Talk:Essay: Good v.s. Evil Rebuttal

Wow! Thanks for providing your input in this rebuttal! However, I do still think that my examples were good representations of some highly unlikely turnouts. Therefore, I'd like to offer a rebuttal of your rebuttal :).

I agree that Janglur Swifteye was a very good warrior, but the Marlfox was still an expert assassin. Even though the latter was headstrong, Janglur should have experienced a small measure of difficulty in defeating such a formidable foe.

If Martin had the bloodwrath, it is possible that he could have defeated Badrang easily, so your argument stands.

In Triss, however, Trisscar had little experience with swordplay. Princess Kurda, on the other hand, had many years of practice. Sword skill is not a genetic trait that can be passed down to offspring. Though Triss may have had a high aptitude for learning how to wield a sword, she would not have been able to achieve a level of skill without practicing. She was probably not able to train with the sword during her years at Riftgard and was on the run for most of her life away from Riftgard. Without any training, she was able to put Princess Kurda to flight without receiving a single scratch or using any effort.

Though there is a slim or good chance that the goodbeasts could have defeated each of these villains, whether or not they could defeat them was not my original question. My question was why none of the evil creatures (except for Fenno and Cluny) can defeat a skilled goodbeast in a one-on-one match. The villains need not win--the heroes could escape death or be aided by an outside force (e.g. the snake in Pearls of Lutra; the Joseph Bell in Redwall). Many of these evil beasts don't even cause any difficulty for the heroes. In my opinion, it would be much more satisfying if the villains presented a greater challenge to the heroes, before going down. Dannflor 21:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)