21 minutes ago, micheldebruyn said:

Except they didn't. They would have been shot dead before they got within melee distance without the Force.

Yes, they did. None of them were throwing around battle droids with telekinesis. They were deflecting blaster bolts with their lightsabers in order to get within striking range with their blades. Never once to they rely on Force powers .

13 minutes ago, damnkid3 said:

Most Jedi at geonosis hadn't fought in a field battle during their time as a Jedi, so they were unprepared for the style of combat they were thrown in to. So many of the Niman Jedi fell during the battle cause their were so many who used that style since it fit their current need. Jedi who used other style fell as well, there were just less casualties since there were less trained in those forms.

Like in the Princess bride when fesik fight Wesley, he comments since he is so use to one style of fighting going back to another is difficult.

Most Jedi wouldn't bother knowing form 1 since they would have such low probability of fighting someone else with a lightsaber. So they learned the form that they would use the most.

Form I is the foundation form every Jedi learns as a youngling before moving on to their chosen form. This too is explicitly stated in Path of the Jedi on page 41. All Jedi learn at least the fundamentals of Shii-Cho. It is required learning.

4 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Yes, they did. None of them were throwing around battle droids with telekinesis. They were deflecting blaster bolts with their lightsabers in order to get within striking range with their blades. Never once to they rely on Force powers .

You, ehm... can't reflect blaster bolts with just bladework. Like, at all. Not even a little bit.

16 minutes ago, micheldebruyn said:

You, ehm... can't reflect blaster bolts with just bladework. Like, at all. Not even a little bit.

They’re not using their bare hands. 😛 They’re also not using Force powers. They’re not relying on telekinesis or anything else. It’s reflexes . It’s instinct .There is no conscious active use of the Force. They didn’t use the Force to reflect the shots. The Force used them. The Force guided them, enhancing their natural reflexes, not them controlling the Force . So yes, it is bladework , not Force powers, not use of the Force that reflected the blaster bolts. The Force May be guiding them, and enhancing their reflexes at the instinctual level, but it is, ultimately, their bladework which is reflecting the shots.

Also, given the actual speeds the blaster bolts have been clocked at on screen (this was tested on Mythbusters), yes, you can deflect a blaster bolt with just the blade work. They really don’t travel that fast. They don’t even travel much faster than a baseball.

5 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

They’re not using their bare hands. 😛 They’re also not using Force powers. They’re not relying on telekinesis or anything else. It’s reflexes . It’s instinct .There is no conscious active use of the Force. They didn’t use the Force to reflect the shots. The Force used them. The Force guided them, enhancing their natural reflexes, not them controlling the Force . So yes, it is bladework , not Force powers, not use of the Force that reflected the blaster bolts. The Force May be guiding them, and enhancing their reflexes at the instinctual level, but it is, ultimately, their bladework which is reflecting the shots.

Also, given the actual speeds the blaster bolts have been clocked at on screen (this was tested on Mythbusters), yes, you can deflect a blaster bolt with just the blade work. They really don’t travel that fast. They don’t even travel much faster than a baseball.

It's like you didn't even watch the video of Obi-Wan Kenobi to Luke explaining how Reflect works.

1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:

No, there isn't. However, Niman doesn't have any actual strengths . That is its biggest weakness. The very fact that it has to rely upon the use of Force powers in order to compensate for anything is a huge inherent flaw in the form.

And, as for a rapier user in an open battle. No, the rapier is not meant for armored combat, particularly against plate armor. Neither is any sword really. In mass armored combat, a sword, is a back up weapon. However, the rapier is well suited for getting into the gaps between the plates in the armor because it is a very thin blade. So it is not completely ineffective in armored mass combat.

The Battle of Geonosis showed Niman to be basically useless in battle. It is only any good at taking on a handful of relatively untrained criminals and thugs, not hardened combatants.

Your attitude is like saying a pistol is a bad tool. It is not the best tool for the battle field and likely will result in your death on a battle field because it is not the right tool for the job. A rifle is the right tool. But it is not the right tool for law enforcement. Cops use pistols because itnis a more suitable tool for that task. Niman is like a pistol. For certain jobs it is great. For others it is terrible. You using a single lens to judge things doesnt make.you right it just means you are blinding your self to much of reality.

19 minutes ago, micheldebruyn said:

It's like you didn't even watch the video of Obi-Wan Kenobi to Luke explaining how Reflect works.

It is like he cant see over the edges of the box he puts himself in.

1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Yes, they did. None of them were throwing around battle droids with telekinesis. They were deflecting blaster bolts with their lightsabers in order to get within striking range with their blades. Never once to they rely on Force powers .

Form I is the foundation form every Jedi learns as a youngling before moving on to their chosen form. This too is explicitly stated in Path of the Jedi on page 41. All Jedi learn at least the fundamentals of Shii-Cho. It is required learning.

Path of 5he Jexi is interesting. But no longer canon. Also have you watched the Clone Wars cartoon? They use the force all the time in combat. They slam droids with telekenisis they use the force to deflect shots back at their attackers they pick up battle droids to get them to shoot other battle droid. They dont just use blade work. Just because you ignore everything that doesnt fit your narrow view doesnt mean itndidnt happen. And anyone who has followed martial arts honestly know different forms have different things they excel at. And different things they lack at. The lightsaber forms is not different.

Is this the 3rd or 4th time all these arguments have been made?
This is going nowhere.
Someone mentioned Niman as a good choice offering specific benefits to any character taking it on page 1, comment 13 and we’re now on page 5 about why Niman is lousy or it’s not.

10 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

And yet we see in history warriors, such as Miyamoto Musashi , who could dominate almost any opponent with just his weapon of choice. He didn't need to use other items or "tricks" to win. He could defeat any opponent, regardless of the weapon said opponent wielded, using just his sword (or bokken [a wooden sword]). Such was his mastery of the blade. This was true in mass battle as well.

Musashi used every dirty trick he could though. Like arriving late to make sure the opponent was in a crappy mood and to make sure he has the sun at his back. He's a poor choice for someone who only uses pure martial ability. Most great masters of martial ability tended to be the ones who did use every trick in the book and made up a few new ones.

13 minutes ago, Darth Revenant said:

Musashi used every dirty trick he could though. Like arriving late to make sure the opponent was in a crappy mood and to make sure he has the sun at his back. He's a poor choice for someone who only uses pure martial ability. Most great masters of martial ability tended to be the ones who did use every trick in the book and made up a few new ones.

****, beat me to it by minutes. That's what you get for having lunch first, refuting idiocy second!

9 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

bladework

You have no idea what that word means.

Having studied a very miniscule amount of something like I.33 you very quickly realize that focusing on "bladework" alone is a great way to get grappled, punched, kicked, thrown and then stabbed in the unmentionables by someone holding their sword in a rather atrociously poor grip somewhere along the mid-blade with their off-hand.

Complaining about someone not using "pure bladework" sounds like the excuse you'd pull out when you get beaten by someone who was better at thinking outside the box than you.

"But" I hear you cry "flattening someone by dropping a power generator on their head is not swordsmanship!" and you'd be correct... in any other case.

Any Jedi can use Force Powers like telekinesis in combat. Niiman focuses on using it in conjunction with a lightsaber. It's like arguing that I.33 promotes poor "bladework" by using the sword in conjunction with a buckler. Consider the amount of focus often needed to pull off telekinetic tricks, and that Niiman focuses on pulling that off while actively going blade-to-blade with another lightsaber. This does not mean their lightsaber skills are poor, but if you look at it from a perspective of "bladework" alone it might seem a bit basic, because it's just half of the equation. If you compare a fighter with just a sword vs someone with a sword and buckler, and just look at their swords, you might come to the conclusion that the one with the sword is the superior fighter as he is forced to make more use of his sword, while his opponent can use his buckler to tie up the swordsman's guard if stab him on a comparatively "unsophisticated" manner.

Technically, it can be argued that the swordsman is more skilled in "pure bladework", but only an idiot would . Quod erat demonstrandum.

Of course, you can argue that without the Force, Niiman is inferior, and you'd actually be dead on correct. But then you'd also have to consider whether it's more likely that a Jedi would lose their lightsaber or their connection to the Force.

The question is what is the goal? Is it to defeat them with a lughtsaber? Or to defeat them by any means available.

I would posit most jedi would like to make as short of work as possible of single or a few opponants as quickly as possible. To allow them to complete their diplomatic task. Niman is great for this task. But then they got called to a battlefield and it was shown that for that task Niman was inferior. That only proves Niman is inferior on a battlefield. It doesnt prove anything else.

I hate to break it to you, but its doesn't prove Niman is inferior on a battlefield. It just proves that the people using Niman weren't really good at using it.

The part where the argument falls apart is your assuming the problem is with the form and not the people using it...

See most Jedi aren't super trained fighters who master the use of light saber forms a vast majority of them are amateurs who barely bother to train if at all since the chances of them getting into a fight is slim to nil.

There are only a handful of Jedi who actually put forth the time and effort to fully immerse themselves in the use of a lightsaber in combat.

1 hour ago, Daeglan said:

The question is what is the goal? Is it to defeat them with a lughtsaber? Or to defeat them by any means available.

I would posit most jedi would like to make as short of work as possible of single or a few opponants as quickly as possible. To allow them to complete their diplomatic task. Niman is great for this task. But then they got called to a battlefield and it was shown that for that task Niman was inferior. That only proves Niman is inferior on a battlefield. It doesnt prove anything else.

It proves niman PRACTITIONERS were inferior at battlefield combat. Given that the typical niman practitioner didn't focus/and in fact slacked at combat training (didn't devote the 10 years needed to master it), that canonical selection bias means it's not necessary a judgement against the form itself.

16 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

No. It's saying that even the best Niman users in the battle couldn't survive. That suggests the quality of the Form in combat situations.

The problem with your suggestion is selection bias , niman practitioners generally didn't master their form, canonically they slacked at the saber, the best niman user at genosis was likely not a niman master. And random bad luck could even explain the death of one niman master. There is a highly plausible alternate explanation for why all niman practitioners at genosis died.

And I noticed you conceded/didn't argue any other point in that long rebuttal of your long post. There is one point I want to pull out a disciple is more devoted than a practitioner . The lightsaber form spec isn't meant to represent lightsaber slackers because PCs are meant to be exceptional by the virtue of them being PCs.

29 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:

It proves niman PRACTITIONERS were inferior at battlefield combat. Given that the typical niman practitioner didn't focus/and in fact slacked at combat training (didn't devote the 10 years needed to master it), that canonical selection bias means it's not necessary a judgement against the form itself.

Basically showing that not only is the tool not the best for the job. They were poorly maintaining the tool exasperating the problem.

23 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:

The problem with your suggestion is selection bias , niman practitioners generally didn't master their form, canonically they slacked at the saber,

Indeed, the issue isn't with the form per se, but that it can be reasonably effective while halfassing the saber.

While this is technically a strength, it could also encourage practioners to neglect their saber skills, or as Tramp puts it, "use the force as a crutch". This isn't a weakness of the form per se, rather it illustrates a strength .

While it's a bit of conjecture, an argument can be made that Niiman would be the most effective form for the amount of practice you put into it, at least at an early stage, as it utilizes skills a Jedi already possesses.

This argument falls apart completely in light of the context of the FFG RPG. Even if you - as Tramp insists on doing - think pure bladework is some sort of hallmark of excellence in combat (he said earlier he wasn't conflating 'pure blade work' with combat effectiveness but he keeps going back on that as well as ignoring Ataru's use of the Force for maneuvering as not tainting it) then even that doesn't really mean anything in this system. Even Niman's signature Talent which uses kinetic Force use to effect the fight is totally open to interpretation and adding Force points to add Success to a Lightsaber (Willpower) checks can be narrated any way you like - you're pushing their lightsaber out of the way, you're accelarating your own lightsaber to strike, you're battering past their defenses by strengthening your blade strike, etc - you can make it all tie directly in to 'blade work' if you want.

You're a Niman Disciple with Lightsaber 5, Willpower 6, you can Reflect, Parry, Sum Djem (an excellent blade work Talent most Forms don't have), and Defensive Training. You are steeped in blade work and have mastered blade work (like literally, with Lightsaber 5). All those Talents are 'blade work'. All of them.

And you have a character as described in the Niman sidebar: very effective at combat.

1 hour ago, Jedi Ronin said:

This argument falls apart completely in light of the context of the FFG RPG.

I like your post, but it's a bit unclear what argument you're replying to.

13 minutes ago, penpenpen said:

I like your post, but it's a bit unclear what argument you're replying to.

All of Tramp's points (all of them) have been responded to multiple times, he repeats what he said before, then the responses get repeated.

Primarily I'm trying to steer things back to the FFG system and what's actually there - focusing on a single argument Tramp repeats enough he seems to think it's central: Niman not being as concerned with blade work. I already know how he's going to respond (he's done it servaral times already). He'll mostly ignore the mechanical reality of FFG's system (As he's done before: if he does mention it, he'll ignore all the blade work stuff in there and shalowly compare it to other forms and conclude since Niman isn't better than all of them it's not very good) and point out the fluff (including in the F&D core book) state Niman focuses less on blade work than other forms. So I'm just demonstrating why that statement is meaningless in light of the system. Getting more concrete with discussion of the system and what it does or doesn't do and comparison's of things in the system make the discussion specific and concrete.

16 minutes ago, Jedi Ronin said:

All of Tramp's points (all of them) have been responded to multiple times, he repeats what he said before, then the responses get repeated.

Primarily I'm trying to steer things back to the FFG system and what's actually there - focusing on a single argument Tramp repeats enough he seems to think it's central: Niman not being as concerned with blade work. I already know how he's going to respond (he's done it servaral times already). He'll mostly ignore the mechanical reality of FFG's system (As he's done before: if he does mention it, he'll ignore all the blade work stuff in there and shalowly compare it to other forms and conclude since Niman isn't better than all of them it's not very good) and point out the fluff (including in the F&D core book) state Niman focuses less on blade work than other forms. So I'm just demonstrating why that statement is meaningless in light of the system. Getting more concrete with discussion of the system and what it does or doesn't do and comparison's of things in the system make the discussion specific and concrete.

SO I should just quote him in response and save time

You know the funny thing about arguing whether something is "pure bladework" or not? That "pure bladework" is very subjective. Does footwork factor into "pure bladework" despite not being directly connected to the use of the blade? IRL, I've studied both Silat and Arnis, and while much of the "bladework" might be very similar, the footwork is very different and yet the isolated motions of the weapon mean very little without it. Force-usage is just a third component of lightsaber styles and there is no meaningful style that does not incorporate at least some Force-usage.

I also find the references to Geonosis idiotic as there is really too little data to make accurate models. If you go by that battle, then Juyo/Vapaad must be the best style for keeping the saber jockey alive since 100% of Juyo/Vapaad practitioners (i.e., Mace Windo alone) survived the battle. Not really what you'd expect from a "berserker" style, is it?

17 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

yet we see in history warriors, such as Miyamoto Musashi , who could dominate almost any opponent with just his weapon of choice. He didn't need to use other items or "tricks" to win. He could defeat any opponent, regardless of the weapon said opponent wielded, using just his sword (or bokken [a wooden sword]). Such was his mastery of the blade. This was true in mass battle as well.

Woah there, friend. I draw the line at invoking the name of Musashi. Of course he was dominant with just blade work; guns weren't commonplace in his time, and we don't have the Force in real life.

3 minutes ago, StriderZessei said:

Woah there, friend. I draw the line at invoking the name of Musashi. Of course he was dominant with just blade work; guns weren't commonplace in his time, and we don't have the Force in real life.

They were at the battle of Sekigahara, where he possibly fought on the losing side. Would seem like superior bladework didn't work out on a battlefield with guns. Or it could just be that numbers and tactics counts for more than skill. Probably that later point, but people prefer to focus on that first one.

1 minute ago, Darth Revenant said:

They were at the battle of Sekigahara, where he possibly fought on the losing side. Would seem like superior bladework didn't work out on a battlefield with guns. Or it could just be that numbers and tactics counts for more than skill. Probably that later point, but people prefer to focus on that first one.

Imma have to review some Japanese history, methinks.

12 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

You know the funny thing about arguing whether something is "pure bladework" or not? That "pure bladework" is very subjective. Does footwork factor into "pure bladework" despite not being directly connected to the use of the blade? IRL, I've studied both Silat and Arnis, and while much of the "bladework" might be very similar, the footwork is very different and yet the isolated motions of the weapon mean very little without it. Force-usage is just a third component of lightsaber styles and there is no meaningful style that does not incorporate at least some Force-usage.

I also find the references to Geonosis idiotic as there is really too little data to make accurate models. If you go by that battle, then Juyo/Vapaad must be the best style for keeping the saber jockey alive since 100% of Juyo/Vapaad practitioners (i.e., Mace Windo alone) survived the battle. Not really what you'd expect from a "berserker" style, is it?

I’ve studied martial arts for many years and this distinction of “just blade work” is odd. It’s not how systems are developed or practiced.