Kyp durron vs Tenebrous

Azronger wrote:@Scial It's safe to say he's better than Darth Bane and all of his predecessors from that lineage, in both Force power and mastery as well as dueling ability.

Azronger wrote:Plagueis said he was the first to have killed his Master with guile rather than in combat, so therefore Tenebrous would have slain his mentor by the way of the blade, and he his own, and so on, all the way down to Bane. It's also confirmed that each successive generation became more powerful in the Force than the last, and that the Banites honed their combat skills over the centuries, making the late Banites superior duelists to the early ones, especially Tenebrous who was a noted enthusiast. His knowledge of the Force also made that of his immediate predecessors (people who could cause cosmic rends in the Force and mess with time) look like ass by comparison, so it's safe to say he is better than those who came before him in the ways of dealing death on the battlefield.

Azronger wrote:I don't think you're quite understanding the implications of Banite scaling. Tenebrous defeated his Master, who defeated his Master, and so on all the way down to Bane. Bane is literally at the bottom of almost 30 people who all successively have defeated each other, are explicitly confirmed to have become consecutively more powerful, and to have increased in skill over the centuries. You're seriously limiting your imagination by fixating on Tenebrous's lack of on-screen fights when there are a dozen data points from which we can infer his strength and skill level with a fair degree of accuracy. Would you say something like Tenebrous vs. Kas'im cannot be determined, even though we know for a fact that a pre-prime Bane was winning against Kas'im by virtue of his superior connection to the Force, and that Tenebrous is even more powerful than peak Bane, most likely by a vast amount? And is a noted lightsaber enthusiast with superior skills to early members of the lineage? And boasts a more advanced understanding of the Force than possibly all his predecessors? And has had around 150 years to actualize all that into a single, cohesive package, with at least one confirmed high-profile lightsaber kill under his belt, and training provided for Plagueis and Venamis that allowed them to perform to the degree that they did during their respective skirmish? Is all that still too vague for you?

Note that I'm not saying Tenebrous would beat Durron, nor am I trying to disparage you; I'm simply bemused with all this talk of Tenebrous being featless or unquantifiable or unusable in versus matches that I have often heard over the years when there has been plenty of information available for years now to prove those notions false.

Azronger wrote:Bane held back against Zannah in their sparring matches, and so she was unprepared for his ferocity and new fighting style when their final confrontation came. That's just one example, sure, but I don't think that the Master literally provided their student with a blueprint and precise instructions on how to defeat them since that would mitigate the point of the Rule of Two, the purpose of which was to see if the apprentice was worthy of wresting the mantle of Dark Lord by proving themselves stronger.

I also don't get what you mean when you say that you admit each successive Sith became a greater force to be reckoned with, but then say there isn't enough material to analyze their capabilities. Seems like a self-contradiction to me.