Achieving mastery over an aspect of the force is not the same as a title, that's absolutely ludicrous, if someone achieves mastery over the Dark Side, it would be listed, same for the Light Side, Revan doesn't have this listed nor has he displayed power enough to claim mastery over an aspect of the force.

 

We know plenty about what happened in the Mandalorian Wars, honestly the whole Revan shtick is beyond overblown, he used the Mandalorian tactics against them(Kreia states exactly this in multiple conversations) but he had six times the manpower and a whole host of Jedi Knights, not only that he had mastermind admirals and great generals like Surik, Alek and Kavar(up to a point), hell Surik led half the Republic fleet on her own and won major victories across the front on worlds like Dxun and Serroco, then led the attack herself on Malachor V, so you see, it wasn't even all Revan to begin with.

 

We are talking about actively using both sides of the force at the same time, it is not possible, using a few powers affiliated with one side or the other is entirely different.

 

Revanite logic, if canon doesn't conform to your POV, canon is stupid and nobody should take it seriously.

That is not our logic at all. You are generalized BIG time. Know what generalizing is? It is a logical falacy. Quit using it. Just because I'm arguing for Revan doesn't mean my logic is poor (although there are many who argue for Revan using bad logic).

Revan did not "master" any sides. Mastering either side of the Force requires conviction. Revan has no conviction in the Force. He constantly flip-flops on what side he uses, never being capable of mastering any side. Very few Jedi/Sith have mastered an aspect of the Force. Revan will never reach that goal either.

 

2. CHARACTER STATEMENT!

 

I think I covered the misconceptions very well. That's what i set out to do. You're just upset that I haven't conformed to the "Revan is god" ideal yet.

Constantly flip-flopped? He flip-flopped #1 time.

Revan has no conviction in the force? Sounds like speculation.

Character statements... This post is full of them.

 

/sigh

 

Character statements are non-canon...

Okay, teach me. What is the canon level of character statements? Why wouldn't they be canon? Are you telling me we should just totally forget everything that characters ever said in all of Star Wars? Wow. If that's the case, then why are we debating this?

Seems like you're just trying to discredit my quotes because they contradict your argument. I'll make sure and point it out next time you quote someone. Let's see how you like it.

Constantly flip-flopped? He flip-flopped #1 time.

 

Revan has no conviction in the force? Sounds like speculation.

Flip-flopped may be the wrong word, but he does lack conviction. He sacrifices Jedi teachings during the Mandalorian Wars for victory. Other generations of Jedi in his position would not. The truly powerful will protect all lives, not just the important ones. Revan sacrificed worlds for victory. Other Jedi would have devised a strategy that would gain victory, but save the most lives.

Okay, teach me. What is the canon level of character statements? Why wouldn't they be canon? Are you telling me we should just totally forget everything that characters ever said in all of Star Wars? Wow. If that's the case, then why are we debating this?

 

Seems like you're just trying to discredit my quotes because they contradict your argument. I'll make sure and point it out next time you quote someone. Let's see how you like it.

I'll ignore the tone for the sake of knowledge...

Character statements are non-canon because they do not come from an official source. Official meaning George, Chee etc. Written Characters are not official sources.

Refer to a sourcebook for more accurate information on certain characters.

I'll ignore the tone for the sake of knowledge...

 

Character statements are non-canon because they do not come from an official source. Official meaning George, Chee etc. Written Characters are not official sources.

 

Refer to a sourcebook for more accurate information on certain characters.

I fail to see why character statements aren't canon. Seems very silly to me.

As for the "official source" thing, if something isn't canon if it doesn't come from a official source then Revan himself is not canon. If this is your logic then why are you even talking about Revan?

Can we not accept the quotes as canon? If quotes aren't canon then we really know nothing about Revan and this isn't worth debating.

I fail to see why character statements aren't canon. Seems very silly to me.

 

As for the "official source" thing, if something isn't canon if it doesn't come from a official source then Revan himself is not canon. If this is your logic then why are you even talking about Revan?

 

Can we not accept the quotes as canon? If quotes aren't canon then we really know nothing about Revan and this isn't worth debating.

I don't make the rules

Revan exists in the continuity. All video games are an official source in the continuity. What happens in the game is canon. At least the Light Side stuff in the KOTOR games are.

We know plenty about Revan. His actions are depicted in KOTOR and works surrounding him. We base what we know off of Revan's actions, not what people say about him.

I don't make the rules

 

Revan exists in the continuity. All video games are an official source in the continuity. What happens in the game is canon. At least the Light Side stuff in the KOTOR games are.

 

We know plenty about Revan. His actions are depicted in KOTOR and works surrounding him. We base what we know off of Revan's actions, not what people say about him.

I'm not saying that you're wrong - I'm just saying that the canon system is stupid in this since.

If the game is canon, then the things that people say in the game should be canon as well. That just plain doesn't make since. Oh well, I give up.

I fail to see why character statements aren't canon. Seems very silly to me.

 

As for the "official source" thing, if something isn't canon if it doesn't come from a official source then Revan himself is not canon. If this is your logic then why are you even talking about Revan?

 

Can we not accept the quotes as canon? If quotes aren't canon then we really know nothing about Revan and this isn't worth debating.

Character quotes can never be canon. It should be pretty obvious why.. I mean, the characters can be wrong. They're characters. They can also change their mind, or lie. Or simply favour specific styles of tactics.. and remember, a genius is someone who agrees with you. Any mandalorian saying someone is a brilliant tactician, with their lust for glorious combat and general contempt for life and disregard for casualties, should be translated as 'someone who takes insane risks and throws away lives'. Not 'tactical genius'. Tactically and strategically sound.. maybe.

I'm not saying that you're wrong - I'm just saying that the canon system is stupid in this since.

 

If the game is canon, then the things that people say in the game should be canon as well. That just plain doesn't make since. Oh well, I give up.

The canon system is complicated, but organized. I must give props to Leland Chee for keeping the universe organized.

The game and its events are canon. The personalities and backstories of the characters are canon, but what they say about other characters are not. So let's take Canderous praising Revan for his tactics. This would be categorized as a character statement. Now if Canderous talked about Mission Vao and how he feels about her, that would be an opinion and fall into his character and personality. That would be canon.

Confusing, I know. And I would rather we stop discussing character statements and focus on what Revan does.

The canon system is complicated, but organized. I must give props to Leland Chee for keeping the universe organized.

 

The game and its events are canon. The personalities and backstories of the characters are canon, but what they say about other characters are not. So let's take Canderous praising Revan for his tactics. This would be categorized as a character statement. Now if Canderous talked about Mission Vao and how he feels about her, that would be an opinion and fall into his character and personality. That would be canon.

 

Confusing, I know. And I would rather we stop discussing character statements and focus on what Revan does.

OH!! *light bulb turns on*

You mean that Canderous's statement isn't canon because it's an opinion? That makes much more since! That's all I've been saying. Canderous's opinion is that Revan is a tactical genius. Okay, glad we're on the same page now (I think).

OH!! *light bulb turns on*

 

You mean that Canderous's statement isn't canon because it's an opinion? That makes much more since! That's all I've been saying. Canderous's opinion is that Revan is a tactical genius. Okay, glad we're on the same page now (I think).

I think we're on the same page. We can't take Canderous' statement about Revan's tactics because they are only his opinion. So they really hold no weight in a debate of this type.

I think we're on the same page. We can't take Canderous' statement about Revan's tactics because they are only his opinion. So they really hold no weight in a debate of this type.

That's not entirely true. Yes, it's just a opinion, but an opinion (especially that of a warrior) can be used in this since. No it's not canon, but it indicates that Revan was a great tactician. Notice I said "indicates".

I think we're on the same page. We can't take Canderous' statement about Revan's tactics because they are only his opinion. So they really hold no weight in a debate of this type.

I don't fully understand how anyone can be a tactical genius then.... if it all comes down to opinion.

Revan used direct tactics that, while the casualty rate was high, won the war. Why is the opinion that that is a bad strategy any more valid than the opinion that it is a good one?

The Echani and Mandalorians liked his tactics, and the Jedi did not....who are we to have an opinion of which opinion is right?

That's not entirely true. Yes, it's just a opinion, but an opinion (especially that of a warrior) can be used in this since. No it's not canon, but it indicates that Revan was a great tactician. Notice I said "indicates".

Now we're going backwards. Canderous' opinion holds as much weight in this particular conversation as Mission's. We cannot base our arguments off of a character's opinion.

I don't fully understand how anyone can be a tactical genius then.... if it all comes down to opinion.

 

Revan used direct tactics that, while the casualty rate was high, won the war. Why is the opinion that that is a bad strategy any more valid than the opinion that it is a good one?

 

The Echani and Mandalorians liked his tactics, and the Jedi did not....who are we to have an opinion of which opinion is right?

A tactical genius uses their OWN tactics to gain victory. Revan ripped off the Mandalorian's tactics during the war. He did not create tactics to defeat them. In this sense, we should call Mandalore the tactical genius as it was his strategies that Revan employed.

This is what seperates Revan from Thrawn. Thrawn created tactics that brought the New Republic to its knees. Revan took Mandalorian tactics and combined them with his superior numbers and Jedi forces.

I don't fully understand how anyone can be a tactical genius then.... if it all comes down to opinion.

 

Revan used direct tactics that, while the casualty rate was high, won the war. Why is the opinion that that is a bad strategy any more valid than the opinion that it is a good one?

 

The Echani and Mandalorians liked his tactics, and the Jedi did not....who are we to have an opinion of which opinion is right?

I'm pretty sure Revan's casulty rate wasn't high at the begining of the war. It was when he started falling that he began sacrificing big time.

But yeah... that's pretty deep. I'd rather not get into that. The fact is that you can't base an argument off of a opinion, however a opinion (depending on how credible the source is - and Canderous is very credible) can aid an argument.

A tactical genius uses their OWN tactics to gain victory. Revan ripped off the Mandalorian's tactics during the war. He did not create tactics to defeat them. In this sense, we should call Mandalore the tactical genius as it was his strategies that Revan employed.

 

This is what seperates Revan from Thrawn. Thrawn created tactics that brought the New Republic to its knees. Revan took Mandalorian tactics and combined them with his superior numbers and Jedi forces.

Okay, your definition of a tactical genius is off. One does not need to create their own ideas to be great in this since. One can learn from the ideas of others, or simply sort good ideas from bad ones.

Think of the army generals of today. Do you think they're making up there own tactics? Not for the most part. They're relying on generations of learning. The reason why they've become generals is because they've learned well and studied hard.

Let's not compare Revan to Thrawn.

I think that since Canderous fought in the war and experienced Revans tactics first hand I think what he says could be a good source.

Exactly.

A tactical genius uses their OWN tactics to gain victory. Revan ripped off the Mandalorian's tactics during the war. He did not create tactics to defeat them. In this sense, we should call Mandalore the tactical genius as it was his strategies that Revan employed.

 

This is what seperates Revan from Thrawn. Thrawn created tactics that brought the New Republic to its knees. Revan took Mandalorian tactics and combined them with his superior numbers and Jedi forces.

Is using an enemy's own tactics against them not a stroke of genius?

It would be hard to beat your own strategy, for sure if the side using it against you was more powerful. The idea of "Let's do exactly what they're doing, only better," seems like a very smart thing to do. Unorthodox and unexpected. And, by definition, unbeatable.

Of course, this is only opinion, and any argument against it would be opinion as well.

That's not entirely true. Yes, it's just a opinion, but an opinion (especially that of a warrior) can be used in this since. No it's not canon, but it indicates that Revan was a great tactician. Notice I said "indicates".

I don't think it indicates anything. Reven just used their own (the mandalorians) tactics (aggression and sacrificial advantages) against them really well. The reason why he was so successful is because he the Republic had the larger forces and jedi help.

I don't think it indicates anything. Reven just used their own (the mandalorians) tactics (aggression and sacrificial advantages) against them really well. The reason why he was so successful is because he the Republic had the larger forces and jedi help.

KOTOR disagrees with you.

Revan was largely responsible for the Republic success in that war for many reasons.

A tactical genius uses their OWN tactics to gain victory. Revan ripped off the Mandalorian's tactics during the war. He did not create tactics to defeat them. In this sense, we should call Mandalore the tactical genius as it was his strategies that Revan employed.

 

This is what seperates Revan from Thrawn. Thrawn created tactics that brought the New Republic to its knees. Revan took Mandalorian tactics and combined them with his superior numbers and Jedi forces.

What exactly did Thrawn come up with?

A tactical genius uses tactics geinus...fully. Who said it has to be that persons tactic? Stop being so nitpicky. Where does it say he ripped them off anyway? If he was using the exact same tactics you'd think the Mando's would know what to do to counter them.

1. A title does not make you a master. Darth Revan was the servant of the Dark Side, not the other way around. The only man who can claim mastery of the Dark Side is Darth Sidious. And Revan was made Jedi Master at the request of the people. Had it been up to the Jedi Council, they would have exiled him because of his teachings.

 

2. *cough* character statement *cough* Read my review of his tactics.

 

3. Revan could not control the Dark powers and would have fallen eventually. He could not even control himself, how could he control the corrupting powers of the Dark Side.

 

Just because G-Canon doesn't conform to your views doesn't make it non-canon.

1- Yeah, still he was one of the most powerfull force user of his time. Since that in his time there was jedi masters and sith masters, he was as powerfull as them. How can you say that someone is a master of something? You'll say that you know about sidious and luke because George Lucas said that they are SW super-heroes. But what about other characters? Has obi-wan mastered light side? He was a jedi master, but that's only a title too...

The thing is, he was powerfull enough to be considered a master in both sides. Just play Kotor and you'll know that.

2- Yes, it's a character statement but they have no reason to lie about that, and since they are very good warriors and know a lot about war, it's a big deal. You can't say that he's not a skillful tactician or else he wouldn't be praised like this by a clan of WARRIORS.

3- Would have fallen? Could not control himself? What the hell are youtalking about? Have you made the dark side ending? That what would happen if he fallen to the dark side, he'd use the star forge to take the whole galaxy!!