Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

tell me who would win and explain.

Ragnos would waste Exar as even as a spirit, Exar's equal feared him.

Yeah, Ragnos would wipe his ass with Kun.

i wanna know who voted kun.

Probably IKC.

lol. i think hes in love with kun.

I haven't voted. In my opinion, it could go either way.

Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
Ragnos would waste Exar as even as a spirit, Exar's equal feared him.

Stop saying either of them feared Ragnos, Glentract. For one, the Sith lord that appeared to them was unnamed. Second, neither of them showed any signs of fear of this spirit, period. Third, at the end, Ulic was nowhere near Exar's level of power.

1. The New Essential Guide to Chronology and the New Essential Guide to Characters both specifically say it was Ragnos. Starwars.com states, "As they fought, the Sith amulets that each of them wore suddenly came to life, awakened from a millennia-long sleep by renewed Sith energies." Ragnos was the most powerful from 1,000 years prior. If it was someone weaker than Ragnos, that makes Kun look even weaker when compared to Ragnos.

2. Why did Ulic protest for being named weaker when it was cleary stated that Exar and Ulic where equal.

3. Prove this.

1) And the actual source material reads:

Ulic: "Who are you?"

Exar: "I know him... I've seen his mummified remains... on Korriban!"

Unknown Dark Lord: "It matters not who I am."

Nowhere is his name stated. It is an unknown Sith lord. And millenia is plural. Millenium would be one thousand.

As well, it says the message the Sith Lord carries is from "...A time when the Sith people were being driven to extinction by the Jedi Knights and the armies of the Galactic Republic."

That was not Ragnos' time.

"If it was someone weaker than Ragnos, that makes Kun look even weaker when compared to Ragnos."

How, exactly? Neither of them showed fear, as I said. They simply stopped fighting each other, as I imagine anyone would do if an apparition appeared in the room.

2) It was clearly stated that they were equal in lightsaber combat.

DLOTS, Narrator: "Both Jedi are master swordsmen -- Neither can claim an advantage with the Lightsaber!"

Nowhere is any other mention of them being equal in any way.

3) It's never shown that Ulic learned Sith Magic. Indeed, he almost lost to Mandalore in single combat. Kun, however, spends his time increasing his own power rather than directing the armies of the Krath and Mandalore, as Ulic does. Kun is decidely more powerful than Qel-Droma at the end of the Sith War.

Originally posted by IKC
1) And the actual source material reads:

Ulic: "Who are you?"

Exar: "I know him... I've seen his mummified remains... on Korriban!"

Unknown Sith Lord: "It matters not who I am."

Nowhere is his name stated. It is an unknown Sith lord. And millenia is plural. Millenium would be one thousand.

As well, it says the message the Sith Lord carries is from "...A time when the Sith people were being driven to extinction by the Jedi Knights and the armies of the Galactic Republic."

That was not Ragnos' time.

You need to expand your thinking. The comics are not the only place to find info on that time.

Also, the comics don't state that it isn't Ragnos while the mutiple Essential Guides state that it is.

Note that the Sith were driven to extinction by the Republic during the Great Hyperspace War and that there is no other time this message could have come from, as it was the only war that involved the Ancient Sith.

Originally posted by IKC
2) It was clearly stated that they were equal in lightsaber combat.

DLOTS, Narrator: "Both Jedi are master swordsmen -- Neither can claim an advantage with the Lightsaber!"

Nowhere is any other mention of them being equal in any way.

Essential Guides state otherwise. Once again you demonstrate you ignorance. The comics aren't the only source.

Originally posted by IKC
3) It's never shown that Ulic learned Sith Magic. Indeed, he almost lost to Mandalore in single combat. Kun, however, spends his time increasing his own power rather than directing the armies of the Krath and Mandalore, as Ulic does. Kun is decidely more powerful than Qel-Droma at the end of the Sith War.

You have failed to PROVE it.

Exar already had been to Yavin by the time he fought Ulic, so Exar already new Sith Magic.

Prove that Exar wouldn't have almost lost to Mandalore. And, you're the one with the comics. "

The two entered into a personal duel on Kuar. Mandalore dictated that the duel take place on the open plains of Harkul. Mandalore's weapon: the Basilisk war droid mount; Ulic's: his lightsaber. The contest: Qel-Droma must hold his ground high on the chain-nets over Harkul as Mandalore attacks. The prize: the allegiance of the combined armies of Teta and Mandalore. Ulic's Jedi training served him well. He bested Mandalore, and the defeated nomad conceded his loyalty. "

Ulic and Mandalore didn't actually fight.

Prove that Exar is spending his time increasing his own power and prove what he would have used to drastically increase his own power within ~ 6 months(time of duel, to death).

Hey Glentract, guess what?

Ragnos was dead by the time the war even started! Ergo, the reigning Dark Lord who created the message could not have been Ragnos, period!



The comics are the superior source, Glentract, as they are the actual story. Essential Guides are worthless if they contradict the primary source.



...Yes, and? Ulic is never shown to use Sith magic. It's possible that he never even learned it. He certainly hadn't learned it at the time of their duel, as he was busy shacking up with Aleema. Exar didn't fight Qel-Droma with magic.



Step one: Cast freeze spell.

Step two: Laugh as Mandalore's war mount crashes to the ground.

Step three: Profit.



That quotation is plays hard and loose with what actually happened. Mandalore and Ulic do fight hand-to-hand after Ulic destroys the war-droid and Mandalore lands on a chain net. Mandalore then takes a steel blade and has Ulic do the same. They fight, and, in the words of the vaunted narrator, "The outcome-- like the combatants-- hangs in the air!"



Exactly what else would Exar have been doing? It was Ulic overseeing the Krath and military portion of the war. In the beginning narration, it reads, "Through his dabbling in forbidden teachings, Exar Kun has fallen completely under the spell of the ancient Sith ways, and he knows he must gain additional disciples to fan the flames of his planned victory."

This is after it reads that six months have passed. Obviously, Exar Kun has spent that time learning to make himself more powerful.

Originally posted by IKC
Hey Glentract, guess what?

Ragnos was dead by the time the war even started! Ergo, the reigning Dark Lord who created the message could not have been Ragnos, period!

And it's not possible that Ragnos had a vision? That it's not possible that 1,000 years is not an exact statement? That it may be off by a few years?

Also note that if it isn't Ragnos, then it was someone weaker than him, weakening your case further.

Originally posted by IKC
The comics are the superior source, Glentract, as they are the actual story. Essential Guides are worthless if they contradict the primary source.

I have stated MUTIPLE sources. They outweigh your single source.

Originally posted by IKC
...Yes, and? Ulic is never shown to use Sith magic. It's possible that he never even learned it. He certainly hadn't learned it at the time of their duel, as he was busy shacking up with Aleema. Exar didn't fight Qel-Droma with magic.

Doesn't make Kun more powerful.

Originally posted by IKC
Step one: Cast freeze spell.

Step two: Laugh as Mandalore's war mount crashes to the ground.

Step three: Profit.

And how would that get the Mandalorians to join them?

Originally posted by IKC
That quotation is plays hard and loose with what actually happened. Mandalore and Ulic do fight hand-to-hand after Ulic destroys the war-droid and Mandalore lands on a chain net. Mandalore then takes a steel blade and has Ulic do the same. They fight, and, in the words of the vaunted narrator, "The outcome-- like the combatants-- hangs in the air!"

Doesn't make Exar more powerful.

Originally posted by IKC
Exactly what else would Exar have been doing? It was Ulic overseeing the Krath and military portion of the war. In the beginning narration, it reads, "Through his dabbling in forbidden teachings, Exar Kun has fallen completely under the spell of the ancient Sith ways, and he knows he must gain additional disciples to fan the flames of his planned victory."

Doing what it says, recruiting additional Sith.

Originally posted by IKC
This is after it reads that six months have passed. Obviously, Exar Kun has spent that time learning to make himself more powerful.

No, Exar was recruiting additional Sith.

lol...



If Ragnos had had that vision, Glentract, he would've offed Naga Sadow before he had even started the war. The narrator specifically states that the message came from the time that the Republic and Jedi were hunting the Sith to extinction. Ragnos is not the spirit that spoke to Kun and Qel-Droma.



Uh, how exactly?



I can have multiple sources that state that excrement smells like fresh wildflowers. That doesn't make the statement correct. You're trumped.



Yes it does, Glentract. Someone who knows Sith magic and is spending his time honing his force skills is going to be a hell of a lot better at the Force than someone who's managing a military operation and shacking up with a Krath sorceress.



The question was "Prove that Exar wouldn't almost have lost to Mandalore."

Please, try to remember your own statements.



Wrong, that's not what it reads. It reads that he knows he needs to gain more recruits, not that he already has them or has spent his time getting them.

Indeed, the opposite is true. Kun acquires these new disciples within the comic, not before, from Ossus.



I just proved you wrong. Again. Aren't you tired of being wrong?

Anyone have a pic of a Basilisk War Droid? I've been dying to see what one looks like.

IKC makes a lot of good points. He makes the more convincing argument. And, personally, just because one likes a specific character does not mean one is incapable of logic. Sorgo was the biggest Dooku fanboy, and from time to time, he made outstanding points.

Don't dismiss someone because of a preference. I'm biased to Yoda, Dooku, and Sidious, and yet I don't consider myself a poor debator.

IKC the comics say unkown sith lord right? well guess what it isnt uncommon for someone to make the unkown spirit known and tie-in other story lines like Ragnos's. and your argument about ragnos not being from that time period i'm fairly sure they're referring to the ancient sith around the times of the great hyperspace war. give or take 100 years(because if they don't state exact years then it's pretty much a generalization). And if starwars.com says its ragnos then wouldn't it techinically be canon?

Originally posted by xxxpoppunker182
IKC the comics say unkown sith lord right? well guess what it isnt uncommon for someone to make the unkown spirit known and tie-in other story lines like Ragnos's. and your argument about ragnos not being from that time period i'm fairly sure they're referring to the ancient sith around the times of the great hyperspace war. give or take 100 years(because if they don't state exact years then it's pretty much a generalization). And if starwars.com says its ragnos then wouldn't it techinically be canon?

There is no contradiction. The Essential Guide in this case can be used officially. And Glentract is right, the Essential Guide is actually a high level of officiality than the comics, strangely enough.

He looks like Ragnos, he's said to be Ragnos in the Essential Guide, the fact he remains "nameless" does nothing to contradict this in anyway.



I guess Kreia is unbeatable. She can go about instakilling anyone she damn wants.

Kun performed the ability once. You have no idea what goes into the action of freezing an individual. Throwing one possible alternative is ASS-U-Me'ing.

Well, I'll insert my two cents:

Marka Ragnos is powerful, but he is an unknown. No one knows what he can do, precisely. To my knowledge, he has no known instakill ability, nor can he manipulate blackholes. You are judging his level of power based on the fear of his peers. Indeed, but several of you have argued Dooku was superior to Sidious, but the Count still feared his master. Thus, it is plausible that Dooku is very much the inferior Force-user. Or is it?

Simply put, he had to be powerful to kill Simus. But it may be very possible for DE Sidious or Kreia to kill Ragnos, as he does not have any known defense against their instakills, nor does he have any known one of his own.

Thus, consider it.

Originally posted by Escape81
Well, I'll insert my two cents:

Its about time. You usually make some excellent points.

Originally posted by Escape81
Marka Ragnos is powerful, but he is an unknown. No one knows what he can do, precisely. To my knowledge, he has no known instakill ability, nor can he manipulate blackholes. You are judging his level of power based on the fear of his peers. Indeed, but several of you have argued Dooku was superior to Sidious, but the Count still feared his master. Thus, it is plausible that Dooku is very much the inferior Force-user. Or is it?

Dooku had reason to not kill Sidious though. No Sidious, no Jedi Purge, no control of the Senate to continue the war, ect.

There have been no presented reasons similar to that for Ragnos being feared by his servants, and when added with Sith traditions, it is unreasonable to assume a similar situation, but a good point nonetheless.

Originally posted by Escape81
Simply put, he had to be powerful to kill Simus. But it may be very possible for DE Sidious or Kreia to kill Ragnos, as he does not have any known defense against their instakills, nor does he have any known one of his own.

Thus, consider it.

As I've explained before, who ever made Malacor V must have lived among people who could defend against it, otherwise that person would have killed every person who attacked him without end and therefor would have been DLOS permanetly. That person would also have conquered the Jedi, because they would have no way to defend against it. Also, unless there was some major war or something that purged all knowledge of this technique from Malacor V, it is unreasonable to assume that the Sith would have forgotten it. Also note that Jedi such as Jacen Solo could also have fought off Nihilus and Kreia because he could completely remove himself from the force.

Originally posted by Illustrious
There is no contradiction. The Essential Guide in this case can be used officially. And Glentract is right, the Essential Guide is actually a high level of officiality than the comics, strangely enough.

He looks like Ragnos, he's said to be Ragnos in the Essential Guide, the fact he remains "nameless" does nothing to contradict this in anyway.



I guess Kreia is unbeatable. She can go about instakilling anyone she damn wants.

Kun performed the ability once. You have no idea what goes into the action of freezing an individual. Throwing one possible alternative is ASS-U-Me'ing.

Oh please. To say that the Essential Guide can contradict its source and still be correct is a fallacy. Try that in anything academic and you'll be laughed at before they kick you out of the course, or the school.

He is not Ragnos, the narrator states him to be the reigning Dark Lord at the time that the Republic and Jedi were hunting the Sith to their extinction. Ragnos was not Dark Lord during that time or any time similar, period. He. Isn't. Ragnos.

Kun performed it once against the Galactic Senate, not to mention all the other armed non-force sensitives present. That's tens of thousands of sentient individuals. I'm damned certain he can perform it on Mandalore. To assume he cannot is ludicrous. Even the Force-sensitives of his era (at least individually, because he knew he couldn't face every Jedi in the galaxy, which were in orbit above Yavin IV) were beneath him.

Originally posted by IKC
Oh please. To say that the Essential Guide can contradict its source and still be correct is a fallacy. Try that in anything academic and you'll be laughed at before they kick you out of the course, or the school.

You still have to prove otherwise. Illustrious is a very reputable person who has no major bias' that I know of, so it makes more sense to go with him.

You also need to understand that the Essential Guides do not use the comics as sources. They are seperate writings of a higher level. Your argument is destroyed.

Originally posted by IKC
He is not Ragnos, the narrator states him to be the reigning Dark Lord at the time that the Republic and Jedi were hunting the Sith to their extinction. Ragnos was not Dark Lord during that time or any time similar, period. He. Isn't. Ragnos.

Ragnos could have had a vision of a few years in the future whe the Sith were being hunted to extinction. Why wouldn't he kill Sadow? Well maybe he just didn't care. Ragnos, "Hmmm. Sadow is going to go to war after I am dead. Maybe I should stop him. Or maybe not because I'll be dead. Yes, I think I won't."

Or maybe Ragnos DID want to go to, but didn't because he knew he was going to die soon and that after he died the Empire would fall apart. Not something you want to have happen during a war.

Originally posted by IKC
Kun performed it once against the Galactic Senate, not to mention all the other armed non-force sensitives present. That's tens of thousands of sentient individuals. I'm damned certain he can perform it on Mandalore. To assume he cannot is ludicrous. Even the Force-sensitives of his era (at least individually, because he knew he couldn't face every Jedi in the galaxy, which were in orbit above Yavin IV) were beneath him.

Not impressive at all, really. Joruus C'Baoth, a relatively unamazing Jedi Clone did the same thing to 46,700 people with barely any effort. He did MORE than Kun, he not only froze them, but then later controlled all of them for a time until Thrawn got him to stop.

Now, please show me what makes you think Exar is so powerful.


Originally posted by IKC
The question was "Prove that Exar wouldn't almost have lost to Mandalore."

Please, try to remember your own statements.

Wow. I mean. There is NO WAY that I could be asking a different question. (sarcasm for the slower people.)

Still waiting for you to answer it.

Originally posted by IKC
Wrong, that's not what it reads. It reads that he knows he needs to gain more recruits, not that he already has them or has spent his time getting them.

Indeed, the opposite is true. Kun acquires these new disciples within the comic, not before, from Ossus.

So he knows he needs more recruits, but he isn't trying to recruit them. That doesn't make much sense.

Marka Ragnos...

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/2446/markaragnos8zo.jpg

Ragnos again.

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/174/ragnos3bo.jpg

So the sith lord looks nothing like this?

Try the "Naga Sadow how powerful tools, ergo he isn't as powerful as we think he is" kind of logic, and they'd never admit you in the first place.

Do you want me to point out every single logical fallacy you've used? I only have a 10k character limit per post, so I suppose that's difficult.



That explains how he looks like Ragnos, talks like Ragnos, is described as being Ragnos is other sources, yet he isn't Ragnos? You'll need to do more than point out a possible temporal incongruity for that.



I can use the same logic.

Kreia casually walked in, she easily tossed around three esteemed Jedi Masters and killed them on the spot. There is no reason to assume that she can't do it again.

The fact is, she didn't do it again onscreen. Just like Kun didn't do it again. To assume she can do it at will is taking into account variables you can not control.

And like Glentract said, Joruus took control of thousands of individuals simultaneously and was remotely affecting their actions. That's impressive, does that prove he was stronger than Kun? No, because arguing based upon feat wars is stupid. You and I have no idea about the level of difficulty or mastery required of any of these force powers.

Originally posted by Ianus
Marka Ragnos...

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/2446/markaragnos8zo.jpg

Ragnos again.

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/174/ragnos3bo.jpg

So the sith lord looks nothing like this?

Man those guys have really long chins.

i agree with glentract.

Originally posted by Ianus
Marka Ragnos...

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/2446/markaragnos8zo.jpg

Ragnos again.

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/174/ragnos3bo.jpg

So the sith lord looks nothing like this?

What comic series is that? I might go get 'em.

Oh yes, because that's not bias. Don't be ridiculous, I don't have to prove to you that your Cliff's Notes can't rightly contradict my literature. Logic and common sense, which you seem to avoid like the plague, do that for me.



Oh, sure. So nevermind that the entire reason Ragnos never wanted to attack the Republic is because he believed the Sith Empire would be destroyed. He just wouldn't care because he'd be dead. That makes quite a bit of sense.

Query: How does deciding not to kill the man who would start the war because you'll be dead later on, and without you your Empire would fall in war, make any sense?

Ragnos: "Hm. I'd better do something about Sadow, he'll start a war and destroy the Empire. But zOMG! I'm going to die soon. That'll be disastrous for the war effort! Nevermind that there wouldn't be any war effort if I just reached out and slaughtered him!"

Yeah Glentract. That makes sense.



Actually, Joruus's feat is very impressive. He didn't freeze them, however. He may have been one of the greatest practitioners of battle meditation. However, he did not control these people against their will. They desired to fight. Are you stating that because Bastila, for instance, could do the same she's more powerful than Kun? Don't be ridiculous. Kun froze tens of thousands against their will. Battle meditation is a whole other animal in comparison.



Why, exactly? Oh wait, you've not read the comics. Maybe Darkstar will swing by and paste his gigantic "reasons Exar Kun kicks serious ass."



I answered your first question, so you turn around and ask a different one. Fine. Mandalore and Ulic made a deal that whoever the victor was would receive the allegiance of the other's army. Kun wins, and gains the Mandalorians.



You need to read what I wrote. Kun's first appearance in The Sith War shows him, having just arrived on Ossus, the Jedi planet, giving a speech to a group of Jedi Knights, using his silver tongue to get them to come train with him.

You do when Lucas's company states the "Cliff's Notes" are official (which is as higher than the comics themselves). Last I check, that happened.



Arguing that someone who looks like Ragnos, sounds like Ragnos, acts like Ragnos, and is described as Ragnos in the official site, the Essential Guide, and other places (while not directly contradicting the original literature) makes a lot of sense too, IKC.



And I could say just as much that you haven't read the Golden Age of the Sith.

Don't be silly and get one-sided. Even Lord Darkstar agrees Ragnos would paste Kun.

Your reading skills would preclude you from admission as well. This is my message: ""Naga Sadow had powerful tools and used them to perform his most impressive feats, ergo he isn't as powerful in the Force as we think he is."



Possible temporal incongruity? It's more like a temporal impossibility, Illustrious. It's absolutely explicit: The message was made by the reigning Dark Lord at a time when the Republic and Jedi were hunting the Sith to extinction. Marka Ragnos was the Dark Lord at no such time, ergo Marka Ragnos did not make the message.

The entire point is irrelevant, however. Glentract first wrote, incorrectly, that Ulic or some such was frightened of the spirit of the unnamed Dark Lord. He was not. It matters not who he is.



Exactly. There isn't a reason she can't do it again. However, neither Kreia nor Kun had any reason to perform the feats again. Kreia because she was only threatened by the Exile, whom is presumably immune, and Kun because he never had to deal with any more mobs of non-force-sensitives.



Apparently in all cases (save for perhaps Joruus') it required little to no difficulty to use these force powers. Neither Exar nor Kreia appeared weakened, strained, or tired after performing these feats. There's no reason to believe they can not be repeated.

Heh, I suppose your ad hominen skills preclude you from logical reasoning.

How does the postulate support the conclusion? Oh wait, it doesn't. The best it does is move Sadow's power back into the unknown column. From there, you launch about 15 assumptions.



Other sources of canon contradict this. This isn't canon hierarchy according to IKC, this is according to Lucasfilm, and according to them, it was Ragnos.

This isn't anime. Ulic doesn't have to have a sweat-drop or shaking knees to indicate he's scared. He sure as hell didn't question anything.



Again semantics. They don't have on-panel evidence because they don't have "any reason." Well I suppose Sadow doesn't have "any reason" to utilize more effective techniques because Gav shoots his ship.



Weren't you arguing that absence of proof is proof of absence. Just as easily could I say by your own logical admission, since they have not performed the feat again, they can't.

Originally posted by Escape81
Well, I'll insert my two cents:

Marka Ragnos is powerful, but he is an unknown. No one knows what he can do, precisely. To my knowledge, he has no known instakill ability, nor can he manipulate blackholes. You are judging his level of power based on the fear of his peers. Indeed, but several of you have argued Dooku was superior to Sidious, but the Count still feared his master. Thus, it is plausible that Dooku is very much the inferior Force-user. Or is it?

Simply put, he had to be powerful to kill Simus. But it may be very possible for DE Sidious or Kreia to kill Ragnos, as he does not have any known defense against their instakills, nor does he have any known one of his own.

Thus, consider it.

This doesn't add up.

Because narratively (and until someone can show the narration is exaggerated or untrue), he is "the Dark Lord of the Sith - the most powerful of the most powerful" (Emphasis GAotS). Meaning of all the Dark Lords, he is the most powerful. Simple interpretive logic.

You can't argue that this is not true because he is an "unknown" because that is an irrelevant negative. You can't disprove a positive with an irrelevant negative.

let me break it down. IKC, your wrong.
illustrious and glentract are very right, and you must be blind not to see that.

No, because since Sadow displays no power that was not duplicated by a relative weakling, we then can reasonably state that he's weaker than, say, Nadd, Kun, or DE Sidious, whose great powers were not replicated by weaklings.



Let me ask you something: If Lucas had authorized a book regarding character X, and the character definitely dies at the end of the book, but the book is later contradicted by a ridiculous reference book that states that the character actually went on to live, which is correct?

The primary source: the book. Because a reference book cannot dictate the plot of the primary source.



Don't be ridiculous. Neither Ulic nor Exar displayed any signs of fear whatsoever. They. Were. Not. Frightened. They stopped fighting, the spirit declared them the chosen, Kun the Dark Lord, and Qel-Droma his apprentice, and left. Because Kun knew Sith magic, was Ulic's equal temporarily with the lightsaber, and was his superior in Force power, Ulic didn't question being made the apprentice. (It's stated quite clearly that Kun was the most powerful force user of his time. Ulic would most likely be able to sense his strength)



Or he doesn't have any more effective techniques. Sadow had plenty of reason, because he was about to lose a war.



Incorrect, because they were shown to have performed the feat without difficulty and without using a static focus of the Force. Sadow had to use the static focus (his ship) to perform his most impressive feat. And if I'm not mistaken, the sphere Sadow had helped to focus his illusions.

WTF?

So I can assume Obi-Wan is stronger than Yoda with just the context of the Clone Wars, because Obi-Wan was in the fields leading battles while Yoda sat on his green ass?

No we can't. You can't take no evidence and spin it out as a negative.



Again, irrelevant. Lucasfilm has authorized and made official the Essential Guide, ergo it is not a "ridiculous reference book."

Making a false analogy not only doesn't help your cause, it's logical fallacy.



So wait. This narration of being "stated" works, but my narration doesn't?

What hypocrisy. Ulic fought Kun to a draw. To. A. Draw. (Notice I can make the same ridiculous points of emphasis you can, so let's cut out the semantics crap.)

According to you, the on-panel evidence has to support the narration. What good is the narration it if the on-panel evidence says Ulic fought Exar to a draw?

^ See how annoyingly stupid that is? ^



Getting suddenly backstabbed and shot while you stood a good chance in a battle doesn't seem like a bad excuse for retreating, now doesn't it?

And because he was about to lose the war, he certainly didn't want to take his own life with him, different ideology. Sadow went on to preserve his life, not end it.



They were shown performing the feat. We were never shown them performing the feat at another occassion. Nor were we shown the exact technique in the feat itself. And neither feat was shown to be viable in a dueling context.

If the Clone Wars were the only evidence we had of Yoda's power, then yes.



Oh, right, that's why the Lucas Books seal is stamped prominently on the back of DLotS. You didn't answered my analogy. Which book is correct? Which book should be correct, if you're going to blindly follow the arbitrary canon rules of Lucasfilm.



Oh, it doesn't say that Kun's the most powerful of the era in the comics themselves. Look for your vaunted reference works for that particular statement. "zOMG, THEY ARE TEH CANON!"



You can't really say that, since the fight was a lightsaber stalemate that was interrupted midway. Say Obi-Wan fights Obi-Wan. One has to win eventually, right?

And besides, Kun would most likely get tired of the saber fight and start using the Dark Side, which Ulic hadn't fully accepted yet.



Actually, the narration says that "neither can claim an advantage with the lightsaber!" That doesn't mean that they're going to be fighting forever or that it's a conclusive draw. It certainly doesn't mean they're definite equals.



Sure, but that doesn't mean that if you have a powerful technique you don't give it a try while you're retreating. Sadow's ace up his sleeve was his ship's ability to affect the stars. He used that while making his final escape from republic pursuers.



Alright, let's accept the premise that these two could only perform these feats at the time they did. Maybe the planets were in alignment! Nevermind that I've never said anything similar regarding Sadow's feats.

What, then?

Quite obviously, Exar never had to freeze anyone he dueled, since he curbstomped them without even using offensive force powers. But what does it matter whether he can use it only once or many times?

Originally posted by Illustrious
This doesn't add up.

Because narratively (and until someone can show the narration is exaggerated or untrue), he is "the Dark Lord of the Sith - the most powerful of the most powerful" (Emphasis GAotS). Meaning of all the Dark Lords, he is the most powerful. Simple interpretive logic.

You can't argue that this is not true because he is an "unknown" because that is an irrelevant negative. You can't disprove a positive with an irrelevant negative.

Illustrious,

I'm a firm believer of the statement that there are always exceptions to the rule. Yes, Ragnos was cited as the most powerful Sith Lord, but only of that time. In retrospect, it would be impossible to name him stronger than such beings as Exar Kun, Kreia, and Revan simply because we do not have a grasp of his power. I did not deny that Ragnos was immensely powerful. What I am saying is that there are those imbued with the power of instakills i.e: Kreia, DE Sidious, ect.

Using those two as an example, Kreia was only defeated when she didn't fight back as hard as she could, and Sidious's spirit was expelled by a powerful Jedi.

But both had abilities in which there were no defense. So, it is impossible for you to state that Ragnos could defend himself against it, other than a mere citation of power which was only relevent during his time on the throne of the Sith Empire.

So until we see some defense, the possibility that someone with an instakill can kill Ragnos is highly possible.

Originally posted by Escape81
I'm a firm believer of the statement that there are always exceptions to the rule. Yes, Ragnos was cited as the most powerful Sith Lord, but only of that time. In retrospect, it would be impossible to name him stronger than such beings as Exar Kun, Kreia, and Revan simply because we do not have a grasp of his power. I did not deny that Ragnos was immensely powerful. What I am saying is that there are those imbued with the power of instakills i.e: Kreia, DE Sidious, ect.

They would probably be ineffective against Ragnos. See below.

Originally posted by Escape81
Using those two as an example, Kreia was only defeated when she didn't fight back as hard as she could, and Sidious's spirit was expelled by a powerful Jedi.

Sidious was also defeated by JA Luke and Leia(Wasn't he?). Brand isn't the most powerful dude of all time, certainly no where the level of Arca(who Nadd's older spirit killed).

Kreia's could have been defeated by nearly anyone with the ability to temporarily remove themself from the force. This is done by mutiple people.

Kreia/Nihilus' power can be block, rather easily, infact. The Jedi Exile was removed from the force, making him capable of winning. Jacen, a relatively weak person next to Ragnos, could do the same thing. Vergere could also do the same thing.

Originally posted by Escape81
But both had abilities in which there were no defense. So, it is impossible for you to state that Ragnos could defend himself against it, other than a mere citation of power which was only relevent during his time on the throne of the Sith Empire.

Both had abilities that CAN be defended against, as shown above.

Originally posted by Escape81
So until we see some defense, the possibility that someone with an instakill can kill Ragnos is highly possible.

Until we see someone with an unblockable instakill, it would be foolish to assume that.

Oh my god:

IKC. Can you please use at least some logic ? The spirit talking to Ulic and Exar is Ragnos and that quote about the time he came from is completely senseless.

There were only two times were Jedi and the Republic hunted down Dark Siders. The first would be about 25,000 years ABY before the Sith Empire was even formed and the second would be the time period of the Great Hyperspace war. In the first time period there was no Dark Lord because there was no Sith Empire. In the second time period it would be limited to either Ragnos, Sadow and Kressh.

Kressh was blown up with his ship so Kun couldn't have seen Kressh's mumified remains on Korriban. Sadow died on Yavin 4 and again Kun wouldn't be able to see his mumified body on Korriban. And thus the last possibility is Ragnos himself. Period.

And for force powers: Everything Exar Kun had access to did come from the ancient Sith Empire. Either it was brought to known space by Sadow (everything on Yavin 4), kept by Nadd (Onderon and Dxun), kept on Ossus or was discovered personally by Kun on Korriban.

Now the ancient Sith Lords in the Sith Empire had access to all of those Dark Side sources, artifacts, alchemy and special technology but non of them did ever try to challenge Ragnos. Therefore it's quite save to assume that Ragnos would be more powerful than Exar Kun because having far more sources for Dark Side powers than him and much more time for training (remember: he reigned over the Sith Empire for more than a century).

Thus being said Ragnos will most likely destoy Exar.

Glentract, Nadd never killed Arca. In fact, Arca infuriated Nadd because he wasn't able to kill him, even through his puppet Ommin. Arca died from the Krath droid ambush on Deneba.

Escape forgot to mention Exar's instakill used against Odan-Urr

Nai:

I've already proved that it is impossible for Ragnos to have created the message. He was dead before the Hyperspace war even started, certainly long before the Republic and Jedi were winning the war and making the Sith extinct. It is a temporal impossibility that he could've made the message. Ergo, Ragnos did not create the message.

The Ancient Sith lords certainly did not have access to all these Dark Side sources. Are you going to tell me with a straight face that Ludo Kressh could have walked into Naga Sadow's stronghold, sat down with his alchemical equipment, and tinkered around without Naga Sadow trying to lop his head off? Certainly not. The fierce rivalry precludes the Ancient Sith from learning a great deal from each other. Exar Kun had no such rivalries to contend with and thus was able to build up an immense wealth of knowledge, which, with what he stole from Ossus, was "more wealth and knowledge than he can ever use," as described by the vaunted narrator.

That being said, the outcome of this battle is unknown.

So you've efffectively submitted to the logical fallacy that absence of proof is proof of absence.

Okay. I see no reason why this debate even exists then. Since clearly logic only exists as IKC deems fit.



You seem to forget that Lucasfilm has all rights to their enterprise. If they say it's official, if they want to retroactively change stuff, they can do it. Period.

You arguing levels of canon counterintuitive to what Lucasfilm says is blatantly wrong.

That's why debating with you is like arguing with a Christian zealot about religion. You are quite possibly the more narrow minded individual on this forum. And like ER, you think you can debate.

For all facts concerning Star Wars (copyright Lucasfilms!) I will take their word over yours. Are you going to argue otherwise? If you are, you are clearly daft.



No, it doesn't state it. And unless your satirizing yourself with that quote, you're not doing anyone any justice.



Wait a minute.

Why does this logic apply to Exar?

According to you, Mr. Internation Kun Cult fanboy, narration is nothing compared to on panel evidence. Kun never beat Ulic on panel, nor was it referenced offpanel. Ergo, by your rules, it didn't happen, Exar did not do it, and he could not do it.

Touche. If you even attempt to argue this, you basically conceded you were being a hypocrite and selectively choosing which quotes are valid.

I say all narrative quotes are valid, I do not attempt to argue what is hyperbole. I say all personal quotes have a possibility of hyperbole. Your policy is "whatever helps Kun's case I'll use." You are literally nothing more than an illogical fanboy.

"It never happened. It was not on panel. Exar is not stronger than Ulic."



And the narration in GAotS say the ancient Sith are godlike, titanic, and frightening. That doesn't mean Sadow can't use other abilities, or that he's weaker than Nadd or Kun.

BE CONSISTENT. APPLY LOGIC BOTH WAYS.

Just because you are so blind, I bolded it for you .



And Kun's "ace up his sleeve" was force power, yet he didn't do it, now did he?

According to you, Kun can't.

Watch, now you're going to come after me with some more semantics bullshit. -waits.-



Because you do not know the context.

If Aleema did not duplicate some feats of Sadow, you would never have guessed his ship did anything.

You applying logic down a one-way street does not work. Period.



It's also a temporal impossibility for it not to be him. Get this through your head. And not to mention, later sources of canon DO say it's Ragnos.

Star Wars EU is not up to your interpretation. Your opinion is irrelevant. Stop pretending to be Supershadow. Lucasfilms says it's Ragnos, it's Ragnos.

Your opinion and observations, even if you have a valid grip, do not supercede Lucasfilms.



You're still effectively trying to convince people that a paleontologist knows more about Ancient Egypt than a pharoah.

I don't care if you spend your life plundering dead stuff, being immersed is still a more effective way of learning. You applying the analogy of Kressh tinkering with Sadow's stuff is irrelevant, because it is your assumption that Kressh does not have access to his own materials.

And additionally, if you want to throw that kind of crap logic out, I can just as easily say that as soon as an individual develops an incredible new piece of technology or ability, he will dominate over the others until another matches it. Competition drives progression far more than dispersion. Basic economic principle.

This was your question: "So I can assume Obi-Wan is stronger than Yoda with just the context of the Clone Wars, because Obi-Wan was in the fields leading battles while Yoda sat on his green ass?"

This was my response: "If the Clone Wars were the only evidence we had of Yoda's power, then yes."

Tell me how that is an illogical response. Matters aren't proven based on hearsay and supposition, they're proven on evidence. Which, of course, you're consistantly refused to provide.



Do you honestly believe that Lucas himself reads through every piece of material that his company verifies and approves it?

Now we've switched sides. I'm arguing logic whereas you're arguing evidence. I say that, logically, a "Cliff's Notes" cannot contradict the novel it's based on and be correct. You're saying that because Lucasfilm sets arbitrary rules of canon that they should be followed at all times, even when doing so makes no sense.



And, of course, insulting your opponent and calling him names is the clear sign of superiority in a debate.

Six year olds may think so.



Yet more name-calling. Please, my nephew at this point does better than that.

Of course Kun never beat Ulic on-panel. The fight was interrupted. It did not happen. That does not mean that, were they to fight again uninterrupted, that Kun would not beat him, because of on-panel evidence of Kun's superiority (use of Sith Magic, etc.).



And you must be literally nothing more than the same, save for your devotion is to the "godlike" Ancient Sith who don't seem to show a great many reasons to be described as such.



And subjective quotes can be applied to any one. It does not make them superior, especially since your only comparative quote relates to the amorphous "later Jedi."

Furthermore, what makes you think those quotes are speaking of the Ancients as individuals, rather than the collective? Certainly an empire made up of those beings would deserve such adjectives.



Query: What are you even talking about? Do you mean when he faced the combined might of all Jedi? Clarify.



Yes, but since she did we now know his ship is the reason he was able to perform those feats. If she were never able to duplicate his feats, and it's not shown in GAotS or FotSE that he used artificial means to perform them, then I'd assume him and the rest of the Sith to be far more powerful than those that came before or after.

Pay attention to the next paragraph.

However, because neither the evidence nor the quotes indicate or state such (that they are literally superior to those that came before or after), their power is impossible to judge. Ergo, it is not illogical to assume that previous or later Force users could have bested one of them. As well, it is folly to put them in a versus match.



Oh. So the Sith Empire, after Ludo's death and Naga's exile, just sat around while the Republic and Jedi drove them to extinction without being led by a new, unknown to us Dark Lord? That makes plenty of sense.

If you believe that, I'm not surprised you'd believe that a man who happened to be dead at the time somehow reigned as Dark Lord of the Sith during a war he didn't want to happen and created a message for the future Dark Lord.



I'd submit that he does know more about certain aspects, such as the life of a slave and others in the lower classes as well as the wars Egypt fought. He doesn't know more about the Pharoah's life, obviously, but his other knowledge compensates.



Nonsense. Do you then claim that Naga and Ludo specialized in the same fields? Do you claim that they both knew the same spells? Of course not. They guarded their secrets for a reason.



Just so you know, that's exactly why they guard their own secrets. I don't see how this counters my point.

Originally posted by IKC
I've already proved that it is impossible for Ragnos to have created the message. He was dead before the Hyperspace war even started, certainly long before the Republic and Jedi were winning the war and making the Sith extinct. It is a temporal impossibility that he could've made the message. Ergo, Ragnos did not create the message.

The only thing you've proven is that you don't know anything about that "message". First off it wasn't a message it was the spirit of the Sith Lord and the spirit of a force user of course knows about events happening after their death. The same way Nadd knew what was going on at Onderon and Obi-Wan knew what Luke was doing in ROTJ and ESB.

The point is that the Sith Lord appearing to Ulic and Exar looks like Ragnos and as you might have noticed, Ragnos was a half-blood and therefore he looked different than all the Sith that did have "pure" Sith blood in the comics.

And now despite the fact that Ragnos is the only individual from the time mentioned that looks like that (even different enough from all others that Kun can recognize him by only having seen his mumified body), the only possible Sith Lord from this time which remains Kun could have seen on Korriban and it's said in every damn source that it was Ragnos you still want to argue that it wasn't Ragnos. Lmao.



Just go back and study the sources. We have seen that Kressh and Sadow were both able to use Sith Lightning and they both used swords which were enchanted with Sith magic - so obviously there was some "basic knowledge" that all Sith were able to use.

Next thing is that it doesn't matter. With all the powers Kressh and Sadow had (and most of Kun's knowledge was coming from Sadow) both didn't even think about fighting Ragnos. Why ? Because Ragnos had simply more power and knowledge then them. Ragnos killed Simus who was said to be the most powerful Sith magician at his time - powerful enough to keep his own servered head alive in a jar for more than a century. Still Ragnos wasted him and reigned over an entire empire filled with powerful Dark Side users for more than a century.

Now please tell me how Kun can even hope to defeat Ragnos...

IKC, one thing I'd like to address right now...

You're calling the New Essential Guide of Star Wars, authorized and licensed by LucasFilm, the company completely in charge of the EU projects, the equivalent of unofficial Cliff Notes?

You DO realize that Lucasfilm has a dynamic EU canon policy, right? They retroactively changed their stance so that Boba Fett lives after ROTJ. They CAN and they DO make adjustments to suit themselves. Hell, Tolkien made adjustments and changes in the transition to LOTR from the Hobbit. Such a large and diverse creation, submitted by various authors commissioned for such projects, cannot be 100% in sync. After all, there are TWO post-ROTJ books depicting the marriage of Princess Leia and Han Solo. Since they don't easily fit together at all, overall EU canon policy tends to use a mutated version of both to get the "real" story done.

EU sources in particular are examined much in the same way that history sources are: they are correct until something later of similar or greater validity overturns them. This is simply the way it is. An excellent example is Bartholomew Roberts, the pirate, was a dandy who slept alone in a cabin and wanted his body thrown overboard at his death. But new evidence could surface that would confirm many suspicions that Captain Roberts was in fact a woman, and one of Jack Rackham's crew nonetheless.

You arguing against the solidified canon policy of the company that has ALL rights to the material and continuity is hubris.

Sith swords have cortosis weaving and are reinforced via Sith magic.

Ludo Kressh broke one with his bare hands.

Done.

Bullshit.

If you are the ones supposing or assuming they are powerful, or if characters within the comics are supposing, then it's possibly hyperbole. When the narrator assumes it, you have to PROVE THE NARRATOR WRONG.

You haven't done that. QED. Done.



When have I switched sides? I've always argued that narrative canon without being proven as hyperbole is acceptable. And that's actually irrelevant towards the original point. The Ancient Sith are godlike, they're power was titanic compared to later generations.

QED 2.



Then show me you can debate. Otherwise, don't bother.

QED 3.



Exactly. It did not happen. The other bits of on-panel evidence is irrelevant. Because he did not beat Ulic.

Feats are irrelevant unless you can put them in context. This isn't "FEAT WARS." You have not demonstrated to me the logic behind Exar being greater than Ulic, because he DID NOT DEFEAT HIM ON-PANEL. You are attempting to put Exar's feats in context to what now? Right, there is nothing you're attempting to put his feats in context to. Are you putting them in context with Superman? With Galactus? With Sponge Bob?

The only argument you have is that Naga Sadow has a shortage of demonstrated on-panel abilities. Wow, that's so astounding that I knew it before you even said anything.

I'm using your own logic against you. Because you are holding Sadow in question because of a lack of on-panel evidence.



The whole point is they don't need a reason to be described as such. The narrator did it.

IKC's opinion or on-panel evidence of a different comic series does not supercede the narrator's word. Get that grandiose notion out of your head. Who do you think you are? Lucas?



Those same quotes were applied to individuals like Ragnos and Sadow, yes.

Again, you haven't read the comics. QED I-lost-count-but-it's-rather-high.



He never did use his "superior force power" as you claimed, to defeat Ulic on screen, now did he? So if I was going strictly on on-panel evidence, Exar has never shown to be stronger than Ulic.



So you should assume Kun to be far weaker than he is now, considering later NJO Jedi could cloak entire ships, or control a black hole, right?

Duplication of feats or demonstration of feats of a similar level doesn't make a feat less impressive. Aleema knew the ancient technique and had access to the ancient weapon, how does this show Sadow is weaker again?

Oh wait, you're dodging the question.



So you just admitted to being illogical. Because you uphold the firm belief that Kun is stronger than Naga Sadow.

Then this debate is really over. Someone who can't even conform to logic and then attempts to use what I have been saying the entire "debate" as ammo against me. Good job. So maybe you can listen to what I've typed.

Excuse me while I step back and take an extended "ROFL" moment.



How the hell does it compensate for anything?

Just in case you don't know anything about paleontology, we know relatively little as far as the lives of slaves. We know practically zero names, zero birthdates, zero accomplishments. We know about Pharoahs, some of them in length, but no paleontologist will ever claim to know more about Ancient Egypt than a pharoah. No scientist would be stupid enough to make that claim.

First order logic tells me the same thing. How is Kun, who goes about and loots the stuff, going to be more powerful than Sadow?

How is Kun, with one Sith amulet, going to be more powerful than Sadow with several?

How is Kun, possessing remnant knowledge from Sadow, going to be stronger or better at it then the source itself?

You can not answer these basic logical inferences without going into pointless and unfounded "hearsay and supposition." Ergo narrator + logic suggest the Ancient Sith are stronger than Kun.

QED!



Where does it specify they guarded their secrets in GAotS?

You argued that the spirit was not Ragnos because a later canon changed it. I can easily use your same logic and say the events in The Sith Wars and The Fall of the Sith are invalid.



It easily counters your point. Because of them to still be alive, they would have to become more powerful. It's a logical factor that does not exist for Kun. He did not have several rivals with the motive, the method, and the means to kill him.

Nai:

You've just shown your ignorance of the story. It was a message. Quoting:

"This is a moment conceived in the long-forgotten time when the Sith were a mighty race of magicians...a time when the Sith people were being driven to extinction by the Jedi Knights and the armies of the Galactic Republic. A time when Sith Magic learned how to construct amulets to carry a message down through the centuries... a message from their reigning Dark Lord of the Sith!" Emphasis mine.

I believe I just shot you down. Ragnos was dead at the time. He can't reign when he's dead. There's nothing saying Ragnos was the only half-blood. The only appearance similarity is the fact that they both had horns. However, the Dark Lord's horns in the message go outward and curve up and in, unlike Ragnos' which go up. There's nothing to indicate that there were no more Dark Lords named after Kressh's death. It's a temporal impossibility for it to have been Ragnos.



Question: Where in hell does it show Kressh and Sadow using Force Lightning? I've never seen that. I don't doubt they can, but I don't think we've seen it.



Because there's nothing to indicate that the Ancients were clearly superior to everyone that came before or after them. Ergo, a battle between them would be up in the air. Kun could have easily reigned over the Jedi if they were an organization set up to be controlled in such a manner. What's your point?

Ianus:



No, I'm calling specific entries the equivalent of Cliff's Notes. If there's an entry regarding the Sith War, for example, I would expect it to be a summation. I'd expect to learn more about the Sith War from the actual source material.



I've not seen the Clone Wars, Illustrious. I've been going on your description that Yoda "sat on his green ass." Was there a narrator during the Clone Wars? Did he describe Yoda's power?

Based on what you've given me, my answer stands.



No, according to you it reads later Jedi, something not quite definitive. It doesn't read all later Jedi, as I've pointed out repeatedly, much less does it refer to other Force users.



Oh, so insults and namecalling are acceptable things to stoop to during a debate?



And you're not doing so well. I don't have a lack of evidence. Quoting from the other thread:



Therefore, Exar could beat Ulic. And, I remind you again, they were only equal for a time in lightsaber combat, as described on-panel and by the narrator.



But the narrator's word does not indicate their clear superiority over specific individuals who are similarly powerful. Nor does it indicate their inferiority. It is up in the air. My personal belief is that beings like DE Sidious and Exar Kun stand a good chance of beating some of the Ancients like Naga, because of the lack of evidence for their power. But that doesn't make it true.



As stated in the other thread, I'd like some specifics. Which quotes applied to whom, and the like.



No he didn't. But we don't know how long their fight laster, either. It was interrupted, you remember. But on-panel evidence indicates he is stronger than Ulic. When has Ulic ever fired literal beams of energy from his hands? Never. When has he ever used Sith magic? Never. Exar has. Exar is more powerful in the Force. He wasn't stronger in lightsaber combat at the time.



No, because they don't easily replicate his feats or show them to be the product of artifice.



Duplication of a feat removes the novelty of it, makes it more common and less impressive. Like I've said before, it shows that Sadow's power is not what caused the core to be ripped from a star. It shows he's weaker than our previous estimations indicated.



Incorrect, I hold the personal belief that while the Ancients' power is relatively unknown, Exar Kun and others like him have a great chance of beating them because we do have a fairly accurate estimate of their power.

However, this belief is not substantiated by enough evidence to make it viable in a versus forum. Nor is the belief that the Ancients would curbstomp these individuals substantiated by evidence. The outcome of these battles is up in the air, which makes it folly to put them in a versus forum.



It compensates insofar as he has more general knowledge about Egypt than the Pharoah in many ways, Illustrious. I don't see what's so hard to understand about this.



I was throwing that out as an example. I could have easily said "pig farmer" or something.

Zero accomplishments? What about the pyramids?



He's possibly more powerful because he may have looted knowledge that Sadow would not have had access to (especially that which came from Ossus).



For one, it's only one confirmed amulet. Kun is shown in TSW to wear numerous other such baubles. To answer your question, it's possible that Kun has more Force potential than Sadow. We don't know because of reasons stated above.



I wouldn't diminish it by calling it remnant knowledge. Kun literally came across a treasure trove. To answer your question, I never stated he would be. However, the knowledge he gleaned from other sources would compensate for it. There's also the possibility that Kun has more natural talent. Like the entire fight, it is up in the air. We can't possibly know for sure.



Again, no they don't. The narrator indicates nothing of the sort. I've said this numerous times. Summation:

1) Narrator only speaks of "later" Jedi, never using the word "all."

2) He speaks only of Jedi, not Sith as Kun became, or any other misc. Force users.



Absence of proof isn't proof of absence. The Sith were ruthless and backstabbing. Conducting your own research into Sith Magic to increase your standing would be fruitless if you didn't protect what you gleaned and allowed your rivals access to it.



Really? Is that why Kun is primarily concerned with acquiring more knowledge? Is that why his primary purpose in having Aleema detonate the Cron Cluster is to land on Ossus and steal priceless Jedi secrets?

Just because he didn't have the same motivation doesn't mean he didn't want to become more powerful.

Because your answer stands. You submit to logical fallacy. Period.

Because while Obi-Wan demonstrated more feats, there is no logical reason to believe Yoda was less powerful. Same with this situation.

You have not offered any logic other than "well he has more feats, lol!"



Funny how things work when you can subjectively change the meaning of statement. Why would that statement not refer to all later Jedi? It certainly does not pin any timeframe for that remark.

Again, you're assuming a negative when there is none.



That's not namecalling. I poked holes in your logical reasoning in this "debate."

You have not recovered from them. You have shown to commit more fallacy than truth, ergo, bad debater.



Nope. I'm actually doing very well.

You have a lack of evidence Exar is greater than Ulic. You have logic to support that point, I have logic to support that Sadow is greater than Exar.

We're on the same damn square. The only difference is that in the context of the Sadow vs. Kun debate, you're losing.



Abilities without context don't mean a thing.

Logically, it indicates Kun is superior, but on-panel evidence shows a draw.

Logic indicates Sadow is superior to Kun, on-panel evidence is inconclusive.

It's the same damn boat. Stop trying to tip it.



Oh don't be daft. You're arguing semantics again.

So in order to duplicate Kun's feat, a future Jedi has to walk into the Senate and freeze the same individuals? I personally find controlling a black hole with the force to be quite a bit more impressive, does that mean I can automatically assume Luke to be stronger than Kun?

According to your opinion: no. According to the garbage you spewed in this thread and others: yes.

Be consistent.



My previous estimation never said he could throw around stars at will. It shows that with his gear, he clearly can.

Are you arguing what Kun is capable of without a lightsaber or his amulet? No. So why should I argue what Sadow is like naked?

Again, inconsistent logic.



You still didn't show why you believe Kun to be stronger. In fact, you said it was up in the air.

Thereby you submit to having a personal bias. Personal bias = illogic.



Not really, you automatically assume the Pharoah would not know about his own state as much as a researcher does. I fail to see how this is viable.



You can tell me what each individual slave did for the pyramids?

No. The paleontologists can tell me that slaves collectively built the pyramids. The same knowledge and more would be available to the pharaoh.

Wow, that statement backfired, huh?



Can you demonstrate Sadow didn't have access to Ossus?

Again, pointless supposition and assumption. You didn't disprove the original logical postulate.



Assumption again.

Assumption does not trump logic.



Possible. It's more logical to assume Sadow had more knowledge.

Sadow and Kun's inherent force potential is a complete unknown.

With that being said, an unbiased observer would disregard that as a wash, and focus on other logic. Ergo, Sadow wins because logic dictates he has more logic.

You assuming Kun had more force power and then believing he would defeat Sadow because of it indicates a character fixation, fanboyism, and a clear personal bias.



I've already argued your point on the "all" semantics. You're twisting language now for your argument. Bad move against someone who's got plenty of experience with literature.

He's also spoken of Sadow as godlike, with immense powers. Technological or not, nothing of Kun's narration applies to the same degree.

And of course, the same logical inferences I said above, you simply batted away with pointless hypotheticals.

Again, you're grasping now.



Then let the logic be consistent.

Either they had open access and advancements were shared.

OR

They had many esoteric advancements, and they required great skill in order to not be wiped out by the advancements of their peers. Competition that Kun did not have.

Either postulate is in the Ancient Sith's favor.



Who competed with him?

What makes you think the ancient Sith had no intention of becoming more powerful? The primary doctrine of the Sith and of the Dark Side in general is acquiring more power. The Sith Empire had competition and thereby progress, what did Kun have besides looting?


Again, where's your logic, did you leave it at home?

I like how subjective and definitive change definitions when one is focusing on Kun, and when one is focusing on the ancient Sith. Nice double standard, IKC.

Maybe you didn't read what I posted and that's why you didn't answer my questions. I don't think I can dumb them down, so please try to answer them this time.



If there was not one, or he doesn't, and the Clone Wars were all we had to go on on Yoda and your description of his actions is accurate, then my answer stands.



Exactly, it doesn't pin a timeframe, nor does it say all. It's an amorphous statement that essentially means they're more powerful than a random group of Jedi.

I submit that if they had meant to mean that the Ancients were more powerful than all later Jedi, then they would have said that explicitly. Because they didn't, you can't prove that they did, and you can't ask me to prove the negative. The burden is on you.



And I've been asking for evidence for a week, which you've failed to produce.

Oh, and I seem to have caught you in a bald-faced lie.

In the other thread, you claimed the following:



Really? What's that on his hand, here, with a chain running up his arm to a shoulderpad suspiciously similar to the amulet Kun later acquires?

http://www.theforce.net/timetales/tt1-1/tgaots7.jpg

You also wrote the following:



As well as,



I refer you to the above scan, as well as the following:

http://www.theforce.net/timetales/tt1-1/tgaots9.jpg

Look at his hand! Red crystal on the back of the hand, mysteriously like Kun's! The only difference is that Kun's was gold.

http://www.theforce.net/timetales/tt1-1/tfotse3.jpg

I'd go on and post more, but this is sufficient to show that you talk out your ass. Back to your "points."



Nonsense. On-panel evidence shows Kun grew exponentially more powerful in TSW than he was in DLotS.

Quoting myself:





No, panel evidence shows Kun's superiority.



No, logic is inconclusive as well. The comparative quotes do not apply to Kun.



You can. That's why NJO Luke vs. Exar Kun would be such a titanic battle. Personally I favor Exar Kun but it could feasibly go either way.



So wait, you count a capital ship as "gear?"



You aren't arguing that, and I never tried to make you.



I state that I favor Kun because we know more about him and have more on-panel evidence of his power. That doesn't mean I know for certain that he would win, but I do believe he has as much a chance as Sadow.



So the Pharoah knows every picayune detail about his state, many things that researchers were able to discover later on?

This analogy isn't quite accurate regardless. The Ancient Sith literally helped those who came after them find their preserved knowledge, sometimes teaching it directly as spirits. Pharoahs aren't able to do such things. All they have is the preservation part.



Nonsense, you claimed that the slaves had no accomplishments. I said they had the pyramids. That wasn't the intent of the argument. Like I said, you could easily substitute "pig farmers."

Which, I'll note, you didn't respond to.



Mostly because Ossus as a Jedi stronghold didn't exist, Illustrious. Odan-Urr vows to make it one at the end of FotSE. Incalculable amounts of Jedi knowledge are stored there by the time of Exar Kun.



No, you've yet to prove that. To say "later Jedi" means "all later Force users" is a mightier assumption than mine.



It would if that's what I believed. It isn't. It is possible that he has more Force power. I do believe he has an equal a chance as Sadow of coming out on top, simply because all evidence regarding Sadow's power is inconclusive.

Because you believe the opposite, Illustrious, and you indeed make a mighty leap to the conclusion that "later Jedi" means "all later Force users," those epithets can clearly apply to you.



And you cannot prove the positive. I'm not the one twisting language. It is your assumption that comprises this debate.



Nonsense. As I wrote before, this is subjective and not comparative language. As I wrote in the other thread, godlike doesn't translate to "most powerful" nor does immense or titanic translate to "largest."



And of course, if the opposite questions were posed to you, you could only do the same if you kept to being intellectually honest.



The latter is true, but the last statement is not. This isn't in the Ancient Sith's favor, because Kun continued his own advancement at an impressive speed even though you claim he had no competition. Indeed, increasing his own power seemed to be his primary goal, as the decimation of Ossus shows. However, it could be said that Kun's competition is the Jedi Order itself, since he was more exposed to it than the Ancients were.



Either A) nobody or B) the Jedi as a whole. Whichever is true, it doesn't change Kun's actions.



In order: Nothing. Yes, and? Kun had progress inasmuch as most of his actions increased his own power. As well, looting was not his only means of progressing. He did his own experiments with Sadow's equipment, turning the massassi priest Zythmnr into an alchemical monster, among other things.

Originally posted by IKC
Nai:

You've just shown your ignorance of the story. It was a message. Quoting:

"This is a moment conceived in the long-forgotten time when the Sith were a mighty race of magicians...a time when the Sith people were being driven to extinction by the Jedi Knights and the armies of the Galactic Republic. A time when Sith Magic learned how to construct amulets to carry a message down through the centuries... a message from their reigning Dark Lord of the Sith!" Emphasis mine.

And you have shown your ignorance of the fundamental workings of the SW universe, the story and logic itself.

Have you ever seen an interactive "message" ? I sure as hell haven't.

Quotes from the Dark Lord in the "message":
"You have chosen... Now you are the chosen."
"Exar Kun, because of you, the Sith will never die... you have rightly earned the title of Dark Lord of the Sith!"

How the hell would a "message" from a time period thousand years before Exar Kun know Exar Kun's name and know about what he has done, hmm ? It was the spirit of a force user and not a normal message.



The point is that the comic itself says that "message" shows the Golden Age of the Sith Empire. The Golden Age of the Sith Empire is clearly associated with Marka Ragnos. Besides of this we have seen no other half-blood sitting in the Council under Ragnos and it's mentioned throughout the comics that a half-blood is something very special in such a high position. That and the point that every official source stated it was Ragnos talking to Ulic and Exar make it perfectly clear that it in fact was Ragnos spirit and not a "message" as you like to put it.

And before you go on comparing Sadow to Kun (and make seem Sadow less powerful than he really was) - why don't you just read the comics, eh ?

Kun talking about Sadow's powers and what he left behind:
"His magician's power lives on. A power that could easily destroy me, unless I learn to master it. So master it I shall." (DLotS #5)

Now this is just talking about what Sadow actually left behind which is not everything Sadow had. Do you really want to tell me that Kun mastered everything Sadow has developed, mastered and left behind in less than a year ? And even if he should have done this (which seems to be impossible) he would be not as powerful as the living Sadow. And yet even if you want to assume that Kun could be as powerful as the living Sadow he would not be as powerful as Ragnos.

So it's pretty much clear that Ragnos > Sadow > Kun meaning that Ragnos would pretty much destroy Kun in a fight.

The narrator did not describe his power. But again, there is no reason to assume Yoda is weaker than Obi-Wan, considering he outranked him, he gave him pointers, and he was the individual who scolded him when he did something wrong.

Still, he was depicted on his green ass, while Obi-Wan in the field. What's the prove? That Obi-Wan has more feats?

Well obviously, but that doesn't indicate anything.

Again, you're the one speaking out of your ass, you make logical claims you can't even back up.



If it means a random group of Jedi, then it is essentially pinning a timeframe.

It does not pin a timeframe, nor does it modify to specify which Jedi. So it can not be simply indicating a particular group or time of Jedi, got it?

The statement is a positive there is no modifier. QED. STFU.



Since when does it state in Golden Age of the Sith that the shoulder pad is the enchanted amulet?



I conceded Sadow used magical gauntlets. Good job Captain Obvious.



Wow, you assume you can say something with such bravado after you "proved"... something obvious. Good job.



Since when can you quantify his power based on one scene?



Yet it was a draw.

You don't seem to understand I'm using your own BS logic against you. Prove to me that Kun beats Ulic. If you can't, I suggest you not holding others to the same standard.



Since when? Don't twist the statements. Also, by Kun's own admission, he was inferior. For one known to be a bit big-headed, that's quite a statement.

Also, logic indicates the superior. You know... those perfectly viable logical quotes you answered with half assed assumptions? yeah, those.



on-panel feats that are not put in context.

You claim the narrative and logic do not put Kun in context, which is debatable. Your feats surely do not have Sadow in context.

You have nothing.



The information is available to him. What? Do you think the hieroglyphs poof centuries later?

Yeah, so even by helping them, can you prove that he learned all of the ancient Sith secrets? Can you indicate he learned them better than the ancient Sith?

No. You can't. And you haven't. And since you haven't, you're debate falls through.

You seem to forget I've taken out the very logical foundation of your debate, and yet you're so slow to respond you haven't even noticed.



If I take notes on what you don't respond to, or can't respond to, the list would be far too long.

I said can you account for an individual slave? No.

Surely the knowledge that some highly-inclusive group built the pyramids is common knowledge, hell, even the hieroglyphs have depictions of the Slaves building the pyramids. Any self-serving Pharoah would know that fact and more.



What did he learn there that would indicate his superiority?

You said yourself that the advantage he had over Ulic was "Sith Magic." So clearly, where did he have an advantage in Sadow over Sith Magic?



So I am to assume that a phrase with no modifier anywhere in the text refers to a select cult of Jedi in some 2 year period in the future?

Bullshit. That's a stupid statement. Learn English. Take a course in literature.



When was the conclusion there?

Do you find it funny that all the other readers can infer that "later Jedi" means all, and that the very basis of the English language (a modifier-less adjective) says it's absolute?

Oh wait, of course not, because this debate hinges on Star Wars as IKC interprets it.



You twist the semantics of every quote.

Apparently "titanic" doesn't mean "titanic," "Godlike" clearly only indicates the entire Empire in reference to one man, "later Jedi" only indicates 2 particular Jedi stuck in a blizzard, and modifiers like "immense" and "frightening" are groundless.

Wow, I'm surprised the author hasn't bitchslapped you yet.



When one is titanic in comparison to others, it does translate into largest.

Godlike is a very powerful modifer. Because a deity is far above the lower entities. It standsalone far better than the "darkest person in the galaxy," statement.

How do you even define "darkest," as in "most evil," "darkest skinned"?

Please.



When was this? I pointed out the first order logical statements.

You attempted to prove they were false with pointless speculation. Then when I point this out, you claimed I did the same thing? Uh where? My ass.



Yeah, and clearly that is not a point in his favor.



Need I remind you that the Massassi were Sadow's own invention?

If you specify he did any experiments, you are basically saying that he learned everything Sadow knew, and thus by experimenting, it put Kun over the top. Where does it even indicate he knew all that Sadow knew?

It's a simple temporal impossibility, like you like throwing around. Sadow was around for hundreds of years, Kun attempted to learn all of this in a few years? Prove he did.