Luke (post-GrandMaster) vs Revan (post-KotOR)

[SoonerJBD]

You know, I see a lot of attack on the post-ROTJ EU and how everyone is overpowered, but then there's hardly any mention of Nihilus or Vitiate. You know, the guys that drain the life of entire worlds. Or what about Naga Sadow projecting illusions across the galaxy? Or what about Sion? What about Jedi that can create typhoons with the wave of a hand?

 

Face it people, there's OP stuff happening everywhere in Star Wars.

 

And this: "The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force."

 

Right in A New Hope we get a guage of the power of the Force. What we see Luke and Palpatine do is insignificant.

 

I don't limit my criticism to the post ROTJ-EU. I hated the way they wrote Sion and Nihilus in KOTOR 2. The same with Vitiate. It's lazy writing. Don't want to develop a character? Just make him immortal or have him eat worlds. Wait, they did that in KOTOR 2? We'll make the new guy do both! Genius! None of those guys have any character. Theyare just faceless monsters. The best Star Wars villains have interesting back stories, Vader being the most obvious example. Malak was also good. Malgus is good in TOR. Those other three are terrible.

[QuiDonJorn]

...and Revan was better than many of those...call me a fanboy of the original KotOR if you wish, but Revan seemed to be the best of the best for the time period...

 

Nope. ...fanboy.

[Wolfninjajedi]

I don't limit my criticism to the post ROTJ-EU. I hated the way they wrote Sion and Nihilus in KOTOR 2. The same with Vitiate. It's lazy writing. Don't want to develop a character? Just make him immortal or have him eat worlds. Wait, they did that in KOTOR 2? We'll make the new guy do both! Genius! None of those guys have any character. Theyare just faceless monsters. The best Star Wars villains have interesting back stories, Vader being the most obvious example. Malak was also good. Malgus is good in TOR. Those other three are terrible.

 

Yet in the EU, Vader too was very powerful...I mean the guy WILLED himself back to LIFE when he was dead. He killed 5 out of 8 Jedi Masters, who set an ambush for him on Kessel and one of which had a Cortosis Blade that shorted out his saber, he twisted minds and induced fear, use Drain Knowledge, tossed huge ships and knocked over/crushed gigantic sized trees and droids, collasped buildings and surviving for days without food or water, creates a TK shield and then force pushes a large group of men away, etc.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Wolfninjajedi

[Ventessel]

Yet in the EU, Vader too was very powerful...I mean the guy WILLED himself back to LIFE when he was dead. He killed 5 out of 8 Jedi Masters, who set an ambush for him on Kessel and one of which had a Cortosis Blade that shorted out his saber, he twisted minds and induced fear, use Drain Knowledge, tossed huge ships and knocked over/crushed gigantic sized trees and droids, collasped buildings and surviving for days without food or water, creates a TK shield and then force pushes a large group of men away, etc.

 

It's rather irritating that this constant brinkmanship seems to ensue where authors are trying to make their versions of characters more powerful in comparison to other writing. In a sense, I feel that it's allowing those other works and things to retroactively intrude on established characters.

 

Vitiate is almost blatantly a counter to the overpowered Sidious of Dark Empire. He's pretty much a direct expy, albeit with a slightly different modus operandi.

 

The great thing about Nihilus as a character was that he had become so consumed with his dark abilities that he wasn't even a person anymore. He was more akin to a force of nature, and he didn't think like a man anymore. He was just trying to sate his hunger for life on world after world. Power should come at a cost, and not the bogus "I drained a planet of life in a secret ritual to give myself these abilities" cost. The dark side clearly destroys your body and crushes your spirit, it shouldn't constantly be used as a punch card for immortality.

[Wolfninjajedi]

All I am pointing out here is...writers make the character, not the powers. You can have interesting characters with huge power, all it takes is a little thought on the writer's part. Edited March 15, 2013 by Wolfninjajedi

[mattchanner]

am I the only one who will be sad if everything is rewritten?

sure there are plenty of things wrong with the eu. but just starting over is like a spider-man remake.

and if we can change this, why not change this, and this.

 

I cant think of anything more annoying then someone telling a story and then saying "wait! no, thats exactly not what happened let me try again"

 

I would rather keep things as they are then just throw them out the window and start over.

[Wolfninjajedi]

am I the only one who will be sad if everything is rewritten?

sure there are plenty of things wrong with the eu. but just starting over is like a spider-man remake.

and if we can change this, why not change this, and this.

 

I cant think of anything more annoying then someone telling a story and then saying "wait! no, thats exactly not what happened let me try again"

 

I would rather keep things as they are then just throw them out the window and start over.

 

No I will be but if it does happen, then all the work the writer's did is for nothing...also speaking of Spider-Man, he isn't

 

 

Peter Parker anymore, its now Doc Ock who somehow switched bodies with him or something of that nature, don't know the specifics but ya....

 

 

But anyway...they could go a route in which everything stays intact, but we shall see.

[Spartanik]

I don't limit my criticism to the post ROTJ-EU. I hated the way they wrote Sion and Nihilus in KOTOR 2. The same with Vitiate. It's lazy writing. Don't want to develop a character? Just make him immortal or have him eat worlds. Wait, they did that in KOTOR 2? We'll make the new guy do both! Genius! None of those guys have any character. Theyare just faceless monsters. The best Star Wars villains have interesting back stories, Vader being the most obvious example. Malak was also good. Malgus is good in TOR. Those other three are terrible.

I agree with your point totaly. Other than that though, what i liked about KOTOR 2 was the philosofical view

of the force as theme and also the mystery that added to Revan character. Kreia was a wonderfull character too, in contrast of sion and Nihilius.

[Beniboybling]

The great thing about Nihilus as a character was that he had become so consumed with his dark abilities that he wasn't even a person anymore. He was more akin to a force of nature, and he didn't think like a man anymore. He was just trying to sate his hunger for life on world after world. Power should come at a cost, and not the bogus "I drained a planet of life in a secret ritual to give myself these abilities" cost. The dark side clearly destroys your body and crushes your spirit, it shouldn't constantly be used as a punch card for immortality.

This, despite him being immensely powerful, he works, and he works well. This is how the unlimited power of the Force should be displayed, and more importantly he personifies the corrupting nature of the dark side of the Force. He is not a person, he's a symbol, and an awesome one at that.

 

Sion is the same, his immortality came at a terrible cost. Where as the likes of Luke and especially Sidious seem to just click their fingers and become immensely powerful.

 

And I agree concerning Vitiate, he is far too powerful and his presence irks me in many ways. However at least he has been voice/scripted very well. However despite this, their still just pulling the dark side = immortality/invincibility card when this is simply not the case, and could have been done a lot better. In fact I would have preferred their to have been no Emperor at all, and have him simply be a myth to keep the Empire in line.

[SoonerJBD]

Great power doesn't mean a character is bad. It is when the writers make a character ultra-powerful/immortal in lieu of actual character development that bugs me. Vader was the most fleshed out character in the Star Wars universe. The entire story of Star Wars centered on his fall/redemption. That's why it bothers me a bit less when he is doing amazing things.

 

I look at Han Solo as an example. Why do people love him so much? It's not because he is the greatest ever with a blaster pistol. It's his personality. If he were written by an EU author, we would be hammered over the head with how great he was with a blaster pistol and as a pilot. He'd have to shoot the wings off a mosquito with his blaster and navigate an asteroid field while blindfolded so we'd know how ZOMG godmode he was.

 

I'll agree Nihilus was a slightly better character than Vitiate is, if only because they did attach a cost to his power. But he still wasn't as good a character as Malak, in my opinion. You didn't have anything personal against Nihilus because he wasn't a person. You could have replaced him with some sort of natural force and the tension would have been the same. With Malak, there was a back story. There was the tension with him seeking Bastilla as well. You cared about what happened to the characters.

 

I think this is also why people are so enamored with Revan. Whatever your opinion of the character's ability, KOTOR was extremely well-writen. People also attach themselves to the character because he was playable, obviously, but this was true of Meetra Surik as well and she doesn't have the same level of devotion from fans. I think this is because the writing in KOTOR was superior to the sequel.

Edited March 15, 2013 by SoonerJBD

[LadyKulvax]

*snip*

 

Nihilus was supposed to be your mirror, what you would become if you followed him down that same nihilistic path, his backstory is also extremely interesting for a fan of the time.

 

I also totally disagree with the notion that KotOR's writing was superior, it was rather lacklustre and cliche Star Wars, instead of something more original for the IP.

Edited March 15, 2013 by LadyKulvax

[Beniboybling]

I'll agree Nihilus was a slightly better character than Vitiate is, if only because they did attach a cost to his power. But he still wasn't as good a character as Malak, in my opinion. You didn't have anything personal against Nihilus because he wasn't a person. You could have replaced him with some sort of natural force and the tension would have been the same. With Malak, there was a back story. There was the tension with him seeking Bastilla as well. You cared about what happened to the characters.

Agreed, but Malak wasn't designed to fulfill the same purpose as Sion and Nihilus. Those guys were there to scare you, and remind all those dark side lovers how the dark side leads to corruption and consumption. Meanwhile the arrogant, ignorant Jedi Council was designed to make light siders question the light and blind obedience to the Jedi Code. All the while Kreia questioned your own morals and actions. That was the purpose of KOTOR II, to question the essence of Star Wars and make you think.

 

Whereas with KOTOR it was playing on feelings of heroism and adventure, with bad guys and good guys and 'princesses' that need rescuing. It was a typical, and very well executed, Star Wars story. But ultimately the two cannot really be compared because they were both trying to do something different, both pulled them off excellently so IMO they are equal. Which one you see as better depends of what kind of game you like to play.

[BewareTheDonkey]

The bottom line is NO ONE compares to Grand Master Luke. He is basically a force god.

 

You guys can argue who the most powerful Sith ever is, but the most powerful force user ever is not even a debate. Luke wins.

 

If you want to argue the level of canon, remember that nothing but the movies and show are canon.

 

The Old Republic is EU as much as the books or any other video game.

 

Again, Luke is the most powerful force user, period.

[Wolfninjajedi]

The bottom line is NO ONE compares to Grand Master Luke. He is basically a force god.

 

You guys can argue who the most powerful Sith ever is, but the most powerful force user ever is not even a debate. Luke wins.

 

If you want to argue the level of canon, remember that nothing but the movies and show are canon.

 

The Old Republic is EU as much as the books or any other video game.

 

Again, Luke is the most powerful force user, period.

 

1. No that is Sidious

 

2. No its all canon, just on different levels. The only things that aren't canon, are things in N-canon

Edited March 16, 2013 by Wolfninjajedi

[SoonerJBD]

Agreed, but Malak wasn't designed to fulfill the same purpose as Sion and Nihilus. Those guys were there to scare you, and remind all those dark side lovers how the dark side leads to corruption and consumption.

 

But they can't do that if there isn't some humanity to them. We never got any sort of sense of who Nihilus or Sion were BEFORE they turned into oogie-boogie force monsters. In KOTOR, we saw the moment Revan and Malak chose the Star Forge's power and took their definitive steps down the dark path. We understood WHY they chose the dark side.That's what made the big reveal so great. When you confronted Bastilla in the temple under the Star Forge, you had a sense of purpose. You cared. You couldn't really care about Kreia, let alone Nihilus or Sion.

 

I loved both games. I played both a ton on XBox, and I bought them again a few years ago for my PC and played them again. KOTOR II had superior game play. The master classes, the additional power and the ability to train your companions as Jedi was fantastic. But the story was not. It built and built and then just crashed flat when you flew to Malachor V. It was mostly Kreia spouting nonsense.

 

It's not really worth debating. Whichever game or story you preferred, it's hard to argue that Nihilus and Sion had any sort of depth to them as characters. Vitiate is worse. I just wish we could get more character development in lieu of "OMG, the bad guy will eat the whole galaxy for some reason."

[Spartanik]

1. No that is Sidious

 

2. No its all canon, just on different levels. The only things that aren't canon, are things in N-canon

 

Meh when vader killed sidious, it should have remained dead coming back makes the whole point of the saga irrelevant.

Whataver reasons and written plots they can conjure to justify sidious being back and the force brought to balance by anakin, the deed is done vader didnt kill the emperor after all, he didnt destroyed the sith after all. There is no balance to the force, how cant it be? its smells strongly of bad writing. It was a poor decision at the time in my opinion.

Probably more to milk the characters and sell some books, then actualy delivering a good story.

But anycase canon is canon, but there is nothing on the canon that says luke beat revan or otherwise they are of diferent eras after all, so in theory despite luke being depicted as very powerfull, in a fight anything can happen.

 

Acording to the canon wisemans

Barris couldnt defeat ashoka wasnt it? well canon prove them wrong after all.

 

But they can't do that if there isn't some humanity to them. We never got any sort of sense of who Nihilus or Sion were BEFORE they turned into oogie-boogie force monsters. In KOTOR, we saw the moment Revan and Malak chose the Star Forge's power and took their definitive steps down the dark path. We understood WHY they chose the dark side.That's what made the big reveal so great. When you confronted Bastilla in the temple under the Star Forge, you had a sense of purpose. You cared. You couldn't really care about Kreia, let alone Nihilus or Sion.

 

I loved both games. I played both a ton on XBox, and I bought them again a few years ago for my PC and played them again. KOTOR II had superior game play. The master classes, the additional power and the ability to train your companions as Jedi was fantastic. But the story was not. It built and built and then just crashed flat when you flew to Malachor V. It was mostly Kreia spouting nonsense.

 

It's not really worth debating. Whichever game or story you preferred, it's hard to argue that Nihilus and Sion had any sort of depth to them as characters. Vitiate is worse. I just wish we could get more character development in lieu of "OMG, the bad guy will eat the whole galaxy for some reason."

I pretty much feel the same way. KOTOR story made a much better job at explaining it self as story it was much better constructed and fleshed out. I realize KOTOR 2 was trying to show the greyish side of star wars, but that is a complete diferent issue, it doesnt erase that flaw at all. what i feel is kotor 2 story has the potencial to be even better if it had been much better fleshed out, given the nature of the whole theme. But as you say it built and built while it lead to something not palpate, and it ended allmost quite anticlimatic.

 

However one think that amazes me in both games are the voice acting, its sublime.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Spartanik

[Ventessel]

But they can't do that if there isn't some humanity to them. We never got any sort of sense of who Nihilus or Sion were BEFORE they turned into oogie-boogie force monsters. In KOTOR, we saw the moment Revan and Malak chose the Star Forge's power and took their definitive steps down the dark path. We understood WHY they chose the dark side.That's what made the big reveal so great. When you confronted Bastilla in the temple under the Star Forge, you had a sense of purpose. You cared. You couldn't really care about Kreia, let alone Nihilus or Sion.

 

You didn't really need a sense of who Sion or Nihilus were for them to be effective. Nihilus was never meant to be a character you understood, so much as he was almost literally a force of nature, the embodiment of the gaping wound in the Force that you could become if you chose his path. He was both a warning, and a dire threat, but never a sympathetic character. Any attempt to give him humanity would have felt misplaced.

 

Sion was a mystery that you unraveled with each encounter. Powerful, but with great cost attached to that power. He was the tortured apprentice, driven by hatred and anger. Eventually, he became somewhat sympathetic when you finally convinced him to release his hatred for you and for Kreia. His redemption made him understandable, even somewhat pitiful because of the helpless monster he had become.

 

Kreia, on the other hand, was one of the best developed characters I've seen in any fictional setting. She was difficult to understand, and highly manipulative, but once you started to see what she was doing and who she was, it not only connected many of the dots in the story's narrative, but also lent a level of empathy to her character. She was so much more than a cookie-cutter Sith Lord trying to rule the galaxy.

 

The key to writing any good villain is to pick one or two emotions that you want the audience to feel towards them. Malak was easy, it was mainly anger tinged with fear. Fear that he would find you and Bastila, then anger that he had destroyed Taris. As you finally realize who he is, you become filled with the desire for revenge against your traitorous apprentice, who has now captured Bastila. Malak provoked these emotions well, and it was satisfying to kill him.

 

Sion and Nihilus were meant to provoke fear, raw and overwhelming fear. You run from every fight with Sion, and never even come close to Nihilus until the final confrontation with him. Eventually, Sion evokes your pity, however, and it is seen as more of a release when you allow him to die. Nihilus is simply destroyed, because there can be no reasoning with him, no discussions. He's gone beyond simply being a savage monster, and is more akin to a hurricane.

 

Kreia provokes complex emotions. Resentment at being manipulated, curiosity to her motivations, gratitude for her training, etc. The player develops a relationship with her that makes it so that when you do kill her, there's very little anger or malice involved. It feels almost more as though you are fulfilling a duty to her by completing the cycle of her rise and fall as Darth Traya.

 

I loved both games. I played both a ton on XBox, and I bought them again a few years ago for my PC and played them again. KOTOR II had superior game play. The master classes, the additional power and the ability to train your companions as Jedi was fantastic. But the story was not. It built and built and then just crashed flat when you flew to Malachor V. It was mostly Kreia spouting nonsense.

 

The story in KotOR II would have been much better if the ending was finished, I'll admit it kind of kills the thrill to reach Malachor and have everything fall so flat. But you can see the direction it was going, and looking at the cut content really makes you wish they'd finished the game.

[Ventessel]

I look at Han Solo as an example. Why do people love him so much? It's not because he is the greatest ever with a blaster pistol. It's his personality. If he were written by an EU author, we would be hammered over the head with how great he was with a blaster pistol and as a pilot. He'd have to shoot the wings off a mosquito with his blaster and navigate an asteroid field while blindfolded so we'd know how ZOMG godmode he was.

 

Interestingly enough, the "most powerful" characters in Star Wars frequently lose. Sidious is the strongest Sith ever, but Vader strikes him down. Anakin Skywalker is more powerful than Obi-Wan but he loses his duel to Kenobi on Mustafar. Good storytelling allows for upsets in the expected order of things. This is part of why it can be boring to hear people say "No one can ever beat Luke because he's so powerful"... well powerful people lose all the time. They make mistakes, they get tired, they miss a step and get tricked. It's what makes them good characters to explore.

 

Curiously, the most dangerous men I've known were not quite the ones you'd expect. It was never the best marksmen, the quickest in close quarters, etc. but rather the guys who knew just how to position themselves and their weapon for maximum effect, even when technically outnumbered and outgunned, they would still come out on top even when a stock analysis of the situation indicated that they should probably have been killed.

 

Raw power can only take you so far, the real trick is in its implementation and an ability to adapt to changing circumstances and play to your strengths without letting your adversary use his own strength against you. Someone like Han Solo wins fights through cunning, rather than raw power, and he is arguably more dangerous than most force users because of his inherent shrewdness.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Ventessel

[AlexDougherty]

1. No that is Sidious

 

2. No its all canon, just on different levels. The only things that aren't canon, are things in N-canon

 

1. Wrong, while Sidious(Palpatine) was arguably the most powerful Sith He wasn't as powerful as Luke. Sidious said that Vader(Anakin) was potentially more powerful than him. Luke not only inherited that Potential fully, he actually realised it, meaning he was more powerful than Sidious.

 

Sidious may have more skilled at mind manipulation, including battle meditation, and he was definately more skilled at the darkside, but he didn't have the amount of raw power that luke did, it was just Luke couldn't use it as much without going overly aggressive and thus Darkside.

[Beniboybling]

1. Wrong, while Sidious(Palpatine) was arguably the most powerful Sith He wasn't as powerful as Luke. Sidious said that Vader(Anakin) was potentially more powerful than him. Luke not only inherited that Potential fully, he actually realised it, meaning he was more powerful than Sidious.

 

Sidious may have more skilled at mind manipulation, including battle meditation, and he was definately more skilled at the darkside, but he didn't have the amount of raw power that luke did, it was just Luke couldn't use it as much without going overly aggressive and thus Darkside.

I think your misinterpreting what Wolf is saying: that Sidious is canonically the most powerful Sith who ever existed, which is true. He is likely however, not as powerful as Luke. Edited March 16, 2013 by Beniboybling

[Wolfninjajedi]

1. Wrong, while Sidious(Palpatine) was arguably the most powerful Sith He wasn't as powerful as Luke. Sidious said that Vader(Anakin) was potentially more powerful than him. Luke not only inherited that Potential fully, he actually realised it, meaning he was more powerful than Sidious.

 

Sidious may have more skilled at mind manipulation, including battle meditation, and he was definately more skilled at the darkside, but he didn't have the amount of raw power that luke did, it was just Luke couldn't use it as much without going overly aggressive and thus Darkside.

 

Uhh? I was saying that Sidious was the most powerful Sith Lord, I didn't say he was stronger then Luke.

 

But anycase canon is canon, but there is nothing on the canon that says luke beat revan or otherwise they are of diferent eras after all, so in theory despite luke being depicted as very powerfull, in a fight anything can happen.

 

We don't need canon to say who would beat who, for that we look at the characters powers and their feats, what they are able to do etc. In which case Luke > Revan.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Wolfninjajedi

[Ventessel]

We don't need canon to say who would beat who, for that we look at the characters powers and their feats, what they are able to do etc. In which case Luke > Revan.

 

Look over what I said about relative power levels, though, and how the stronger person does not necessarily win.

[Wolfninjajedi]

Look over what I said about relative power levels, though, and how the stronger person does not necessarily win.

 

In this case it does, cause Luke has fought characters much more powerful and better then Revan, and also have done things better in terms of power/skill. The gap between the two is very large.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Wolfninjajedi

[SoonerJBD]

Look over what I said about relative power levels, though, and how the stronger person does not necessarily win.

 

In reality, the winner of any versus duel is the person the author writing the story wants/needs to win. If the story calls for Revan to defeat Vitiate, he will. If it calls for Malgus to defeat Exar Kun, he will. I think that is what you are saying.

 

But that is not how these versus duels work in the forums. And at least when it comes to post-ROTJ Luke Skywalker, we know definitively that he can't lose one of these because the current canon proclaims him the most powerful force user ever. That could change in the next movie or in some future EU canon coming from Disney. But right now, he is untouchable.

[Spartanik]

In this case it does, cause Luke has fought characters much more powerful and better then Revan, and also have done things better in terms of power/skill. The gap between the two is very large.

It doesnt mean anything...

 

We don't need canon to say who would beat who, for that we look at the characters powers and their feats, what they are able to do etc. In which case Luke > Revan.

i disagree with that notion, the powers and their feats arent on the canon? off course they are, bottom line they mean very litle judging only by that. You are atempting to measure something that cant be measured.

What if scenarios can be everything we wish, even based on canon elements, a what if scenarion cant never be canon, or set in stone.

But i understand why it is so. The forumites need something to debate.

Edited March 17, 2013 by Spartanik