] dominated a group of the orders best with two force two attacks, without even being touched by his opponents.

Vitiate being defeated wasn't so much the point than that he never managed to ragdoll HoT, and it was HoT alone (and HoT was also hindered since it was on a dark side nexus). Vitiate was weakened but it was still on a dark side nexus which would likely cancel it out. On the other hand, Malgus sending a healthy, unhindered HoT and the Barsen'thor (somebody whose telekinetic feats exceed Malgus's) is certainly nonsense, especially when it can't be seen that Vitiate could do that, or at least, I can't see it.

Savage is an inconsistent character and for that matter, he also threw Dooku across a room. Moreover, throwing TCW Anakin is not an amazing showing because TCW Anakin has few impressive telekinetic feats/is inconsistent as a character in contrast to his EU incarnation and therefore the value of the feat is restricted. Savage would never send EU Anakin flying.

Overall, though, I get your point about it being useless in a vs match. However, I'd like to see a case about Mundi being comparable to Malgus in the force.

Minus the points that we were both discussing, Malgus is more powerful but not such that he could ragdoll Ki-Adi, who has lifted and upturned a large skiff whilst injured.

Avatar image for dominis
DOMINIS

167

Forum Posts

200

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#22  Edited By DOMINIS

@shootingnova said:

@dominis:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't you used Malgus's performance against the strike team in vs threads?

No, I haven't, but if I did, it would have been long ago and it isn't my standpoint now.

Regardless, I'm not sure the feat is exactly "invalid," considering the emphasis placed on it. Inconsistent? Sure. I view it as a one off feat, similiar to Anakin's easy defeat of Dooku once he focused his rage with clarity. To me, they are both one-off feats and shouldn't be used in vs threads unless specified that they are in the same state of mind, but the feats are demonstrations of sheer raw power and what they are capable of under very rare circumstances. I agree that it was bad writing, but it's not something that I would consider as what I call 'ignorant writing.' Ignorant writing is when someone like Hondo can hold his own against Skywalker with there being no explanation as to how a random mook can fight someone who has superhuman speed and reflexes/battle precognition (a being capable of seeing things before they happen and seeing/perceiving time in slow motion). At least with Malgus's performance we're given an explanation, which indicates that the writer is at least aware that Malgus shouldn't be able to pull off a stunt like that under normal circumstance, regardless of it being a horrible explanation.

If it's inconsistent, it would be invalid. And I think that does qualify for ignorant writing because clearly the writer had no idea how Oneness could be attained.

Also, Vitiate isn't much of a combatant to begin with. He relies on his powers to overwhelm or keep his opponents at a distance. If, however, a combatant can defend against Vitiate's offensive force attacks then Vitiate is very prone to being defeated even if his opponent isn't as powerful as he is, so a comparison between him and Malgus as far as combat is like comparing apples to oranges. Vitiate is confirmed as being more powerful than Malgus, but that quote which confirms Vitiate's superiority doesn't apply to how well they could do against the same opponent since their approach as far as combat is a bit different. Furthermore, Malgus sending both HoT and the Barsen'thor flying doesn't exactly contradict the fact that Vitiate is a more powerful force user. Savage has sent both Skywalker and Kenobi flying more than once, whereas Dooku never has, but that doesn't mean Savage is more powerful than Dooku when we consider the very difference circumstances regarding their respective performances against the same duo. Besides, we don't know what all took place during Vitiate's fight with HoT, considering a large portion of it takes place during game play. IMO, Vitiate has a better display of power than Malgus's one-time feat of briefly overpowering the jedi with his powers when he [Vitiate] dominated a group of the orders best with two force two attacks, without even being touched by his opponents.

Vitiate being defeated wasn't so much the point than that he never managed to ragdoll HoT, and it was HoT alone (and HoT was also hindered since it was on a dark side nexus). Vitiate was weakened but it was still on a dark side nexus which would likely cancel it out. On the other hand, Malgus sending a healthy, unhindered HoT and the Barsen'thor (somebody whose telekinetic feats exceed Malgus's) is certainly nonsense, especially when it can't be seen that Vitiate could do that, or at least, I can't see it.

Savage is an inconsistent character and for that matter, he also threw Dooku across a room. Moreover, throwing TCW Anakin is not an amazing showing because TCW Anakin has few impressive telekinetic feats/is inconsistent as a character in contrast to his EU incarnation and therefore the value of the feat is restricted. Savage would never send EU Anakin flying.

Overall, though, I get your point about it being useless in a vs match. However, I'd like to see a case about Mundi being comparable to Malgus in the force.

Minus the points that we were both discussing, Malgus is more powerful but not such that he could ragdoll Ki-Adi, who has lifted and upturned a large skiff whilst injured.

1) Maybe it was someone else.

2) The point I'm trying to make is that the writer acknowledged that it's not something Malgus could accomplish any time he wants, similar to Anakin not being able to down Dooku in seconds any time he wants. Whether or not the writer has a full grasp of how the force works or whether is was a stupid explanation, an explanation was at least given nonetheless. So, no, the writer wasn't exactly ignorant regarding what Malgus would be normally capable of achieving under normal circumstances.

We're using the term invalid differently it seems. What I mean is, I could easily make a thread using Malgus in his one-time rare state in a vs thread, just as I would be able to with Anakin when he's using his rage and focusing it with a clear mind as he did in his final duel with Dooku. With someone like Hondo, however, I can't make a vs thread and claim that he would stand a chance against someone like Malgus just because he held his own against Anakin due to the fact that we were given no explanation as to how Hondo was able to challenge Anakin; it's like the writer was ignorant on the advantage a force user has with respect to combat, which is a pretty consistent them (such as easily blocking and outpacing multiple blaster bolts at once).

3) A large portion of the fight takes place during game play, so you don't know what all took place. And, again, we are given an explanation for Malgus being capable of the feat, because the writer acknowledged the fact that it's not something Malgus is capable of achieving unless under a very rare condition, which in turn does not make Malgus a more powerful force user than Vitiate. You are making a big deal over a FP that happened under a very, very rare circumstance, and just not liking the explanation we are given. All that matters is you can dismiss the feat (unless it's specified in the OP).

4)Unless we are separating canon from legends then I don't see why you're treating Anakin as different characters. If we are discussing EU then there is no reason to exclude Anakin's EU feats, considering they are consistent enough to include them, unless you do so with all characters, which you don't, considering your respect thread of Dooku includes his TCW feats. Do you apply the same standards regarding the movies, which has Yoda seemingly struggling to pull off low level TK? Because if you don't, then I don't see much of a difference, which is a form of double standards which I have a low tolerance for, and probably won't take you seriously if that's your style of debating, which is a shame because you are a very knowledgeable and well respected debater here.

I'm discussing EU here, so yes, if Savage can hurl TCW Anakin around in a fit of rage then he could do the same to EU Anakin since they are the same character. Also, Anakin does have a decent amount of TK showings in the series.

Savage isn't so much of an inconsistent character. His anger has a lot to do with how much power he can call on, similar to how Anakin's power works in just about every source he appears in, whether it's the movies, EU, or the series.

5)I get your point as far as the feat not being applicable in a vs thread for the most part. I just don't see a reason for the unnecessary complaints regarding a few inconsistent feats from Malgus.

I never said Malgus could ragdoll Mundi, however, you made the notion that they are comparable in power, which I'd like to see a case being made for that claim. I think Malgus has displayed enough raw power that it'd give him a solid victory, mainly his lightning, which was potent enough to kill force users who managed to topple two buildings. Not to mention that Malgus's has greater TK feats than Mundi.

Avatar image for shootingnova
ShootingNova

25785

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@dominis:

The point I'm trying to make is that the writer acknowledged that it's not something Malgus could accomplish any time he wants, similar to Anakin not being able to down Dooku in seconds any time he wants. Whether or not the writer has a full grasp of how the force works or whether is was a stupid explanation, an explanation was at least given nonetheless. So, no, the writer wasn't exactly ignorant regarding what Malgus would be normally capable of achieving under normal circumstances.

The writer was being ignorant in the sense that his explanation was ignorant. That's all.

We're using the term invalid differently it seems. What I mean, is I could easily make a thread using Malgus in his one-time rare state in a vs thread, just as I would be able to with Anakin when he's using his rage and focusing it with a clear mind as he did in his final duel with Dooku. With someone like Hondo, however, I can't make a vs thread and claim that he would stand a chance against someone like Malgus just because he held his own against Anakin do to the fact that we were given no explanation as to how Hondo was able to challenge Anakin; it's like the writer was ignorant on the advantage with respect to combat, which is a pretty consistent them (such as easily blocking and outpacing multiple blaster bolts at once).

I consider both feats invalid. In one, we are given an explanation, which is probably better than nothing, but the explanation still doesn't make any sense so it would be tantamount to not giving an explanation.

The latter case with Hondo (and then there's Clovis) vs Anakin doesn't need to be addressed.

Majority of the fight takes place during game play, so you don't know what all took place. And, again, we are given an explanation for Malgus being capable of the feat, because the writer acknowledged the fact that it's not something Malgus is capable of achieving unless under a very rare condition, which in turn does not make Malgus a more powerful force user than Vitiate. You are making a big deal over a FP that happened under a very, very rare circumstance, and just not liking the explanation we are given. All that matters is you can dismiss the feat (unless it's specified in the OP).

No, I'm really not. I made one point, one line. That was not a big deal. You chose to turn it into two paragraphs.

So if we both agree that the feat is to be dismissed, then that's the end of it.

Unless we are separating canon from legends then I don't see why you're treating Anakin as different characters. If we are discussing EU then there is no reason to exclude Anakin's EU feats, considering they are consistent enough to include them, unless you do so with all characters, which you don't, considering your respect thread of Dooku includes his TCW feats. Do you apply the same standards regarding the movies, which has Yoda seemingly struggling to pull off low level TK? Because if you don't, then I don't see much of a difference, which is a form of double standards which I have a low tolerance for, and probably won't take you seriously if that's your style of debating, which is a shame because you are a very knowledgeable and well respected debater here.

I'm discussing EU here, so yes, if Savage can hurl TCW Anakin around in a fit of rage then he could do the same to EU Anakin since they are the same character. Also, Anakin does have a decent amount of TK showings in the series.

Savage isn't so much of an inconsistent character. His anger has a lot to do with how much power he can call on, similar to how Anakin's power works in just about every source he appears in, whether it's the movies, EU, or the series.

Of course I'm separating legends from canon. That's why they were separated to begin with - because they are completely different timelines.

I'm not treating Anakin as a different character. I'm saying Anakin in TCW is inconsistent and the showing is not always directly translatable to the EU for that reason (unless you want me to believe that Clovis or Hondo could compete with EU Anakin). Of course there's instances where they are directly translatable, because the Anakin in TCW is intended to be a representation of the same character from the EU. What I said was that Anakin in TCW has a number of inconsistencies which are very similar to Malgus's inconsistencies, which we were just discussing.

What decent TK feats does Anakin have in the series? At best he lifted some large chunks of rock that buried him, unless I'm missing something (which I could be, because I don't follow the series and watch every episode). That does not compare with Anakin manipulating Conqueror-class dreadnaughts as a padawan or any of the other showings he has. There's a scene when Savage drops a small platform and Anakin and Obi-Wan couldn't even lift it or move it aside.

Since when has Dark Rage increased your power? Anakin's power can be hindered due to his emotions interfering, which is not the same as being angry allowing you to draw upon greater power. But if you really wanted to make the case, I can concede because the way Savage is written in TCW seems as if he should be something of a special character whose anger dictates his power levels.

I get your point as far as the feat not being applicable in a vs thread for the most part. I just don't see a reason for the unnecessary complaints regarding a few inconsistent feats from Malgus.

I only made a line. But anyhow, let's stop discussing this so there won't be anymore complaints.

I never said Malgus could ragdoll Mundi, however, you made the notion that they are comparable in power, which I'd like to see a case being made for that claim. I think Malgus has displayed enough raw power that it'd give him a solid victory, mainly his lightning, which was potent enough to kill force users who managed to topple two buildings. Not to mention that Malgus's has greater TK feats than Mundi.

Our usages of the term "comparable" seem to be different as well. I usually refer to somebody being comparable when they won't get beaten by the opposition due to the Force.

Avatar image for dominis
DOMINIS

167

Forum Posts

200

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#24  Edited By DOMINIS

@shootingnova:

It's still an explanation, and something the writer acknowledges as being beyond what Malgus is normally capable of. You not liking the explanation or it not making sense is beside the point. With the Hondo incident, it's like the writers forgot Anakin was a force user. There is a big difference in both situations, and you know it.

Do you separate legends from canon or not? Why are you running off on Anakin not being consistent with his EU version, and declaring that you don't treat them as separate characters if you do? That doesn't make too much sense at all. As far as Clovis and Hondo competing with EU Anakin, they shouldn't even be competing with TCW Anakin. It's inconsistent period. And again, I'll ask, do you use this same standard regarding the movies? Because I could name a ton of inconsistencies between the movie feats and EU feats. I'm well aware that legends is no longer apart of official canon, but that's not to say official canon can't be included in the legends timeline, especially for the purpose of a vs forum. Don't tell me you don't include canon, otherwise you wouldn't include movie feats or the series feats in favor of your arguments.

Anakin has easily dominated Ventress with TK just by getting angry; he's bended metal supports polls, which were strong enough to support an entire building in under water pressures, causing the entire structure to collapse; he's redirected an avalanche of free falling huge boulders. In fact, while not a demonstration of TK, Anakin is the only opponent Dooku has faced in the series, other than an angry Savage, who hasn't been outright ragdolled by Dooku.

You have to be trolling me on the rage. Drawing on rage has always allowed a force user to draw more heavily on their force reserves or untapped power. That's the very reason Sidious was trying to goad Maul into a fit of rage on Hypori, which did, in fact, allow Maul to move at speeds and amped his strength at a higher level than ever before, despite being weakened and deprived of food for weeks. Anakin killed Dooku in seconds via rage, and is the only time he gives Dooku a struggle in their fights (when fighting alongside Kenobi, Anakin tries to control his anger, and is usually a lesser threat to the count). Ferus Olin cracked open the ground beneath him and nearly destroyed an entire building just by drawing his rage, IIRC. Savage consistently ragdolls powerful force users in fits of rage. Ventress dominated both Anakin and Kenobi at the same time in a fit of Rage. Heck, Mace invented vapaad for the sole purpose of channeling his own dark emotions (rage, anger, etc) for that reason. Palpatine himself constantly encourges and lectures his subordinates about hate, rage, and anger being a gateway to power. It's been a consistent theme of SW since the OT.

I wrote two paragraphs because you wasn't even trying to get your point across properly. Your entire argument was basically "no malgus can't do that because that's not how oneness works, it's bull, Vitiate couldn't ragdoll HoT so Malgus shouldn't be able to either." Unless you can explain your reasoning, then most people are going to take what the writer has established over your word, regardless of whether or not the writers explanation makes any sense. To the average viewer it may make sense unless they know how the force works, and what contradicts how it works. The way I took it was that Malgus allowed himself to be fully consumed by his rage/anger/hatred and was capable of momentarily pulling off feats that he otherwise could not, similar to how Savage powers through just about every opponent he faces, who isn't Sidious that is, when he gets angry. The difference being that Savage is more consistent with it.

Avatar image for shootingnova
ShootingNova

25785

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#25  Edited By ShootingNova

@dominis:

It's still an explanation, and something the writer acknowledges as being beyond what Malgus is normally capable of. You not liking the explanation or it not making sense is beside the point. With the Hondo incident, it's like the writers forgot Anakin was a force user. There is a big difference in both situations, and you know it.

I already answered this. Of course Malgus's instance having an explanation makes it better than the other instance, but the explanation is so distorted and against all the expository writing established not by myself, but by a myriad of other writers, that I just find it tantamount to not having an explanation.

Do you separate legends from canon or not? Why are you running off on Anakin not being consistent with his EU version, and declaring that you don't treat them as separate characters if you do? That doesn't make too much sense at all. As far as Clovis and Hondo competing with EU Anakin, they shouldn't even be competing with TCW Anakin. It's inconsistent period. And again, I'll ask, do you use this same standard regarding the movies? Because I could name a ton of inconsistencies between the movie feats and EU feats. I'm well aware that legends is no longer apart of official canon, but that's not to say official canon can't be included in the legends timeline, especially for the purpose of a vs forum. Don't tell me you don't include canon, otherwise you wouldn't include movie feats or the series feats in favor of your arguments.

I already answered you. Yes, I separate Legends from canon, because that's what it's meant to be. But Legends includes canon anyways.

I said TCW Anakin is often inconsistent with EU Anakin, but because he represents the same character and because he does have feats like stalemating Dooku, of course he's the same character.

You have to be trolling me on the rage. Drawing on rage has always allowed a force user to draw more heavily on their force reserves or untapped power. That's the very reason Sidious was trying to goad Maul into a fit of rage on Hypori, which did, in fact, allow Maul to move at speeds and amped his strength at a higher level than ever before, despite being weakened and deprived of food for weeks. Anakin killed Dooku in seconds via rage, and is the only time he gives Dooku a struggle in their fights (when fighting alongside Kenobi, Anakin tries to control his anger, and is usually a lesser threat to the count). Ferus Olin cracked open the ground beneath him and nearly destroyed an entire building just by drawing his rage, IIRC. Savage consistently ragdolls powerful force users in fits of rage. Ventress dominated both Anakin and Kenobi at the same time in a fit of Rage. Heck, Mace invented vapaad for the sole purpose of channeling his own dark emotions (rage, anger, etc) for that reason. Palpatine himself constantly encourges and lectures his subordinates about hate, rage, and anger being a gateway to power. It's been a consistent theme of SW since the OT.

No, I'm not. Drawing on rage has allowed Force users to allowed them to enhance the way they fight and the way they draw upon the Force in the sense that it bolsters their physical amplifications and their resolve. Maybe the latter does translate to increased power, but that doesn't mean direct improvements in combative telekinesis and related powers.

Your instances with Maul, Anakin etc. all fall under the category of physical improvements. That doesn't contradict what I've said.

IIRC, Ferus only destroyed a room, and he was actively using his power.

Ventress Choking both Anakin and Kenobi at once is pretty stupid to me, and Savage, as I said, seems to be able to draw upon his anger to increased his combative powers, which seems to be special for him. And I already conceded the point if you didn't realize.

You're not following me. What I referred to by "power" was combative displays of telekinesis and other powers, and I have only seen Savage (and some other characters in select instances) gain increased access to such powers after rage enhancements. In most other instances, rage has only amplified physical attributes and resolve.

I was referring to the "Dark Rage" or "Force Rage" ability, by the way, not Savage's rage which appears to dictate his power levels (although he is quite powerful without it anyway). And to my knowledge, when described in sourcebooks, the "Dark Rage" power has no reference to increased combative telekinesis, only increased physical attributes and ferocity and the likes. It's more or less the dark counterpart of Force Valor, which does not increase power either.

EDIT: I could probably concede this point because we were referring to different instances of Rage. You were just referring to something like Savage attaining greater power through rage, whereas I was referring to the Dark Rage power.

I wrote two paragraphs because you wasn't even trying to get your point across properly. Your entire argument was basically "no malgus can't do that because that's not how oneness works, it's bull, Vitiate couldn't ragdoll HoT so Malgus shouldn't be able to either." Unless you can explain your reasoning, then most people are going to take what the writer has established over your word, regardless of whether or not the writers explanation makes any sense. To the average viewer it may make sense unless they know how the force works, and what contradicts how it works. The way I took it was that Malgus allowed himself to be fully consumed by his rage/anger/hatred and was capable of momentarily pulling off feats that he otherwise could not, similar to how Savage powers through just about every opponent he faces, who isn't Sidious that is, when he gets angry. The difference being that Savage is more consistent with it.

How was that my entire argument?

In any case, I'm losing you as to whether you're replying in response to Malgus's case of Oneness, or the case with ragdolling HoT and the Barsen'thor. To begin with, Oneness would only last so long anyway, so unless you're proposing that his Oneness instance still lasted during the TOR fight, then the Oneness is irrelevant at this point. I've already said that we'd be better off without bringing up the Oneness anymore.

As for Malgus being consumed by his rage, that really lacks direct proof at that point (Malgus was hardly blindly enraged at that point like Savage) but I can agree to disagree.

Avatar image for mije_101
Mije_101

1588

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26  Edited By Mije_101

Malgus ragdolls.

Avatar image for dominis
DOMINIS

167

Forum Posts

200

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#27  Edited By DOMINIS

@shootingnova said:

I said TCW Anakin is often inconsistent with EU Anakin, but because he represents the same character and because he does have feats like stalemating Dooku, of course he's the same character.

I'm not trying to make this out into a big deal, but go back and read your response to me about Savage hurling Anakin, and while doing so, keep in mind that you're now telling me that they are the same character.

No, I'm not. Drawing on rage has allowed Force users to allowed them to enhance the way they fight and the way they draw upon the Force in the sense that it bolsters their physical amplifications and their resolve. Maybe the latter does translate to increased power, but that doesn't mean direct improvements in combative telekinesis and related powers.

When they perform far greater TK feats on account of it then, yes, it does.

IIRC, Ferus only destroyed a room, and he was actively using his power.

Regardless, it was something he was capable of doing on account of embracing his rage, which was Palpatine's first lesson on becoming a more powerful force user. It was a display of power that Ferus admitted to never matching until that point--upon embracing his anger/rage.

Ventress Choking both Anakin and Kenobi at once is pretty stupid to me.

It was a one-off feat achieved through a fit a pure rage. Of course, a dark sider always utilizes their negative emotions to harness the force (that's what makes them dark siders), but Ventress's rage at that point was clearly beyond normal and was likely at it's peak, and thus allowed her to tap into powers she otherwise could not.

You're not following me. What I referred to by "power" was combative displays of telekinesis and other powers, and I have only seen Savage (and some other characters in select instances) gain increased access to such powers after rage enhancements. In most other instances, rage has only amplified physical attributes and resolve.

No, I'm following. You're just being selective on what you like and don't like. If rage enhances one's power then TK is included. I've given you examples, but you're just dismissing them on account of the example being either stupid in your opinion, or it not happening in combat situation.

I was referring to the "Dark Rage"

Obviously I wasn't referring the term for the dark sides counter part of force valor.

How was that my entire argument?

Your entire argument for dismissing Malgus's feat.

You made some very good points for Mundi.

In any case, I'm losing you as to whether you're replying in response to Malgus's case of Oneness, or the case with ragdolling HoT and the Barsen'thor. To begin with, Oneness would only last so long anyway, so unless you're proposing that his Oneness instance still lasted during the TOR fight, then the Oneness is irrelevant at this point. I've already said that we'd be better off without bringing up the Oneness anymore.

I agreed with you there. All I'm suggesting is, if you're going to dismiss a feat while debating with someone then you should give an explanation.

As for oneness, when has there been a time limit on how long it could last? It's a very rare state to begin with. Do you recall how long Jacen's oneness lasted, or if there was anything to indicate how long it was?

I've read people argue as if it's a state of power that would have been a permanent one had Malgus lived on, which I don't agree with. In any case, I agree that it's something that shouldn't be used in a vs thread, unless it's to compare the power and feats he achieved in that particular state to another force user who is normally beyond Malgus in power.

As for Malgus being consumed by his rage, that really lacks direct proof at that point (Malgus was hardly blindly enraged at that point like Savage) but I can agree to disagree.

It was just my personal interpretation, not something I expect anyone to take as fact.

I think Revan using both sides of the force simultaneously is just as stupid (if not, stupider). My interpretation of that incident, is that Revan was using negative emotions and channeling it as a weapon of light (which isn't the same as using the dark side), similar to how Mace channels his own inner darkness into a weapon of light in the form of vapaad. However, Revan being a fallible character, he could have mistakenly thought that using one's inner darkness is the same as using the dark side. I have no direct proof but it's the only explanation I could think of that makes sense.

Avatar image for shootingnova
ShootingNova

25785

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#28  Edited By ShootingNova

@dominis:

1. I didn't claim Anakin was a different character, only that he was inconsistent. This is what I said:

I'm not treating Anakin as a different character. I'm saying Anakin in TCW is inconsistent and the showing is not always directly translatable to the EU for that reason (unless you want me to believe that Clovis or Hondo could compete with EU Anakin). Of course there's instances where they are directly translatable, because the Anakin in TCW is intended to be a representation of the same character from the EU. What I said was that Anakin in TCW has a number of inconsistencies which are very similar to Malgus's inconsistencies, which we were just discussing.

2. As far as I know, that's only happened with Savage, Malgus, and Vader. There seems to be a link between those types of characters and how well they can take pain/anger and turn it into something useful.

3. Fair enough.

4. I just see that as an inconsistent feat but to each their own.

5. If it didn't happen in a combat situation that should be fairly pertinent. I can understand why you don't agree with me viewing things as stupid, though, since it's fairly subjective.

6.

Obviously I wasn't referring the term for the dark sides counter part of force valor.

Then this solves all of our discussion. I was referring to Dark Rage, which is Valor's counterpart.

7. Oneness has never lasted a long time, with the exception of when you become one with the Force upon death. Jacen's Oneness only lasted the battle, IIRC, and never have I seen an instance of Oneness that lasted a long time, because that would be extremely stupid for obvious reasons.

8. No, I just chalk that up to Karpyshyn's poor knowledge on the Force, which I've discussed with Silver several times.

Avatar image for lord_tenebrous
Lord_Tenebrous

10357

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Malgus 10/10 in a difficult fight.