Exar Kun vs Darth Maul (TCW Season 7)

Damn, that was quick.

I will get back to you soon.

@Tybalt

That's incorrect. The quote is from the TPM Flapbook, which explicitly says that "Maul is just the apprentice". This is a direct reference to the Rule of Two that Yoda specifies in the film.

That the quote later references the Rule of Two does not mean that a prior part of the passage is referring exclusively to Banite scaling, when the text clearly emphasises otherwise. Again, "ever" is all-encompassing: by definition, it's not limited to a specific time period. The only reason the Rule of Two is even mentioned is to point out that the Master is obviously stronger (i.e. Maul is only the apprentice), so that Maul doing all of these crazy things is the lower limit of what the Jedi can expect.

@I_Like_Chee

That the quote later references the Rule of Two does not mean that a prior part of the passage is referring exclusively to Banite scaling, when the text clearly emphasises otherwise. Again, "ever" is all-encompassing: by definition, it's not limited to a specific time period. The only reason the Rule of Two is even mentioned is to point out that the Master is obviously stronger (i.e. Maul is only the apprentice), so that Maul doing all of these crazy things is the lower limit of what the Jedi can expect.

Yoda directly refers to the Rule of Two in the film, the highest form of canon. Legends then attributes the Rule of Two to Darth Bane, making this Banite scaling according to Legends.

The word "ever" thus falls in line with Banite scaling. Each successive generation is deadlier than the last.

@Tybalt

Yoda directly refers to the Rule of Two in the film, the highest form of canon. Legends then attributes the Rule of Two to Darth Bane, making this Banite scaling according to Legends.

Again, one part later in the source which references the Rule of Two does not mean the prior sentences are all referring to Banite scaling, you haven't provided any rationale for that claim. This isn't some important context which is completely re-defining the meaning of the quote, it's literally in brackets. As I said last post, the sole reason that part is added is to convey that Maul is the lower limit the Jedi are expecting to face.

The word "ever" thus falls in line with Banite scaling. Each successive generation is deadlier than the last.

But it doesn't say Banites, it says the Sith (i.e. the whole group, not just the Banites) are deadlier than "ever" (i.e. it's not just commenting on a power progression from the Banites, it's factoring in all of time).

@I_Like_Chee The films are G-Canon. The TPM Flapbook is supplementary material to The Phantom Menace, and is a Legends C-Canon source. If G-Canon refers to the Rule of Two and then Legends attributes the Rule of Two to Darth Bane then the Legends C-Canon source thus follows Banite scaling, and "ever" simply means as of the Rule of Two, not all of history.

I_Like_Chee wrote:I'm answering all IU character opinions are always more fallible than OOU quotes, so whatever others have said about Kun, it's instantly shown to be incorrect by the supremacy quote.

That assumes it is all based in purely opinion. It isn't.

I_Like_Chee wrote:That aside, I'm also not convinced JA Kun is necessarily weaker than TOTJ Kun, when Kun literally drained thousands of Massasi prior to getting WoLed.

Given Kun is so weak after the WOL that he was facing total disillusionment and had to use the temple focal points to sustain himself, an effort which drove him half-insane, that's really not relevant. Given the Jedi built a city underground specifically designed to prevent Kun's return, and that said city was destroyed by 5ABY, then the idea he's growing in power thereafter is also moot. Besides that, there's the three quotes Decaf posted all proving that Kun never again reached the height of his power.

In other words, JA Kun ~ TOTJ Kun is outright contradictory to all evidence.

@LadyKulvax: I'll respond to you in a few days, hopefully.

@Tybalt: Everything you've written there is a repeat of previous posts and does not address a single one of my counter-arguments. There wouldn't be much utility in me replying, so, please, just read through the debate again, and if you still don't see the issue with your arguments, then there's very little I can do to help you.

@I_Like_Chee I would advise you to read my arguments again. The rationale is clear, and follows LFL policy. Your arguments are just repeats of previous posts as well.

@Tybalt

I would advise you to read my arguments again.

I've read your arguments multiple times, and they don't remotely refute my own.

The rationale is clear, and follows LFL policy.

I don't get what you mean by "follows LFL policy". Listing off a bunch of levels in the canon system doesn't add weight to your argument, because the sources are totally unrelated. Again, the only part of the C-Canon quote which even references the Rule of Two is a comment in brackets, which is purely meant to emphasise that everything Maul has proven about the Sith being deadlier than ever is the lower limit of what the Jedi can expect. The Sith being deadlier than ever means the Sith are deadlier than ever, not that the Sith grew more powerful because of Banite scaling - that's nonsense. For the final time, "ever" cannot mean what you say because it is all-encompassing - i.e. it factors in all of time. Do I seriously need to Google the definition for you?

Your arguments are just repeats of previous posts as well.

That's because your rebuttals are re-stating your original point and don't address my counter-arguments, so I'm forced to keep spamming them until you understand. The above is a repeat of those arguments, and I pray this time you actually address them.

@I_Like_Chee

To make it simple for you, I will go over your first rebuttal post in more detail.

That the quote later references the Rule of Two does not mean that a prior part of the passage is referring exclusively to Banite scaling, when the text clearly emphasises otherwise. Again, "ever" is all-encompassing: by definition, it's not limited to a specific time period. The only reason the Rule of Two is even mentioned is to point out that the Master is obviously stronger (i.e. Maul is only the apprentice), so that Maul doing all of these crazy things is the lower limit of what the Jedi can expect.

Perhaps I shouldn't have focused only on that passage of the source as it seems to have given you tunnel vision.

The beginning of the source says "The Sith were believed extinct, but DARTH MAUL is proof that they're back". This too directly refers to Yoda's statement in the film, which is G-Canon. The TPM Flapbook is secondary to the film, and is both Legends material and a C-Canon source.

The Rule of Two is attributed to Darth Bane in both Canon and Legends. The Sith that the Jedi "believed extinct" are therefore the Sith of Darth Bane's Rule of Two.

"Ever" would then just be telling us that Darth Maul is deadlier than Darth Bane.

I hope this clears things up, and that any further replies on your part are more civil.

@Tybalt

To make it simple for you, I will go over your first rebuttal post in more detail.

Great, because your posts have been astonishingly lacking in detail thus far, and have also completely ignored my rebuttals.

Perhaps I shouldn't have focused only on that passage of the source as it seems to have given you tunnel vision.

You're ignoring the real reason you shouldn't have focused on that part of the passage: it's an irrelevant side comment used to emphasise one thing and doesn't change the meaning of the prior statements.

The beginning of the source says "The Sith were believed to be extinct, but DARTH MAUL is proof that they're back". This too directly refers to Yoda's statement in the film, which is G-Canon. The TPM Flapbook is secondary to the film, and is both Legends material and a C-Canon source.

The Rule of Two is attributed to Darth Bane in both Canon and Legends.The Sith that the Jedi "believed to be extinct" are therefore the Sith of Darth Bane's Rule of Two.

Okay... so, let me get this straight: your sole contention here is that "Sith" in the quote really means "Sith of the Rule of Two"? But the issue is, it wasn't Bane's Rule of Two that was believed to be extinct (in fact, the Rule of Two was created after the Jedi were sure of the Sith's extinction, not before - the Sith that the Jedi believed were annihilated was Kaan's Brotherhood of Darkness), it was the Sith as a whole, so the quote would be factoring in all of Sith history - including Exar Kun.

I hope this clears things up, and that any further replies on your part are more civil.

Quote me where I haven't been civil in this conversation.

@I_Like_Chee

Great, because your posts have been astonishingly lacking in detail thus far, and have also completely ignored my rebuttals.

I've provided sources and a Youtube video clip from The Phantom Menace. That you don't want to acknowledge them is a problem on your part, not mine.

You have failed to provide a legitimate rebuttal.

You're ignoring the real reason you shouldn't have focused on that part of the passage: it's an irrelevant side comment used to emphasise one thing and doesn't change the meaning of the prior statements.

Do you not understand that the TPM Flapbook is secondary to the film, and thus of a lower canon level?

Okay... so, let me get this straight: your sole contention here is that "Sith" in the quote really means "Sith of the Rule of Two"? But the issue is, it wasn't Bane's Rule of Two that was believed to be extinct (in fact, the Rule of Two was created after the Jedi were sure of the Sith's extinction, not before - the Sith that the Jedi believed were annihilated was Kaan's Brotherhood of Darkness), it was the Sith as a whole, so the quote would be factoring in all of Sith history - including Exar Kun.

Kaan's Brotherhood of Darkness did not follow the Rule of Two, which Yoda directly references in the film. Darth Bane being the progenitor of the Rule of Two is both Canon and Legends canon.

Quote me where I haven't been civil in this conversation.

Your tone throughout the duration of the debate.

HP:

1. How do you tag?

2. I think I will concede our little debate. Schoolwork is catching up to me, and you seem to have a few other debates to juggle.

Apologies.

@VictreebelVictr

1. How do you tag?

Write the @ symbol, and then the person's name in quotations marks, like so:

@"RandomUser"

2. I think I will concede our little debate. Schoolwork is catching up to me, and you seem to have a few other debates to juggle.

That's okay.

Apologies.

No need to apologise, I have plenty of debates I've never got back to myself. In fact, "I'll respond tomorrow" is a literal meme in this community, because I've said it a lot and then never replied.

@Tybalt

I've provided sources and a Youtube video clip from The Phantom Menace.

Providing sources doesn't make your posts detailed - the reasoning is surface level, and doesn't logically follow.

That you don't want to acknowledge them is a problem on your part, not mine.

I'm not acknowledging them because they don't actually refute anything I've written.

You have failed to provide a legitimate rebuttal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4

Do you not understand that the TPM Flapbook is secondary to the film, and thus of a lower canon level?

I do, but that's irrelevant, as you've yet to provide a contradiction between the sources. This doesn't at all address my point that the comment in brackets is an irrelevant side comment, not something that is attributing the whole quote to Banite scaling.

Kaan's Brotherhood of Darkness did not follow the Rule of Two, which Yoda directly references in the film.

I know? That's kind of the point. Recall your initial claim: "The Sith that the Jedi 'believed to be extinct' are therefore the Sith of Darth Bane's Rule of Two." The point is that the quote isn't referencing the Rule of Two when it says the Sith were believed extinct, because it was the Sith as a whole that was believed extinct, not Bane's Rule of Two (and, specifically, Kaan's Brotherhood of Darkness was the last group of Sith that the Jedi saw) - Bane's Rule of Two was created after the Jedi thought the Sith were extinct. Ergo, the quote does bind Exar Kun.

I don't get why you keep mentioning the film. You're trying to apply LFL's policy that the film is the supreme source here, but you're not doing it correctly. This only applies in cases of contradiction, we don't take random unrelated statements from the film and try to make them change C-Canon supplementary sources that are saying something entirely different. Again:

-"The Sith" means the group as a whole, as it was the totality of the Sith that were believed extinct.

-"Ever" means all of history, as is necessitated by the definition.

Darth Bane being the progenitor of the Rule of Two is both Canon and Legends canon.

This is unrelated information that does not remotely address any of the above.

Your tone throughout the duration of the debate.

I asked you for a quotation, not a general statement:

I wrote:Quote me where I haven't been civil in this conversation.

Good thread

@I_Like_Chee

Providing sources doesn't make your posts detailed - the reasoning is surface level, and doesn't logically follow.

I provided the sources to back up my arguments. Something you've failed to do so far.

It doesn't help that you admit that you are unwilling to acknowledge those arguments.

I'm not acknowledging them because they don't actually refute anything I've written.

Neither do yours, yet I acknowledge them.

You can't really debate someone if you refuse to acknowledge their arguments.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4

I do, but that's irrelevant, as you've yet to provide a contradiction between the sources. This doesn't at all address my point that the comment in brackets is an irrelevant side comment, not something that is attributing the whole quote to Banite scaling.

The point is that there isn't a contradiction. The TPM Flapbook is promotional material for the film and therefore falls in line with information stated in the film, and I've already addressed your point about the comment in brackets. You would know this if you actually read and acknowledged my posts.

I know? That's kind of the point. Recall your initial claim: "The Sith that the Jedi 'believed to be extinct' are therefore the Sith of Darth Bane's Rule of Two." The point is that the quote isn't referencing the Rule of Two when it says the Sith were believed extinct, because it was the Sith as a whole that was believed extinct, not Bane's Rule of Two (and, specifically, Kaan's Brotherhood of Darkness was the last group of Sith that the Jedi saw) - Bane's Rule of Two was created after the Jedi thought the Sith were extinct. Ergo, the quote does bind Exar Kun.

I don't get why you keep mentioning the film. You're trying to apply LFL's policy that the film is the supreme source here, but you're not doing it correctly. This only applies in cases of contradiction, we don't take random unrelated statements from the film and try to make them change C-Canon supplementary sources that are saying something entirely different. Again:

-"The Sith" means the group as a whole, as it was the totality of the Sith that were believed extinct.

-"Ever" means all of history, as is necessitated by the definition.

If the last known Sith the Jedi knew about was Kaan's Brotherhood of Darkness then that would be the Sith the source is talking about. As the film directly refers to the Rule of Two however that can't be the case as that wasn't their doctrine.

"The Sith" refers to Darth Bane's Sith Order.

"Ever" means in the history of that Sith Order.

This is unrelated information that does not remotely address any of the above.

Yes, it is related. Who created the Rule of Two that was directly referenced in the film? Darth Bane.

I asked you for a quotation, not a general statement:

I_Like_Chee wrote:There wouldn't be much utility in me replying, so, please, just read through the debate again, and if you still don't see the issue with your arguments, then there's very little I can do to help you.

I_Like_Chee wrote:The Sith being deadlier than ever means the Sith are deadlier than ever, not that the Sith grew more powerful because of Banite scaling - that's nonsense. For the final time, "ever" cannot mean what you say because it is all-encompassing - i.e. it factors in all of time. Do I seriously need to Google the definition for you?

I_Like_Chee wrote:That's because your rebuttals are re-stating your original point and don't address my counter-arguments, so I'm forced to keep spamming them until you understand. The above is a repeat of those arguments, and I pray this time you actually address them.