@admirallogic said:
@silver2467: I didn't say he was a threat did I? I said he held his own for an extended period of time.
All right, since this is basically a disagreement over phraseological semantics, let's clarify what we mean here so that we avoid further misunderstanding. When I see or use the phrase "hold his own" in a battle setting, I usually pick up the idea that this means there is some amount of challenge involved, as in whoever "holds their own" before losing does still give their opponent at least a moderately tough fight. If you take a different meaning than that, then my mistake. I should let you clarify before responding to your point.
With that said, under the definition of the phrase "hold his own" that I work with, did Maul hold his own, or as you said fight Sidious for an extended period of time? Yes, he did. I never dismissed that. But why did he fight as long as he did? Because Maul can actually tax him in an all-out fight and provide an ample challenge? No, he held his own as long as he did because Sidious was holding back. It was never an all-out fight on Sidious' part, and that alone is why Maul held his ground for as long as he did. We know he was never a real challenge for him because Sidious dominated Maul with the Force like it was a training exercise and still outdueled him while holding back.
@admirallogic said:
If Sidious was truly so great why bother to single them out, wouldn't it be more enjoyable to take out Savage while fighting Maul?
Not sure I follow. What makes taking out Savage while fighting Maul more enjoyable exactly? Why does he need to do that in order to prove he can beat both at once to begin with? The beginning of the duels sees Sidious TKing both of them and relaxing his telekinetic grip just to permit them to draw their weapons. In one sense, he already did handle both of them at once; he just elected not to finish the duel then and there because he liked the prospect of a lightsaber duel. I don't really see the connection here between killing Savage while Maul was still on his feet and Sidious' enjoyment of the fight in any case.
This idea that Sidious had to separate them in order to win has no merit, both because he was holding back, but also because it runs contrary to his other combat showings. In Revenge of the Sith, Sidious was confronted by the Council members, and he killed three of them without anyone, including and especially Mace Windu, being able to protect them. If he can kill Saesee and Agen in a quick blitz, and then strike down Fisto while dueling Mace in simultaneity, I hardly find it a stretch to say that he could beat both Maul and Savage concurrently without too much of a struggle.
@admirallogic said:
I know he was toying with them but I also know, even with him always above them, it took time to actually win. For instance, Sidious compared to a normal jedi councilman is a jaguer to a kitten. Sidious compared to Maul is a dog to a turtle. In one case it takes minimal effort to win but in the other he must use a bit more force.
If you know that Sidious was toying with them, then you just answered your previous question as to why Sidious separated them: he was holding back and treating the duel like a game. Obviously it took time for him to win because he chose not to end the battle from the outset via Force attacks. Your entire argument here is predicated on the idea that if Sidious did notdo something during the duel that that means he could not have, even though you acknowledge his mindset towards the fight and his refraining from abusing his Force attacks. This makes no sense.
To give you a hypothetical analogy to explain the logical gap here, I have never seen Maul telekinetically pull a glass of water to himself so that he could quench his thirst, but does that mean he can't? No, it means we never saw it happen. Maul has extended the reach of his TK onto objects far in excess of the weight and size of a glass of watter; obviously he can do that even though he has never shown to do that to the letter. This is just reasonable extrapolation.
If that analogy is too far afield, then let me give you a more concrete one. In Return of the Jedi, the Emperor blasts Lightning at Luke and said out loud that he intended to kill him. Luke suffered under the barrage of bolts for a minute or two before Anakin/Vader killed the Emperor and saved Luke. So Palpatine failed to kill him. Should I assume then that he couldn't? Of course not. Had it not been for his father, Luke would be dead. The reason he survived is because Palpatine was indignant over Luke's rejection of the dark side and spent his time reprimanding him and punishing him slowly with Lightning for his audacity, which forced Vader to finally choose between his son and the Emperor and afforded Vader the opportunity to kill him. Palpatine failed to kill Luke because he took his sweet time executing him, and yes, that did cost him. But it would be completely unreasonable to infer from that that the Emperor was just too weak to kill Luke or that he absolutely had to kill him slowly.
Running along the same vein, did Sidious have to spend as long as he did fighting the brothers to defeat them? No, not at all. Once again, he had them at his mercy before any of them drew their blades and then gestured with his hands to drop them back to the floor while cackling at them. Later, he KO'd Maul with a telekinetic attack and then, blades initially withdrawn, took his time downing Savage. Then, he allowed Maul to go to Savage's side as he died. Afterwards, according to starwars.com, he fought Maul one on one and was still toying with him even then. After disarming Maul, he decided "I'm done with this," in Filoni's words, and just ragdolled him with the Force.
There is really no reasonable way to interpret this fight as Maul and Savage actually posing a challenge to Sidious or Sidious needing as much time as he spent to defeat them. Everything points to the precise opposite. The episode The Lawless, Darth Maul: Shadow Conspiracy, Dave Filoni (multiple times), and starwars.com all echo one another: Sidious held back the whole time, played around, dominated the fight, and showed himself far and away more powerful than both of them to the extent that he was in a position to beat them without ever drawing his lightsaber. All of this leads me to the conclusion I expressed in the OP: Sidious could end the duel at his leisure, and it would end when he decided to end it, as Filoni commented on the end of the duel.
If you want to discuss exactly how much he was holding back or what degree of pressure the brothers could put on Sidious had he not been restraining himself, the former is impossible to determine accurately, and the latter would probably look like the Jedi Council duel, Kit Fisto in particular. Fisto dueled Sidious for a brief exchange before being cut down. Maul and Savage could probably replicate that, and it fits because Fisto also had one ally left alive to fight with him, Mace Windu. In the case of the Council duel, Sidious was demonstrably not holding back against Saesee, Agen, and Kit; his demeanor was more combative, his facial expressions were fiercer, he snarled angrily instead of laughing, and he wrecked his competition in short order instead of entertaining a protracted duel with them like he did with Maul and Savage. In the duel with the Council members in RotS, starwars.com, the RotS novelization, and Revenge of the Sith: The Visual Dictionary all state that Sidious killed the three Jedi Masters before any of them could react. That would be an example of Sidious when he wanted to cut a duel short rather than amuse himself with his enemies, and he managed to essentially speedblitz three of the most masterful and decorated swordsmen the Jedi Order had ever seen (Revenge of the Sith novelization, Revenge of the Sith: The Visual Dictionary). If we're taking Legends into account, then I would draw attention to Shadow Conspiracy's description of Sidious in his one-on-one with Maul; in the novelization, he gradually amplifies the speed of his blows until Maul can no longer visually track them or react to all of them and is disarmed. That would be our sample of what would've happened if Sidious decided not to "toy with Maul" like starwars.com said, but even if we agree not to assent to Shadow Conspiracy because of its exclusion in current Canon, then we still have Sidious' repeated ragdolling of the brothers. He pins them to a wall, he KOs Maul with a push, and he flings Maul around at the end before afflicting him with Lightning. If Sidious never held back in this duel, then in all probability, he would have cut them down roughly as quickly as the three Council members, and/or he would have incapacitated/killed them with the Force without even the necessity of a lightsaber.
We can continue this discussion, but all I'm doing here really is repeating myself, not offering anything new. So if you still disagree after all of the evidence presented, then fair enough, I guess; we can agree to disagree.
Log in to comment