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

Being new to this forum but already knowing the hotly debated subject between the users here, who is the strongest Sith Lord. Well according to New Essential Chronology by Dan Wallace on page 84 the first paragraph the following is said:

"Obi Wan Kenobi and Yoda were the only Jedi left in a position to do something about the disaster. Yoda went after Palpatine in the empty Senate chamber, but could not defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history."

This book is not a RPG guide book. It is an official book for the purpose of charting the Star Wars universe thus far. It has LFL's official stamp and its pretty much law. It is also very new being issued out in late 2005.

Sidious didn't have the power to destroy a planet with nothing but his hands, now did he?

Feats Wars are teh greatest!

Heh, Styles from the GameSpot/GameFAQs forums? I remember seeing you at the KOTOR 2 forum.

Sidious didn't have the power to destroy a planet with nothing but his hands, now did he?

Feats Wars are teh greatest!

Did I say or post ANY thing about feats? Maybe you can't read. i just posted a direct quote from NEC stating Sidious as the most powerful Sith Lord in history.

I'm pretty and decently sure no Sith lord ever destroyed a planet single handedly...Bane deforested a world with the help of...twenty five or twenty six other Sith Lords, Naga Sadow's force powered technology did the star destroying...in fact, the only two Sith to ever really effect a world completely on their own were Nihilius and Sidious.

Yes I'm from the GF forums

Wow, a Sidious fanboy thread.

http://img384.imageshack.us/my.php?image=proof9gs.jpg

And an owned Ragnos fanboy thread. If you can actually refute this, you have to ignore the facts that Ragnos's power to destroy galaxies is never mentioned, while Palpatine's power is mentioned AND shown and that Leland Chee has used the Chronology in a few instances.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
http://img384.imageshack.us/my.php?image=proof9gs.jpg

And an owned Ragnos fanboy thread. If you can actually refute this, you have to ignore the facts that Ragnos's power to destroy galaxies is never mentioned, while Palpatine's power is mentioned AND shown and that Leland Chee has used the Chronology in a few instances.


First- no one ever said Ragnos could destroy "galaxies". Stop pulling statements out of your ass.

Second- compilation resource material can't make blanket statements on a character's level of power in comparison with all the others, for the same reason why the claim in any history book that "X is the greatest leader of all time" is reflective of the author's opinion and therefore NOT CANON. Don't be daft.

Third- Leland Chee did NOT make or have a hand in the Chronology. Point is moot.

Fourth- you got OWNED in the Sidious debate. Please do us a favor and go back to TFN forums.

Firstly: The chap with the Drow as an avatar did.

Secondly: Actually, it can. In fact, since earlier material and all evidence supports this compilation, dark Empire declares Sidious's power to be above anyone else and considering the author of DE Co-write TOTJ...so...how can TOTJ refute an earlier source? Never mind that it doesn't and you just think it does

thirdly: Leland Chee is the official word on continuity and clarified Revan's allignment. And gender

Fourth: Refute it. Try. Go on, fine me a quote on Ragnos's power.

http://www.tfaw.com/gn/profile.html?&SKU=46806

There you go, fanboy. Author's synapsis.

Fascinating. Now...how is an obviously hyperbole synopsis canon at all? Where is it in the story? I've never denied Ragnos was the strongest of the Ancient Sith, that's exactly what that quote means. It doesn't take into account- at all- of the five thousand subsequent years. It covers that specific time period and not a second after. And Once mroe: Dark Empire declared Palpatine on quite the plateau. As does the Chronology which has the LFL stamp on it and was used to clarify numerous things, like the start of the Sith Empire, do you deny it started in 7000 BBY? Do you deny Revan was a Light sider? Chronology declared both and Leland Chee confirmed it.

Honestly, you're working from assumption. I have actual feats of Palpatine, quotes on his power, and this quote stating he is the strongest Sith of all time and with only your opinion that it is wrong. When this guide is stamped by LFL, an essential guide, among other things

Seriously. Do you want to get pwned again?

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=386748&perpage=20&highlight=&pagenumber=1

Ah, memories. That's just one of many threads in which your ass was handed to you.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Fascinating. Now...how is an obviously hyperbole synopsis canon at all? Where is it in the story?

Uh, it's the author's synopsis. You DO know what those are, right? It's straight from the horse's mouth. He's the omniscient narrator, telling you that Ragnos is THE baddest of the bad. If you want to refute that, it's because you're a Sidious fanboy and Ragnos' very being challenges the things that make you cream your sheets.



O rly? Last I checked, most powerful of the most powerful didn't have an invisible implied time period on it.



It's called source material, asshat. And it's cowritten by someone who wrote DE, as you pointed out. So wouldn't that person have the authority to sign off on Ragnos being stronger than DE Sidious? Or would that totally ruin your stance?



And this comes later and says otherwise. DE doesn't account for Ragnos since he wasn't created at that point. The very existance of Ragnos and him being the "most powerful of the most powerful" and being signed off on by a former DE comics author solidifies it, despite your love for Sidious being number one.



Are you really that dense? GAorSE has the same stamp on it. IKC scanned it for you last time you made that stupid claim.



So? If a military historian confirms that a textbook or encyclopedia says something correct, does this validify everything in that source? No. Don't be stupid. Sidious is not god, and lying fanboys can't save him.

Read the quote, buddy boy. Your entire argument comes crashing down around your ears. See? Want me to spell it out? Page 84: Palpatine is declared the most Powerful Sith Lord in history. Dark Empire says the same. The co-author of TOTJ wrote...Dark Empire.

We enter one of the five stages, IKC: Denial

Read my post, fanboy. Your argument holds less water than Custer's body. Don't be daft. You'll only get destroyed again if you keep this up.

I look to your opinion...I look to the official source.

1. Ragnos's power is in reference to the official source. In an out of universe synopsis. Why is THAT accepted as gospel but a quote saying Palp> All Sith Lords ignored? Oh, right, your bias...

2. Oh, come on..."WAS the most powerful....now he is dead. And so and so come to take his place. Gav and Jori arrive, etc etc etc." This refers to the time period and nothing more.

3. Except Tom Veitch declared Palpatine the most Powerful Sith Lord of all time in his stuff. Ragnos is never, not once, mentioned as the strongest Sith ever.

4. Point being? Once again: This has LFL's official stamp on it, backing of Leland Chee...now, why can TOTJ suddenly override sources when TOTJ HAS been overriden! Come on, waiting for that quote! I want sometihng in DIRECT opposition to opposition 'of all time' from Dark Empire AND this Chronology!

5. Hmm...the only place it seems to be unofficial is in your deluded mind.

And last I checked, the Sith Order was broken, it was reformed by Bane. How do you know that "in History" is a blanket statement covering all eras, including eras where such statements would not be comparable?

I could just as easily point out that Sith Lord does not mean "Dark Lord of the Sith."

I could also easily point out that Marka Ragnos does not even have a biography in the NEC, it's kind of hard to compare and contrast with something that the book doesn't include, is it?

Originally posted by Lightsnake
I look to your opinion...I look to the official source.

Funny, I remember pointing out to you that RPG Sourcebooks aren't canon.



Uh, because Palps does NOT overpower the other Sith Lords. We've already shown this time and time again. But you're a fanboy, and accepting the hard cold truth would make you have to wake up and realize that Sidious is NOT number one. IKC posted the link; I suggest you reacquiant yourself with the argument that you LOST last time. Suddenly having one line from a compilation does nto "OMfg overryde!!11" your entire flawed argument.



This isn't GAtoS synopsis according to Lightsnake the TOTJ hater; it's what it is. You are the kind of person who argued that the Golden Age wasn't really the golden age, so when it comes to your opinion and the official source... I take the official source, k thnx.



Except Tom went on to help make GAotS a couple of years after DE, so obviously in creating it and signing off on it and letting the official synosis state "Most powerful of the most powerful", this newer source trumps the older one. It's called retcon, and DE's claim that Sidious is "teh uber" is retconned by the presence of "godlike" ancient Sith. I realize you struggle with this, but eventually when you drop that fanboy facade, it'll hit you.



Are you that thick, Lightsnake? BOTH have LFL's official stamp on it. If they didn't, they couldn't be marketed without COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. Duh.

Second, Leland Chee has not signed off and verified all information, and in any case, a compilation cannot OVERRIDE THE SOURCE MATERIAL IT DRAWS ON. It's a reference material, not canon. Duh.



Please. You are the very meaning of deluded.

http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/2686/unsupportedass6ke3fz.jpg

Every DotS is a Sith Lord. This is a coverage of the entire history of Star Wars, what else would 'in history' mean? history is all eras.
And Dark Empire clearly says 'of all time.' Ragnos doesn't have the coverage Sidious does because his appearances are slimmer. Ragnos is well mentioned though, his century of iron handed rule for one. Ragnos is more famous for the power vacuum his death caused than anything he did while alive. Hell, Sadow isn't given a full biography. Ludo Kressh is skimmed over almost completely. Bane and Kaan are as well.

Lightsnake, you don't even KNOW what the hell you're talking about. In the ancient Sith Empire, there are MANY Sith Lords, but only ONE Dark Lord of the Sith. At least know what you're criticizing.

1. No, Janus, you supported a delusion unsupported by anyone else. And considering this ain't a sourcebook. Pick and choose, hm?

2. Considering the New Sith Empire was described as 'greather than the Golden Age.' and the Chronology, which is done by an omniscient godly narrarator that sums up all of Star Wars' history from ancient to present...

3. Great. So this new source, trumps your old one.

4. Basically, it's 'whatever JAnus wants to be canon is canon', right? As you suddenly decide what is and isn't canon.

5. STILL waiting for an in universe quote calling ragnos most powerful of all time when recent info has disproved that and even recent stories called Palp the strongest of all time-which I posted quite a bit...are they invalid too?

Every DOTS is a Sith Lord. Not every Sith Lord is the DOTS. Plain and simple

"Except Tom went on to help make GAotS a couple of years after DE, so obviously in creating it and signing off on it and letting the official synosis state "Most powerful of the most powerful", this newer source trumps the older one. It's called retcon, and DE's claim that Sidious is "teh uber" is retconned by the presence of "godlike" ancient Sith. I realize you struggle with this, but eventually when you drop that fanboy facade, it'll hit you."

And NEC reaffirms DE's stance that Palpy is the strongest.


"Second, Leland Chee has not signed off and verified all information, and in any case, a compilation cannot OVERRIDE THE SOURCE MATERIAL IT DRAWS ON. It's a reference material, not canon. Duh."

And the compilation draws on Dark Empire. And it states Sidious as the strongest. Why would Lee Land Chee or LFL allow such a comment to exist in a book they signed off on if it contradicted the pre established canon.

I want an example of this godliness myself, when recent soruces in late 2005 have retconned this 'retcon'....when Tom wrote Palp was the strongest of all time.

And source materials have overwritten PLENTY. Kadann, Lord Cronal, Lady Lumiya, the Sith Empire, the Legions of Lettow, Arden Lyn...plenty

If we have fights your way, then i'll just be as stupid as you and say DE is not canon as it contradicts the movies completely.

Lol, Lightsnake. Didn't you get WTFpwned?

Well in his eyes, he can't see himself as being fallible meaning he wont understand that he got WTFpwned but merely he'll go on arguing with an argument which has been refuted over and over again.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
I want an example of this godliness myself, when recent soruces in late 2005 have retconned this 'retcon'....when Tom wrote Palp was the strongest of all time.

And source materials have overwritten PLENTY. Kadann, Lord Cronal, Lady Lumiya, the Sith Empire, the Legions of Lettow, Arden Lyn...plenty

Erm, "a God amongst Gods"?

Lightsnake is totally owning you guys. Just because there are more of you up against him, it doesn't make your argument any more stronger, and you any more right.

Numan, get stuffed...

Well lightsnake does have a point.

The "New Essential Chronology" a canon source in terms of continuity places Sidious over Ragnos.

Any contrary evidence from quotes to dispell this? Otherwise we would simply have to accept this as solid canon evidence.

I'm not so sure... does the NEC have the ability to contradict/retcon earlier ideas?

Also, why should DE even be counted as canon, if it quite frankly contradicts the Movies, which in general means its rendered N-Canon.

Now if they state ROTS Sidious is the most powerful ever, then however canon its perhaps the most absurd idea ever.

DE can be argued to be in the continuity. The "sith" in DE was an artificial one.

And it's Star Wars. Nothings ever too absurd. Hell, if anyone deserves the title, IMO it's Palpatine.

Originally posted by hord06
Lightsnake is totally owning you guys. Just because there are more of you up against him, it doesn't make your argument any more stronger, and you any more right.

Numan, read any of the previous debates, Lightsnake lost to the extent he went into forced hibernation, you only agree with him, because his ideals suit your fanboyism.

Just a question. Why would DE be considered less canon than TOTJ? Is there a specific reason that I am missing out on?

Anyways I was arguing NEC places Sids on top, even above Ragnos. There are obscurities, and to possibly suggest the idea that Palps can best Marka is absolutely ridiculous. But Canon seems to agree with this view.

One possible explanation is that the quote "Sidious is the strongest dark lord of the sith" refers to Lucas' own works. Last time I checked, Lucas did not create the ancient Sith, so Sidious is not necessarily the strongest compared to them.

I believe there was a quote illustrating Lucas' disconnection with much of the EU.

Here are two

But to remind you how this works, zephiel- unless a specific exceptioin is made (e.g. Boba Fett), the EU's own published canon rules say that if anything is true of the koviues, it is absolute primary EU canon.

So if any evidence makes out that Sidious is the greatest Sith Lord ever, that counts for the entirity of the EU.

Frankly, though, this debate seems to be 100% opinion.

u r wrong m8 he is not the best jedi in history.....

I AM.....
LOL NO
ERM DARTH VADER KILLS HIM SO DARTH VADER = STRONGEST..

Because DE specifically contradicts the prophecy of Anakin destroying the Sith, not inclusive of Dark Jedi, Sidious was indeed the last Dark Lord of the Sith and he was defeated in ROTJ, meaning the prophecy had been fullfilled.

However DE contradicts this entirely, by bringing back Sidious it specifically means that the Prophecy was wrong and Anakin did not and will not destroy the Sith.

TOTJ, due to preceding TPM - ROTJ, means they can create any Villain, so long as the Jedi and Sith do not become extinct, you may come close but it just wont happen, adding on that the Republic cannot be defeated, as it also contradicts the time the Old Republic had survived. However in all the Comics to Kotor to Ruusan's time, there have been no major contradictions if indeed there had been any.

Very true indeed m8
very true

Originally posted by zephiel7
Just a question. Why would DE be considered less canon than TOTJ? Is there a specific reason that I am missing out on?

Anyways I was arguing NEC places Sids on top, even above Ragnos. There are obscurities, and to possibly suggest the idea that Palps can best Marka is absolutely ridiculous. But Canon seems to agree with this view.

One possible explanation is that the quote "Sidious is the strongest dark lord of the sith" refers to Lucas' own works. Last time I checked, Lucas did not create the ancient Sith, so Sidious is not necessarily the strongest compared to them.

I believe there was a quote illustrating Lucas' disconnection with much of the EU.

Here are two

I really don't see how a compilation book can totally retcon an earlier piece of work's claims (TOTJ), but TOTJ can't retcon DE's claims. That seems to be a serious inconsistancy in Lightsnake's stance. Source material > compilation/reference material every time. Him saying "OMFg Leland Chee sez" doesn't change a thing because Leland Chee hasn't taken an official stance on it. He didn't create the book, and his title is "Keeper of the Archives"; he determines what is canon or not, but he doesn't create canon out of thin air. If they intend to include GAotS in the timeline (Which they did a very sloppy job of doing- Ragnos doesn't even have an entry) and DE, it makes no sense to champion DE's claims over TOTJ's., especially since DE's claims were made in ignorance of the existance of TOTJ (Two years before).



Also, the majority of his claims ride on this one line, and anything else he fails to provide evidence for or his argues to death any counter evidence. In short, he has no case. Just bias.

From : <[email protected]>
Sent : Thursday, April 20, 2006 12:42 PM
To : [email protected]
Subject : Re: Reply from your Star Wars Blog

| | | Inbox


In a message dated 4/20/2006 12:51:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
On page 84 of New Essential Chronology you said that Darth Sidious was the most powerful Sith Lord in history is this to be taken as canon truth?


re. While I hate to draw lines in the sand (you never know when that line may need to be shifted later), I'd have to say that if Sidious wasn't the most powerful Sith lord in history, who was? Nobody else in the history of the Republic ever came close to accomplishing what he did, and he was basically just one guy. Plus he kicked Yoda's butt in one-on-one combat, and Yoda would undoubtedly be one of the greatest Jedi Masters in history.

Best,
Dan

Well that pretty much confirms it. This is Dan Wallace the author of the book. He was given official stance by LFL to say the things he does in this book such as Revan being Lightside and the start of the Sith Empire. So as of now as he states the canon is Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord. Also Im working on getting a reply from Lee Land Chee.

If they intend to include GAotS in the timeline (Which they did a very sloppy job of doing- Ragnos doesn't even have an entry) and DE, it makes no sense to champion DE's claims over TOTJ's., especially since DE's claims were made in ignorance of the existance of TOTJ (Two years before). - Janus Marius

How would they make an article about Ragnos? An article being more then a paragraph long. Known info we have on him...Ruled with an Iron Fist...for a century...fought Simus...Stops duels between Naga Sadow and Kreesh and duels between Kun and Ulic. Thats about it. We have largly no information about the guy we have more info on Revan then we do Ragnos.

Deception
Ancient Dark Lord

Gender: Male
Location: Somewhere unknown


Because DE specifically contradicts the prophecy of Anakin destroying the Sith, not inclusive of Dark Jedi, Sidious was indeed the last Dark Lord of the Sith and he was defeated in ROTJ, meaning the prophecy had been fullfilled.

However DE contradicts this entirely, by bringing back Sidious it specifically means that the Prophecy was wrong and Anakin did not and will not destroy the Sith.


Keeper of the Holocron's Blog

by: Tasty Taste
date posted: Jan 19, 2006 3:02 PM | updated: Feb 23, 2006 1:35 PM
Palpatine (clone)
Palpatine's clone dies, his life force enters another clone body, that clone body is killed, and another clone emerges. When that final clone entity attempts to possess the body of the newly born Anakin Solo, it is intercepted by the dying Empatojayos Brand, thus snuffing out the Emperor's will once and for all.

I would post a link but Im not well known enough yet to do so(god thats dumb)

Originally posted by AcStylesVer01
From : <[email protected]>
Sent : Thursday, April 20, 2006 12:42 PM
To : [email protected]
Subject : Re: Reply from your Star Wars Blog

| | | Inbox


In a message dated 4/20/2006 12:51:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
On page 84 of New Essential Chronology you said that Darth Sidious was the most powerful Sith Lord in history is this to be taken as canon truth?


re. While I hate to draw lines in the sand (you never know when that line may need to be shifted later), I'd have to say that if Sidious wasn't the most powerful Sith lord in history, who was? Nobody else in the history of the Republic ever came close to accomplishing what he did, and he was basically just one guy. Plus he kicked Yoda's butt in one-on-one combat, and Yoda would undoubtedly be one of the greatest Jedi Masters in history.

Best,
Dan

Well that pretty much confirms it. This is Dan Wallace the author of the book. He was given official stance by LFL to say the things he does in this book such as Revan being Lightside and the start of the Sith Empire. So as of now as he states the canon is Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord. Also Im working on getting a reply from Lee Land Chee.

Oh yes... This is official. It couldn't be BS or anything.

And if Sidious is the "Most powerful Sith Lord in history" based on his feat of usurping the rule of the empire, that's not a personal level of power- that's a political one. By this logic, Adolf Hitler was more powerful than Sparticus, even though the latter would wipe his ass with Hitler in personal combat.

And I really don't see how Yoda being "one of the greatest" jedi reflects on his personal power. Yes, Yoda was good. But he wasn't leagues above any other jedi in the Order, and he certainly wasn't powerful enough to contend with people like Kun and Sadow, much less Ragnos. If Dan Wallace has the absolute authority to throw around hyperbole and retcon established EU history and material in an e-mail, I seriously have to question the source.

Leland Chee and Dan Wallace aren't on the credits to Golden Age of the Sith Empire, either.

Isn't the information presented on the New Essential Chronology approved and supported by Lucas?

In that case, Palpatine, would be de facto the strongest sith lord of all time. I thought every other level of canon would be influenced by what Lucas says, according to Ushgarak.

Originally posted by Traya
Erm, "a God amongst Gods"?

Quote's a lie. Never once mention in...anything.

Also, the chronology does have the ability to retcon and change. I present for evidence, the Sith Empire

Prior to this, from the TotJ sourcebook, it was stated the Sith empire existed for 25,000 years...now, instead of this, it exists for 2000 years and Leland Chee is on record supporting that at SW.com

The chronology also confirmed completely that Revan was lightside.

And a LOT of EU contradicts the movies, TOTJ, too. And the NEC places Palp as the strongest during the PT, DE not apply. Dark Horse has no intention of declaring TOTJ or DE infinities according to Randy Stradley, though.

And the chronology covers the EU, as well. It goes over the Ancient Sith empire and lists how it was formed, from the Hundred Years darkness to the Great Hyperspace war.

Once more, this isn't a compilation book, it's a written account of Star Wars's history and is fully official and HAS retconned earlier sources, TOTJ included. Empire's End, which came out after TOTJ put Palpatine on his plateau as well.

And you think something that grievous in error would be allowed to make it into publication, let alone for, HOW many months? Six? They've retconned thigns much, much sooner than that to wrong info. And hell, KJA helped to write the last Chronology, along with Dan Wallace.

Now, Janus, we're gonna have to prove those Yoda comments. He WAS leagues above anyone else in the Order and described as the strongest foe the darkness had ever known.

Did you even read Dark Empire, Janus? You know what Sidious has done there? He's destroyed ships, with what has since been described-in 2005 stuff- as the single greatest use of dark side power in history, a 'living embodiment of the darkside' who's final defeat crippled the Dark Side itself. He and Luke were described as battling divinities, Palpatine razed worlds with force power alone and drained the lives of millions, froze and erased the memories of...trillions at most on Coruscant to bury Lusankya.

As opposed to Ragnos now, you claim my argument has no water but bias, what of THAT? What's the support for Ragnos and his ilk but what you could easily describe as hyperbole if it were used against you? Simus was killed by a blaster shot when the shooter raised a gun in his direction, that says quite a bit. Numerous Sith lords were killed by Massassi.

You don't have to write the book to retcon it, there are company decisions that effect things. If Wizards of the Coast or Del Ray decide they want something different-and they have in the past, like Arden Lyn- then it goes, and an individual author's work be damned. That's what writing a chain in book franchises is: economics and if the company makes a choice, it goes. If they want to declare Dark Empire Infinities, it'd happen. Hell, KOTOR retconned some of TOTJ itself.

Quite frankly, Dan is also official with the backing of LFL, too.

I really don't see how a compilation book can totally retcon an earlier piece of work's claims (TOTJ), but TOTJ can't retcon DE's claims. That seems to be a serious inconsistancy in Lightsnake's stance.

I guess you can look at it any of these two ways:

1) DE makes the claim. No contradicting earlier source material, therefore TOTJ and NEC are "wrong"

2) DE makes the claim. Newer sources contradict older ones. TOTJ contradicts DE. NEC contradicts TOTJ.

I also once heard that Lucas says Sidious is the strongest Sith Lord ever in the TPM Audio Commentary. Can anyone confirm?

Wow. The moronic Sidious fanboys strike again.

Antediluvian, did you even read the link?

An Revolver: Empire's End also goes against TOTJ's supposed stance (Honestly, TOTJ never once claims anything on the subject of power.)

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Antediluvian, did you even read the link?

An Revolver: Empire's End also goes against TOTJ's supposed stance (Honestly, TOTJ never once claims anything on the subject of power.)

I didn't need to. Actually, I didn't need to read a single thing in this thread except for the TITLE of the thread.

You're back again to spout off how powerful Sidious is. Take a walk, Fanboy. You're going to get put down.

What if I say I have a link to the page of the book proving it?

http://img384.imageshack.us/my.php?image=proof9gs.jpg

The upper right, not far from the top

Originally posted by Lightsnake
What if I say I have a link to the page of the book proving it?

http://img384.imageshack.us/my.php?image=proof9gs.jpg

The upper right, not far from the top

That's funny, because that Sith Lord couldn't manage to defeat a handful of Rebels and a Jedi with around three years of experience.

Nor could he conquer his mechanical apprentice from chucking him in a shaft.


We've seen the Comics display Sith Lords that have shown more impressive powers and features than Palpatine so how do you come up with this repulsive bullshit that he's the deity of the Sith?

That source is official, you are not. And was Palpatine ever taking the Rebels seriously? Were the Rebels ever really beating the Empire hands down? Palp himself said they just amused him, even after the Death Star. And let's not forget Vader surprised him when he was focused totally on hurting Luke and was fated to kill him...

And what powers have shown these Sith Lords? I recall Palpatine razing worlds and destroying fleets on his own without 'weapons on ships' like Naga Sadow's star destruction. And maybe, just maybe, you should read the link? Calls him the most powerful Sith Lord...ever. DE and Empire's end and really everything with him support this fact. And let's turn this around:

The Ancients were beaten on three worlds, killed by their own slaves, couldn't deflect blaster beams...

Well my friend, that's a direct, in continuity source, backed by the comics and books themselves. Would you like me to type it out?

Yoda was unable to defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history."

Now, seriously, I'm still curious where the godliness of Kun and the Ancients come from. Kun froze a senate, great....we know Palpatine froze a world from the X wing novels while his men buried the Lusankya. Then he wiped almost everyone's mind over it

Originally posted by Lightsnake
That source is official, you are not. And was Palpatine ever taking the Rebels seriously? Were the Rebels ever really beating the Empire hands down? Palp himself said they just amused him, even after the Death Star. And let's not forget Vader surprised him when he was focused totally on hurting Luke and was fated to kill him...

And what powers have shown these Sith Lords? I recall Palpatine razing worlds and destroying fleets on his own without 'weapons on ships' like Naga Sadow's star destruction. And maybe, just maybe, you should read the link? Calls him the most powerful Sith Lord...ever. DE and Empire's end and really everything with him support this fact. And let's turn this around:

The Ancients were beaten on three worlds, killed by their own slaves, couldn't deflect blaster beams...

The Rebels defeated the Empire hands down in ROTJ.


Yeah, well your most powerful Sith Lord ever couldn't even sense that his Apprentice had feelings for his son when he was less that a foot away from him. Sidious was a moron.

Sidious was killed by his own slave. Just one. And Sidious can deflect a blaster beam? Actually, he couldn't block a bolt. He was shot by Han Solo.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
That source is official, you are not. And was Palpatine ever taking the Rebels seriously? Were the Rebels ever really beating the Empire hands down? Palp himself said they just amused him, even after the Death Star. And let's not forget Vader surprised him when he was focused totally on hurting Luke and was fated to kill him...

And what powers have shown these Sith Lords? I recall Palpatine razing worlds and destroying fleets on his own without 'weapons on ships' like Naga Sadow's star destruction. And maybe, just maybe, you should read the link? Calls him the most powerful Sith Lord...ever. DE and Empire's end and really everything with him support this fact. And let's turn this around:

The Ancients were beaten on three worlds, killed by their own slaves, couldn't deflect blaster beams...

Well my friend, that's a direct, in continuity source, backed by the comics and books themselves. Would you like me to type it out?

Yoda was unable to defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history."

Now, seriously, I'm still curious where the godliness of Kun and the Ancients come from. Kun froze a senate, great....we know Palpatine froze a world from the X wing novels while his men buried the Lusankya. Then he wiped almost everyone's mind over it

Better re-reply to your edit . . .

Mace was apparently on par with Yoda and he managed to conquer the most powerful Sith Lord in history. He also deflected his so called Uber Lightning and the only way Palpatine could survive was to lure his Apprentice to help him strive.

Not to take sides...

Anyways here (in the pic below) we see Naga Sadow making a fist and causing these two suns to go nova. Pretty impressive if you ask me.

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/6919/oldrepublic36062kg.jpg

It wasn't 'hands down', there were....twenty more years worth of conflict?

And Palpatine's overconfidence is his weakness, it's as simple as that, same with any Sith Lord. you argue that was his error, you better point fingers at Kun, Kressh, Sadow, Nadd and most every other Sith ever. See, he was focused on something and considering the CHOSEN ONE, after two decades of being his dog decided to rebel when he saw his SON in danger-Palpatine can't understand love, one of the flaws of the Sith- chucked him down...which, y'know, if you take the EU, wasn't really a permanent condition. In the comics and the books, the empire persisted for ages, under Isard, Daala, Reborn Palp and Pellaeon.

And did you even read Empire's End? He allowed himself to be shot to possess anakin Solo.

Once more, this is official, YOU ARE NOT. DIRECT QUOTE: "Most powerful Sith Lord in history."

Jonathan, in Fall of the Sith Empire, we see it how it really happens-Sadow isn't human, for one-...Sadow's ship uses a weapon powered by the force that removes the core of a star, causing it to go nova. It's ancient Sith technology-by ancient, I mean developed at almost the dawn of the empire. The comics even state the weapon on Sadow's ship destroyed the star...Sadow never used it to the limit Aleema did, because unlike Aleema, Sadow understood the massive repercussions

And from the Holocron:

C-canon is primarily comprised of elements from the Expanded Universe including books, comics, and games bearing the label of Star Wars. Games and RPG sourcebooks are a special case; the stories and general background information are themselves fully C-canon, but the other elements such as character/item statistics and gameplay are, with few exceptions, N-canon.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
It wasn't 'hands down', there were....twenty more years worth of conflict?

And Palpatine's overconfidence is his weakness, it's as simple as that, same with any Sith Lord. you argue that was his error, you better point fingers at Kun, Kressh, Sadow, Nadd and most every other Sith ever. See, he was focused on something and considering the CHOSEN ONE, after two decades of being his dog decided to rebel when he saw his SON in danger-Palpatine can't understand love, one of the flaws of the Sith- chucked him down...which, y'know, if you take the EU, wasn't really a permanent condition. In the comics and the books, the empire persisted for ages, under Isard, Daala, Reborn Palp and Pellaeon.

And did you even read Empire's End? He allowed himself to be shot to possess anakin Solo.

Once more, this is official, YOU ARE NOT. DIRECT QUOTE: "Most powerful Sith Lord in history."

They can't sense love? Is there source for that? Any proof against that? Because Vader is proof that Sith can sense Love. You're wrong again.

Maybe the others took over the Empire because Sidious couldn't do the job correctly. Actually, he couldn't. Seeing as when he ran the Empire, it fell terribly under a handful of REBELS.

Is it official? So, where is it said that this an official source? Is there proof? I ain't seeing it, Lightsnake.

And no, Sidious leaped for the baby and was shot from behind. He didn't let Han shoot him.

I said they can't understand love. And Vader never completely embraced the Dark Side, it's why he's a tragic, fallen hero.

And Good God! It's the ESSENTIAL CHRONOLOGY, see that mark on the front? That's LFL's logo!

And Palpatine said "It is time to enter the child as I promised." He allowed Han to shoot him to escape his already dying body....and Palpatine was incapacitated after Endor when others took command...when he came back, the New Republic became the Rebellion again and lost most of its strength. They only lost at Endor because he died and they didn't have his battle meditation. Confirmed in Thrawn Trilogy

And:

C-canon is primarily comprised of elements from the Expanded Universe including books, comics, and games bearing the label of Star Wars. Games and RPG sourcebooks are a special case; the stories and general background information are themselves fully C-canon, but the other elements such as character/item statistics and gameplay are, with few exceptions, N-canon.

And come on, Sorgo and Janus...you guys are smarter than this. I provide the link to the source with the quote? You argue it, fine...I provide a posting of the levels of canon showing all books except thsoe marked as infinities and RPG sourcebook story plus background info are canon, you argue it, I can understand that...I post a link proving my points from Sansweet and Sue Rostini...you don't argue it. You try cheap insults. It's done, you cannot argue this any more. Q. E. Freaking D.

While I'm at it: http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWCanonquotes.html#2003-Rostoni-BeforeContinuity

Originally posted by Lightsnake
And come on, Sorgo and Janus...you guys are smarter than this. I provide the link to the source with the quote? You argue it, fine...I provide a posting of the levels of canon showing all books except thsoe marked as infinities and RPG sourcebook story plus background info are canon, you argue it, I can understand that...I post a link proving my points from Sansweet and Sue Rostini...you don't argue it. You try cheap insults. It's done, you cannot argue this any more. Q. E. Freaking D.

While I'm at it: http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWCanonquotes.html#2003-Rostoni-BeforeContinuity

RPG sourcebooks are not canon, nor do I see guidebooks on the C-Canon. Guidebooks sort canon, they do not create canon.

Also, as far as that one line of proof that you've apparently come out of hibernation to try to show people up with, it doesn't establish anything. In Dan Wallace's information, when asked if he is the most powerful Sith Lord, he says yes and cites because "he conquered the Republic."

He sure as hell didn't singlehandedly walk around and conquer the republic. No one is arguing that Sidious didn't achieve the most out of all the Sith Lords, or that he isn't the most powerful (politically), but that line is clearly open to interpretation. George Wallace never clarified Darth Sidious as being the most personally power, or most powerful in the force, or most powerful in lightsaber combat. He was the leader of the most powerful Galatic Force the Galaxy ever saw, so yes, I would say he was the "strongest" Sith Lord in history.

You can not take an interpretive line in a guidebook (one that does not attempt to establish canon) as your only knowledge.

Your interpretation does not trump the interpretation of other individuals. The fact of the matter is that the on-panel evidence does not make it conclusive, and George Wallace's answer only makes it more ambiguous what he actually means.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Jonathan, in Fall of the Sith Empire, we see it how it really happens-Sadow isn't human, for one-...Sadow's ship uses a weapon powered by the force that removes the core of a star, causing it to go nova. It's ancient Sith technology-by ancient, I mean developed at almost the dawn of the empire. The comics even state the weapon on Sadow's ship destroyed the star...Sadow never used it to the limit Aleema did, because unlike Aleema, Sadow understood the massive repercussions

That's a crock. Fall of the Sith Empire does not make any reference to Naga Sadow needing the technology. In The Sith War, Aleema uses the ship to "rip cores."

But the technique in question did not "rip cores" from any stars.

In Fall of the Sith Empire, Sadow shot something that looked like giant scale force lightning into a Red Giant, causing it to go nova. He also manipulated the solar flares of another. Nowhere in Fall of the Sith Empire is he referenced as "ripping cores."

In fact, since it was by the same author and since it was published AFTER Dark Lords of the Sith and The Sith War, it makes it seem more than likely that Sadow had more than a few abilities that were never clarified as using his ship. In short, it's speculative.

No, he doesn't only cite that. Illustrious, for the- I just showed a link and posted the section showing and proving RPG sourcebook story info is C canon. And that's invalid because THIS IS NOT AN RPG SOURCEBOOK. It's not a guidebook either, it's an omniscient narrarator telling us about the history of Star Wars and unless you have anything shooting it down or proving RPG sourcebooks aren't canon...especially when DE calls him the strongest. Especially when I provided a quote showing games and sorucebooks' story info and background info are part of the story. Dan is also a close friend and co-writer with KJA, so he knows what he's talking about. Regardless, why is he more fanboyish than KJA who can suddenly be untouchable when parts of his stuff HAVE been overwritten and Leland himself used info in this guide?

This guide is official and I've proved it. Sufficiently.

And oh, yes:

The Sith War: Kun says it was the wweapon on Sadow's ship. Chronology, wRITTEN BY KJA: It was the weapon, Fall of the Sith Empire: Sadow says he'll 'make use of the remainder of the ship's power'

And Empire's End was published after Golden Age of the Sith, one, and two: Sadow is not shown shooting lightning, his ship is....hell, we just see him leering at Gav at the point before his ship fires. In the next one we see lightning crackling around him and then the stars exploding...and the weapon causes a chain reaction, sending the stars nova.

No you didn't establish that. The link you gave would mean game stats are canon, because the games have the Star Wars logo.

Take the official release from SW.com:



Nowhere does it reference a guide.



It's the New Essential Guide to Chronology. It does not attempt to CREATE canon, it attempts to sort canon, Lucas himself has made a reference to this in passing.



I didn't say nothing from KJA could be overwritten.

I did say that the line is not substantiated. Dan Wallace himself cites the reason that he "conquered the republic" as one of the reasons for him being the "strongest." If anything, this seems to imply that he is comparing their relative power. Like mentioned, Hitler was "stronger" than Sparticus, it does not mean he would beat him in a fight.

The line is inherently ambiguous and does not establish anything. It is open to interpretation.

You can not tell me that your interpretation is superior to the interpretation of other fans, especially since the line by its nature lends itself to that.



No, he brags about the power of the dark side right as the lightning surges into the star and causes it to go nova. That line is not associated with that picture.

Same link I gave said SPECIFICALLY that game stats and gameplay are noncanon

And don't try to get out of this, C Canon-and I posted a link to this too- Consists of EVERYTHING ELSE in the EU, and the RPG sourcebooks call Palpatine the strongest ever, so either way...

And Dan Wallace's personal reasons are of no issue, even though conquering the Republic isn't the only thing. Is my interpretation more significant? No. Does it have direct evidence and continuity, with direct quotes backing it up.


And Sadow simply says the power of the Sith and considering KJA himself wrote what identified the star destroyer as a 'weapon on the ship'...And that line I mentioned is when he destroys the Denarii

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Same link I gave said SPECIFICALLY that game stats and gameplay are noncanon

And don't try to get out of this, C Canon-and I posted a link to this too- Consists of EVERYTHING ELSE in the EU, and the RPG sourcebooks call Palpatine the strongest ever, so either way...

And Dan Wallace's personal reasons are of no issue, even though conquering the Republic isn't the only thing. Is my interpretation more significant? No. Does it have direct evidence and continuity, with direct quotes backing it up.


And Sadow simply says the power of the Sith and considering KJA himself wrote what identified the star destroyer as a 'weapon on the ship'...And that line I mentioned is when he destroys the Denarii

Really? We see Sue Rostoni telling us that anything without an Infinities label is canon, and we see Leland Chee saying the following:



Which specific quote says game stats aren't canon? This one, right?



Nowhere in that does it reference a guide.

Dan Wallace's personal reasons are of no issue? WTF? He was asked what "he" said should be taken as canon. Ergo, he was asked if the words that he used, as the "narrator" of the book, should canon truth.

He replied with an answer involving the following: Nobody else in the history of the Republic ever came close to accomplishing what he did, and he was basically just one guy.

Well yes, the Ancient Sith Empire was hardly referenced, Ragnos hardly exists in the chronology, and they were NEVER PART OF THE REPUBLIC.

Also, the line says he "accomplished" the most. It does not say he would beat every other Sith Lord in history, the line is open to interpretation and even he did not make it conclusive when asked about it.

That's the point, you can argue out of your ass that "Sidious is the greatest," the only problem is that your interpretation does not trump the interpretation of others. The versus forum attempts to sort out who would in a fight, not who would be considered the most powerful because of their personal accomplishments.

Look, I actually agree with you. I feel Sidious was the Greatest and some ways the strongest, but not the most powerful and not the one that would beat every other Sith Lord in a fight. Nor is said canon elaborating on that point.

Rostini commentary was rather before the Holocron was formed. And that's why there were levels of canon formed, it's all canon: Just some is N-canon, some is S canon, etc.

And specific quote:
C-canon is primarily comprised of elements from the Expanded Universe including books, comics, and games bearing the label of Star Wars. Games and RPG sourcebooks are a special case; the stories and general background information are themselves fully C-canon, but the other elements such as character/item statistics and gameplay are, with few exceptions, N-canon.

And guides are books, the chronology is a book. And once more, the DE SB states 'Strongest of all time.'

Dan Wallace's statement were taken as canon...six months and no retcons in sight, no uproar...until it gets retconned, it's continuity. And did Ragnos or his ilk factor into the history of the Republic or not? Still 'most. Powerful. In. History.' The semantics can't be argued. I've shown the quote in the book, with the omniscient narrarator. Everything in that book was approved by LFL

And the DE sourcebook still says Palpatine was the strongest of all time...and him wiping out a fleet with just himself, described as the greatest usage of Dark Side power backs it up. I'm getting so tired of his power being dismissed for people who are much vaguer. So what if Ragnos wasn't touched upon? Maybe because noone will let the authors do anything else with him for the moment? So what if they were skimmed over, Palpatine factored more into galactic history than the hyperspace war ever did. I'm tired of ragnos's power being touted, I'm tired of Palpatine "I destroy fleets, know all aspects of the dark side, am described as a divinity and the dark side embodied and raze planets with the force alone." be so downplayed when I can actually show something OFFICIAL proving it. A book, an official book that is in C-canon and rewrote former points from earlier stories. When Dark Empire declares him the most powerful and Empire's end as well. And it's blatant hypocrisy that somehow TOTJ's sourcebook can be used. I just provided the quote on the holocron, by the way

From what I have seen, Sidious has both the feats and official quotes in his favour.

Just adding to what illustrious is saying, Ragnos' scepter, a weapon of immense power in the darkside in the hands of a relative weakling like Tavion, was capable of draining planets. In the hands of Ragnos (a weapon that Ragnos himself imbued with the darkside) would be able to create far more havoc.

Not to mention that Luke himself said that it would require the entire academy plus himself to even have the chance of stopping Ragnos should he ever return in full form and strength.




Good for you, fanboy...

Palpatine alone was capable of draining planets, so? And Luke said it'd require their full force to stop Ragnos's ressurection.

The point is that a weakling like Tavion, was capable of using the scepter to drain planets. A force BRUTE like Ragnos would be able to cause FAR more devastation than little old Palps could.

Don't get me wrong, I like Palps as a villain, but in terms of brute force strength, he could not stand against Ragnos.

So? A sith artifact is just a tool and Ragnos was showing her how to use it. And Palpatine razed worlds with just the force and was stated to be the most powerful Sith of all time. He knew everything the Ancients did, too.

Stop saying Palpatine d'doesn't compare to Ragnos' when you've got no idea if Ragnos was as strong as he's hyped up to be. All you have is hearsay and assumption. Seriously, how can people keep arguing this after what I provided? I showed the offical links and proof that they counted

Others have provided the necessary proof.

Sadow was capable of great feats, such as causing a star to go supernova. He was also of true Sith species, which in turn fuels his power in the darkside. If you look at TOTJ, Sadow states that he will use the power of the darkside, and with that his two amulets start glowing and the Star suddenly explodes and takes down/blocks Republic ships following him. Kressh was described by omniscient narrator as being his near equal. If the two of them were afraid to take on Ragnos and obtain the coveted positions of Sith Lord, it speaks volumes about Ragnos' strength.

The knowledge that Palpatine acquired was diluted at best. Observe in the movies how the only power he demonstrates is force lightning. Also observe how he was stalemated by two Jedi who were UNPREPARED for Sith, and were UNTRAINED to deal with a dark Jedi. Palpatine himself had time to study the Jedi, yet this knowledge was still not enough. He was beaten once, and stalemated the other time.

His feats in DE were considerably greater, however it still did not stop his inevitable defeat. Luke and Leia, who still have not reached their highest potential in the slightest, were able to use Illumination to reflect Palpatine's storm right back him. Afterwards he was "killed" by a blaster bolt aimed by Han.

No, they haven't, because an official statement says otherwise.

For the final time, KJA HIMSELF WROTE THAT SADOW'S SHIP CAUSED THE SUPER NOVA. And they weren't 'afraid'...Sadow lacked the political support and KRessh loved Ragnos. His devotion, even in Ragnos's death was startling.

And no, it's DIRECTLY STATED Palpatine had complete knowledge of every technique and power of the Sith and Jedi.

And by the way, learn your damn facts: Sidious let himself be shot to escape his body and possess Anakin Solo but was intercepted by a dying Jedi where every Jedi who ever lived held him into the Dark Side forever. And you know someything else? I've posted things from DE showing how he was beaten...Luke and Leia channeled the ENTIRE force to defeat Palpatine, ALL of it, they became living embodiments and instead of fighting Palp, they protected him, shielding him from the dark and without the dark he couldn't use his force storm. And don't give me 'They were untrained to deal with Dark Jedi' Revan and Ragnos's era Jedi weren't either. In fact, The Jedi had just destroyed the Sith a millenia ago and Yoda was confirmed to have fought with Bane's order...both Mace and Yoda had faced Dark Jedi and killed them before and Yoda was described as the strongest Jedi the order had known to that point

Palpatine knew everything, really? Did he ever once drain the Force from someone? Apparently, if he could he could've destroyed the Jedi himself.

Yeah, he did. He drained the life, force and will from billions on Byss and some on Coruscant. And I've provided the quote that says Palp knew pretty much everything before.

Wait, that quote you posted, what Sidious did it say knew everything? DE or RotS?

It's from DE, well supplement material to it. But it shows he knew a prodigious amount even from his ROTS days. It was written in about...2005

>From: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: Reply from your Star Wars Blog
>Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:32:35 EDT
>
>
>In a message dated 4/20/2006 1:30:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>[email protected] writes:
>
>One final question though, In the Book Tales of the Jedi Golden Age of the
>Sith there is a quote saying Markas Ragnos "The most powerful of the
>powerful" is that to be taken as refrence only to the ancient Sith Lords? Or
>is this quote Retconned altogether?
>
>
>Well, keep in mind that the Golden Age of the Sith book is set 5000 years
>before the movies, so it's possible that Marka Ragnos was the most powerful Sith
> at that time -- and much later, Sidious later broke that record.
>
>Best,
> Dan

Can you post a photo of this email instead of copying and pasting the text? Thanks.

I'll have LS post the pic for me cause Im not well known enough to post links

I'm not sure how to post a picture of an email, how can one do that, Revolver?

You can print screen (button on keyboard, on top of the right number pad) -> paste image on MSword or somewhere -> save image -> Host on imageshack.

EDIT: Just checked it works

And you don't have to be well known to post a link. "Being popular" doesn't give anyone a right over anyone else.

From how some posters treat dissenters, you'd never know that.

Here's the link Styles sent me: http://by24fd.bay24.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg?msg=MSG1145554363.11&start=8148&len=3358&imgsafe=n&curmbox=F000000001& amp;a=ac2f45813a3edeffd2d844fd3a8bf9d3941b31346376
c1e61c716a8111788377

No, when I tried to post a link it says "Sorry you cant post a link you arent well known enough this is to prevent spam"

Oh dear Lord where to begin...

Lightsnake, I've read your previous argument on this topic, and you were royally curbstomped in it. Sidious does not pwn all. In fact, if I recall, in ROTJ (and as a warning, most of my sources are the movies and their novelizations, along with the few books after ROTJ that I've read), I seem to remember his own ****ing apprentice turning on him and throwing him down a damn vent shaft thing. If he's so very powerful, how is it that he cannot control his own servants?

Secondly, in ROTS, Yoda and Sidious are more or less evenly matched, until they are BOTH thrown backwards by Sid's lightning. Yoda simply had the misfortune to be thrown off the edge. If that fight had continued, Yoda, the 900 year old Grandmaster of the Jedi Order would have beaten Sidious down.

Thirdly, also in ROTS (movie and novelization), Sidious outright SAYS that Anakin would become more powerful than either himself or Yoda. Granted, Anakin did not fulfill this (although I consider that point arguable for other reasons that are not related to this argument), one would think that if Sids was the most powerful Sith Lord in HISTORY, there would NEVER be anyone more powerful than him.

Finally, in the book Dark Apprentice of the NJO series, Exar Kun embodies himself as a ****ing spirit, and then proceeded to pwn Luke Skywalker, the most powerful Jedi of the time, as well as most of the New Jedi Academy as such. I don't believe Sidious has ever displayed such power.

Except in Dark Empire...where his spirit razes a world...and he drains the life/force of billions...and destroys a fleet...and did you ever READ the first pages of this?

Lightsnake, I've read your previous argument on this topic, and you were royally curbstomped in it. Sidious does not pwn all. In fact, if I recall, in ROTJ (and as a warning, most of my sources are the movies and their novelizations, along with the few books after ROTJ that I've read), I seem to remember his own ****ing apprentice turning on him and throwing him down a damn vent shaft thing. If he's so very powerful, how is it that he cannot control his own servants?


Pretty much every Sith Lord suffered the same thing.

Thirdly, also in ROTS (movie and novelization), Sidious outright SAYS that Anakin would become more powerful than either himself or Yoda. Granted, Anakin did not fulfill this (although I consider that point arguable for other reasons that are not related to this argument), one would think that if Sids was the most powerful Sith Lord in HISTORY, there would NEVER be anyone more powerful than him.

...? History refers to the past.

Y'know, when you think about it, Revolver's right...about every Sith in history has been backstabbed...Ajunta Pall's sword was the end of him, Dathka Graush was assassinated, Kun was betrayed by his own people, Freedon Nadd died in a rebellion, Sadow was killed by his student, Nadd was destroyed by his student, Plageuis was killed by his student, Kaan and his buddies...almost every Sith Lord preceeding Kaan in the new empire was betrayed...

And Sidious expected Anakin to become stronger than him, Mustafar...changed that

It's the nature of the Sith to destroy eachother... that's why they can never truly conquer the light.

I think that's what Lucas was showing anyways.

Yeah, he said so himself at one point...when describing how the Sith went extinct

Heh, I once heard a theory that Palpatine's precognition allowed him to know that Vader would be crippled.

At first I thought it was crazy, but after looking into things it seems possible.

- Palpatine needed Vader the most at the Rise of the Empire. He was the supposed to be Palpy's Dark Knight against the Jedi. At this point in ROTS, Anakin is fairly weak minded but very powerful... Best case scenario for Palpatine.
- Palpatine should have been aware Vader would become more powerful than himself... and following Sith traditions attempt to seize control and dominance.
- Palpatine was a damn good manipulator, but unless he grossly overestimated his abilities (he was arrogant, I know), he could not expect to keep a mental dominance on Anakin forever.
- Anakin was the Chosen One... not sure if Palpatine knew of this, but it would have counted for a bit.

Yet he still kept Vader...

Palp never intended to be replaced...he just wanted to keep replacing apprentice after apprentice and live/rule forever.

I doubt Palp put much faith in a Jedi prophecy

I disagree Palpy seemed pretty PO'ed and dissapointed in Dark Lord the Rise of Darth Vader when thinking about what he could have gotten The most powerful force user ever and what he got a cripple in a suit.

Yes, but all of those apprentices were able to overthrow their masters because they were stronger than them. Vader was statistically weaker than Sidious. As well, the other apprentices overthrew their masters for personal gain, Vader didn't. Logically, every Sith Lord in history hasn't suffered the same thing, because every Sith Lord was succeeded by a stronger student.

Also, you are right, my use of the word history there was incorrect, but the fact remains, if Sids was supposedly the strongest Sith Lord ever, then why would he go to such lengths to purposefully find a student that was stronger than he was? If he was truly so powerful as to claim knowledge of Plageius' death defying Force powers, then it would seem that he actually had no need of an apprentice.

And, before you start citing that Plageus was unable to save himself from death, he was murdered in his sleep. Not much you can do with the Force if you're already dead.

Yes, but all of those apprentices were able to overthrow their masters because they were stronger than them. Vader was statistically weaker than Sidious. As well, the other apprentices overthrew their masters for personal gain, Vader didn't. Logically, every Sith Lord in history hasn't suffered the same thing, because every Sith Lord was succeeded by a stronger student.

Incorrect. Ludo Kressh betrayed Naga Sadow (and viceversa!). Ulic Qel Droma betrayed Exar Kun. Darth Malak betrayed Darth Revan. Darth Sidious betrayed Darth Plageuis in his sleep.

In each case, the betrayer was not stronger. You should really look more into the history of the Sith.

I can think of two explanations:
Sidious saw a true continuation of the ORder in Vader
Sidious would have possessed his body.

Also, there's something I have to bring up. I've posted that the NEC states Palp= strongest Sith ever...you know who co-wrote it and thus approved or wrote it himself? Kevin. J Anderson

And you know who doesn't have the authority to make that claim? Kevin J. Anderson and Dan Wallace. Why? Because they didn't create the DE works, and they cannot make blanket statements on what is ultimately Lucas' character. Also, Ragnos is defined by Anderson as the most powerful of the most powerful, and Anderson himself has yet to refute this statement, despite your "supposed" email from Dan Wallace.

http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/8748/warninglabelsdskad2wp.jpg

What part of a corporate system don;t you understand? NO author has that authority, it's up to LFL. KJA's co-written book declares Ragnos, HIS CHARACTER, inferior to the most powerful Sith of all time. And tom Veitch DID help to write TOTJ...now seriously, Veitch's comics stated Sidious's power...KJA's SUMMARY refers to the current time, notice Ragnos WAS the most powerful and NOW he is dead as Gav and Jori arrive? That's 5000 years ago in the past before Sidious is born

I already replied to your asshattery here.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
That's right, he is. No one else. Congrats.



No really? Can you show me what it was he contributed to the book specifically? Can you? Did he write or even oversee that Sidious article?



Proof of this? Since when does LFL make the binding decisions on canon via REFERENCE MATERIAL that... uh, REFERENCES SOURCE MATERIAL?



Not really. You still haven't shown us KJA's take on the subject, and we're already pointed out that reference materials can't contradict the source materials they're based on; if they do, that's a subjective opinion inserted by the author. Apparently, Dan Wallace was the Sidious fanboy in that duo, as he's supposively emailing you and your buddy that Sidious pwns all and is better.



See above. This is not conclusive. It's a reference material. Nowhere does KJA say "Sidious > Ragnos". And a potentially faked email from Dan Wallace doesn't convince me either, especially since Dan Wallace knows ****all about Ragnos and isn't in a position to make that call because he's not the author!

Let me know when that sinks in.

http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/8748/warninglabelsdskad2wp.jpg

And show me exactly where LFL has taken an official stance on the pecking order of the characters that are generated by independent authors. Make it something good, too. Not another faked email.

Get one thing through your head: These authors don't make ideas and send them to LFL, LFL makes the dieas and comissions THEM to write them. Often, an author's beginning and end is decided before he even starts the book. sometimes they're told how, when and where a character can or cannot die. Dan wallace was given authority to write by LFL with KJA...the source is in print with no objections from LFL or their editing and continuity team. In fact, no objections from KJA...and considering how closely he and Dan worked on the first chronology together...

And what part of 'I linked to the email' escapes you?

You know nothing about a novel franchise. Authors do not own the characters they create.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=400007&from=thread&pagenumber=3#post6370131

I addressed this. And now I'm going to turn in for the night. You have fun repeating the same thing over and over again. When you can prove up the authority of Dan over the creators and authors of DE and TOTJ, I'll fully entertain your "Discovery". Until then, you're outmanuevered.

Your hypocrisy really knows no bounds. What gave KJA the right over, say...Timothy Zahn or Michael Stackpole's creations that he KILLED OFF In Darksaber. Once more: IT's a corporate system so no author owns the characters. Walter Jon Williams killed the character John Luceno created, after all. Tom Veitch said Palpatine was stronger AFTER tOTJ had come out in Empire's End. You're under the impression KJA owns a damn thing and considering he signed on to this book and thus gave approval..

Janus if you think I faked the emails, Go to the Star Wars Blog page look up Dan Wallace and at the top there will be an Icon that lets you email he, do it. Ask the question and find out for yourself

But why would Kevin J Anderson put his name on something he didn't agree with? Why would he endorse a product that contradicted, in his alledged view, the Star Wars continuity?

If he was a co-author, then he could have writen the statement himself. But does it matter? His name's on it.

One would think a man as influential in this subject as KJA could deal with this with his friend and co author

Sidious sucked the life out of planets and drained the force, right? If that makes him the most powerful Sith, wouldn't Nihilus be on par?

Actually, Nihilus put Kreia on her ass who is arguably on par with Sidious and he completely destroyed the life on a planet and the entire planet itself.


They said he was the strongest Sith Lord, and you taking this into your court and assuming that "ZOMG! HE IS TEH MOST POWERFUL CUZ DEY SAID SO!"

That could mean anything. We've seen Sith Lords that show better feats so doesn't that nullify your theory into fallacy?

You are also forgetting that it only took Sidious about 10 seconds to conjure up a force storm, and if I remember correctly it was just after he had been battling Luke. Yet it was powerful enough to wipe out an entire fleet. The ancient sith needed hours of meditation to perform such feats, and needed the use of amulets to actually channel that power.

Originally posted by Antediluvian
Sidious sucked the life out of planets and drained the force, right? If that makes him the most powerful Sith, wouldn't Nihilus be on par?

Actually, Nihilus put Kreia on her ass who is arguably on par with Sidious and he completely destroyed the life on a planet and the entire planet itself.


They said he was the strongest Sith Lord, and you taking this into your court and assuming that "ZOMG! HE IS TEH MOST POWERFUL CUZ DEY SAID SO!"

That could mean anything. We've seen Sith Lords that show better feats so doesn't that nullify your theory into fallacy?

Not necessarily. If his sources are right its ALMOST as if Lucas straight up said "Palpatine is the most powerful Sith Lord in history". Though its not, because (according to Lightsnake) its C-Canon. But that puts it on par with all of EU. If it is, and it was written by someone with the authority to make such claims, then it doesn't matter what feats any other Sith has done, I think thats what Lightsnake is trying to get at. For instance Lucas could come out tomorrow and say "Porkins was actually the chosen one, and was going to be the most powerful Force user of all time and he lived his ship destruction and blew up the death star with his mind. Luke didn't actually destroy it" and there isn't anything anyone could do to say otherwise. This is kinda the case, except in this case its not G-Canon, its C-Canon, but it doesn't need to be G-Canon, C-Canon is all that is required.

If the New Essential Chronology is capable of retcon-ing canon and chronological events, then Lightsnake is correct. (whoaa..) And by definition (as of now) Palpatine (as of ROTS) would be the most powerful Sith of all time.

This however rests on 2 things.

1) Is the Guide Canon at all?
2) Can it retcon events?

If it can then we have no choice but to say Palpatine is the strongest. However, I hold judgement until I really look at all the facts.

I think Sidious also has the feats on his side.

But the point Lightsnake is trying to make is that even if Sidious didn't have the feats on his side, it wouldn't matter. IF the canon has indeed been retcon'ed...lol

The question is: Has it?

Yeah I know. I was just trying to think of some feats that make him impressive and I think what I posted 4 posts above seems to indicate that.

Anomaly, the Essential Guide compiles events. It's cannot make new things up and neither does it have the power to retcon other events.

The quote from NEC is vaguer than the quote on Ragnos being the most powerful of the most powerful.

"Most Powerful of Sith Lord in History" - Ok, the Roman Emperor back 2000 years was the Most Powerful Figure, but does that substantiate enough proof to say the Roman Emperor single-handedly defeating every single human of Roman History in personal combat? No.

Another example is Mao Zedong, The Most Powerful Man in China's History, yet again does that substantiate enough proof that Mao can single-handedly defeat every last Chinese in history? No.

Unless you can prove just how DE Sidious is the Most Powerful of the Most Powerful, go back into hibernation.

So Sadow blowing up a Star is a less impressive technique than Force Storm ? So Sadow producing an illusionary army that would've toppled the Republic had he not have been betrayed is a less impressive feat than Sidious's feat of Force Storm?

Honestly, Lightsnake and Numan you diminish the feats of greater Sith Lords in favour of weaker ones, true we agree that Sidious was the Most Powerful Figure in SW EU, due to him dominating the Galaxy purely through Politics and Manipulation, yet you have to prove that Ragnos is not the Most Powerful of the Most Powerful and Sidious is.

Logically speculating, also makes us assume that the Ancient Sith are much stronger than the ones that succeeded them. Kun with fractions of their teachings allowed him to overpower the Republic, every instakill from TOTJ to Kotor was said to have originated from the Ancient Sith. Also comparing them phyiscally, it depicts the Ancient Sith wielding barstard swords, that presumably, are immensly heavy, as easily as a Jedi and Sith wields a lightsaber.

Lightsnake honestly, why cant you accept that Sidious was NOT the most Powerful PHYISCALLY and in terms of the FORCE?

Because, frankly, those of you trying to argue the definition of 'powerful' are being incredibly pedantic. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that when someone is defined as 'the most powerful Sith Lord in history', they mean POWERFUL. Don't mess around saying they mean the wrong sort of power, it is VERY clear what is meant. Your tactics are those of extreme desperation, and your accusations of fanboyism look very hypocritical in lieu of that.

Anomaly's question is the cogent one. Are the sources good for what LS thinks they are or not? If they are, then he is right, and all of that crap about super powers in the earlier works are simply wrong- made up stories sourced from very over-active imaginations.

Not that I know why people try to defend them anyway. All those stories about Sith with godlike powers were shit- lazy power inflation on the part of the authors. Same problem with that they did with Luke in NJO. In their defence, though,. I would point out they are comic books, and hence things in them are exaggerated, as they were in the Clone Wars cartoons. Some of these things are, therefore, not to be taken literally as they would be on screen.

Not to mention how utterly, utterly silly this 'bastard swords are better than lightsabres because they are heavier' thing is. Cretinous nonsense. And if you are going to try and claim that Sidious is inferior because he doesn't have the physique as some previous Sith Lords, then I have to question whether you actually ever watched Star Wars at all, that being such a huge own goal in power logic in SW.

Also, I don't think it is appropriate for posters to immediately assume that that email is faked; the posters offer for you guys to email as well has rather called you out on that one.

Did i say Barstard Swords are better? No, i merely stated that they are heavier by far and yet the Ancient Sith can wield them as well as a Jedi/Sith wields a lightsaber.

Can you substantiate proof for that? That quote is as vaguer than the quote from the Narrator stating Ragnos was THE Dark Lord of the Sith, The Most Powerful of the Most Powerful, adding onto that, they're are numerous implications supporting the quote. However for Sidious, the quote is honestly unsupported, we dont doubt Sidious's prowess and power, however i myself doubt Sidious being the Strongest of All time. Also there is much more proof showing Sidious as being Most Powerful Sith Lord in history in terms of domination, politics and manipulation and not in personal combat. He is after all depicted as a politician

That "Anyone" with an ounce of common sense is infact limited to you, Numan, Lightsnake and likely a few other members within this forum, you do not speak for everyone, also you can see how many people with common sense eg Illustrious, Nai, Sorgo refute that point. Also how is assuming Sidious as the Most Powerful Sith Lord, soley in politics illogical?

Perhaps, but the credibility of the email can be questioned.

"So Sadow blowing up a Star is a less impressive technique than Force Storm ? So Sadow producing an illusionary army that would've toppled the Republic had he not have been betrayed is a less impressive feat than Sidious's feat of Force Storm?"

Sadow needed to meditate for hours to do the things that you have listed. He needed to channel the force through amulets because he could not control the power. Sidious was able to do a force storm in about five seconds shortly after his fight with Luke.

He is shown to meditate for hours to perform them to his full extent, however mediation simply enhances his performance and it doesn't neccesarrily mean he needs it.

Yep he uses the Amulets, but why does that diminish his power? Look what happened to Sidious when he lost control of the Force Storm, if anything the Amulet can limit the power of Sadow's technique. All in all, the Amulet does not give power to Sadow, the force he used for the specific technique is his raw power.

Correct me if im wrong, but Sidious applied the technique close to his flagship, he did not use the power to the length nor breadth of Sadow sitting in the middle of his fleet, producing an Illusionary Army on a few planets.

So prove that Sadow couldn't reproduce his illusions in a lower grade? Its proven that relatively weaker Dark Jedi ( Aleema ) can use the illusions, in a much lower scale.

Just like Sidious can control the power and extent of his Force Storm Sadow can control his illusion's power and amount.

You are missing my point. Sidious' force storm was able to generate as much power as Sadow's destroying a star, yet it took him less time, and he didn't require as much concentration.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Because, frankly, those of you trying to argue the definition of 'powerful' are being incredibly pedantic. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that when someone is defined as 'the most powerful Sith Lord in history', they mean POWERFUL. Don't mess around saying they mean the wrong sort of power, it is VERY clear what is meant. Your tactics are those of extreme desperation, and your accusations of fanboyism look very hypocritical in lieu of that.

Exactly, I think it is made pretty clear in the quote that it is raw combat power. Isn't the quote something along the lines of "Yoda could not defeat the most powerful Sith ever."? It would be plain silly to be talking about how Yoda could not defeat Sidious because of his great political power. Ever encompasses everything (or at least up to that time, yup, that includes the Ancients like Ragnos).

Originally posted by jollyjim311
Exactly, I think it is made pretty clear in the quote that it is raw combat power. Isn't the quote something along the lines of "Yoda could not defeat the most powerful Sith ever."? It would be plain silly to be talking about how Yoda could not defeat Sidious because of his great political power. Ever encompasses everything (or at least up to that time, yup, that includes the Ancients like Ragnos).

No, Yoda could not defeat The Most Powerful Sith in History, not ever, also how does that disapprove the statement of Sidious being more so in the political/domination factor. It simply means Yoda could not beat Sidious, and none of us here have doubted Sidious's prowess in terms of Force and Physical power.

Quite simply, its not silly because it terms of power, he wielded the most over the galaxy, he manipulated and controlled, thus giving him the title Most Powerful, because he suceeded in what the other Sith had not is quite correct. Political/Domination Power > Single Entity Power. If you dont believe that, the face the facts around our world today, name one leader of Modern Times that was the most powerful being even in personal combat.

Originally posted by hord06
You are missing my point. Sidious' force storm was able to generate as much power as Sadow's destroying a star, yet it took him less time, and he didn't require as much concentration.

Read the comics, Sadow did not require immense concentration nor time to destroy the star, and also you missed the point that if Sadow was to create an Illusionary Army, that could provide as much destructive power as the Force Storm, he wouldn't need to concentrate as much, as far as anyone knows he needed the meditation chamber to help him concentrate enough for an invasion army that divided and attacked more than one planet.

Your twisting what is said to suit your own agenda. When it says "...most powerful in history" it means most powerful in history. The meaning is clear, your just coming up with lame things like "history as in what..." crap.

Thats not the question as I've said though. IF these quotes are canon and can retcon events then it makes absolutely no difference what other people have or have not done. The statement holds true in any case, Palpatine would be the most powerful. It makes no difference who has blown up stars or frozen senate chambers, the statement holds true no matter what.

You guys are being hypocritical. When it says "Ragnos was THE Sith lord the most powerful of the most powerful" its not saying of all time (like the palpatine quote does). The quote is directed at that time frame, where Ragnos WAS the most powerful of the powerful. It does not say "Ragnos was THE Sith lord, the most powerful of all the Sith ever" if it did then the meaning (that you attempt to infer upon the quote) would hold true. But in reality all it is saying is that Ragnos was the most powerful at the time. Its illogical to assume that a statement would hold true in events that have not happened yet, the narration is being made at the time of the events. Its like me saying "Roy jones jr. is the best of the best boxers" and you then maintaining that such a quote would hold true to other (possible) boxers who do not exist but will potentially exist in the future. Such a quote is temporally fixed on the time it was said and to infer a further temporal meaning upon it is illogical.

Deception, 'In history' is 'ever' and in a book that's describing SW history...really, the semantics here are nothing, Dan Wallace said he wrote Sidious as the most powerful Sith ever.

Deception, KJA himself wrote that the weaspon on Sadow's ship destroyed the star...Sadow's power wasn't doing the job by itself...and Sidious didn't need to concentrate to destroy a world or obliterate a fleet...in fact, when he razed a world, he was described to do 'at his leisure'.

This quote is a reference to ever and is in a reference to a battle, Yoda failed to defeat the most powerful Sith ever in what, a debate?

And Palp and Luke have both been shown to create illusionary ships spanning entire fleets. Moreover, Sidious's force storm was described as the single greatest usage of dark side power ever...it ripped the fabric of the galaxy.

Moreover, I can and HAVE proved the guide is C-canon...I've linked to the Holocron, to the Sansweet/Rostini, to Leland Chee's comments and posted the bit on C-canon...it's everything else, books, RPG sourcebook story and background info, card game character info, comics, game plots...

Dan Wallace said sometimes they cut things-some of his stuff was gone over with a fine tooth comb and changed- others were allowed to stay, like changing the Sith Empire, Xendor and the Palpatine thing, and Kevin J. Anderson collaborated...in fact, KJA wrote all that 'vague' info of the Ancients in the NEC

If I may post some things I've posted before, from the Holocron info on the canon level:
G-canon is absolute canon; the six Episodes and anything coming directly from George Lucas (including unpublished production notes from him or his production department that are never seen by the public). Elements coming directly from Lucas in the movie novelizations, reference books, and other sources are also G-canon, though anything created by the authors of those sources is C-canon (see below).

When the matter of changes between movie versions is brought up, the remastered editions are deemed superior to the theatrical ones, since they correct mistakes and 'improve' consistency between the two trilogies. They also express Lucas' "original" intention and also final word.

C-canon is pretty much everything in the Expanded Universe: Star Wars books, comics, games, cartoons, non-theatrical films, and more. Games are a special case as generally only the stories are C-canon while things like stats and gameplay may not be. C-canon elements have been known to appear in the movies, thus making them G-canon. (This includes: the name "Coruscant," swoop bikes, Quinlan Vos, Aayla Secura, YT-2400 freighters, Salporin, and Action VI Transports.)

S-canon is "secondary" canon; the story itself is considered non-continuity, but the non-contradicting elements are still a canon part of the Star Wars universe. This includes things like the online roleplaying game Star Wars Galaxies and certain elements of a few N-canon stories. Many of the materials labelled as S-canon are older sources which may or may not fit within the continuity, but which have not been fully evaluated prior to inclusion in the Holocron database.

N-canon is "non-canon." What-if stories (such as stories published under the Infinities label), most game stats, fanon, and anything else directly contradicted by higher canon ends up here. N-canon is the only level that is not considered canon by Lucasfilm.



Tasty Taste
Member Profile
Total Posts: 1044
Member Since: 05/00

reply

Date Posted: Jan 21, 2004 09:16 AM

Are the entries in the Holocron sorted as cannonical & non-cannonical? Are there various degress of oficialness?

The database does indeed have a canon field. Anything in the films and from George Lucas (including unpublished internal notes that we might receive from him or from the film production department) is considered "G" canon. Next we have what we call continuity "C" canon which is pretty much everything else. There is secondary "S" continuity canon which we use for some older published materials and things that may or may not fit just right. But, if it is referenced in something else it becomes "C". Similarly, any "C" canon item that makes it into the films can become "G" canon. Lastly there is non-continuity "N" which we rarely use except in the case of a blatant contradiction or for things that have been cut.

http://forums.starwars.com/thread.jspa?forumID=24&start=15&threadID=152583&msRange=15


Tasty Taste
Member Profile
Total Posts: 1044
Member Since: 05/00

reply

Date Posted: Jan 25, 2004 03:52 AM

Okay, I know that the novels are C-level, and I assume that most of the newer comics are also C-level. Where on the continuity spectrum to the Video games come in?

"...continuity "C" canon which is pretty much everything else. " By everything else I mean EVERYthing else. Novels, comics, junior novels, videogames, trading card games, roleplaying games, toys, websites, television. As I've mentioned earlier, any contradictions that arise are dealt on a case-by-case.

This has been our general approach to continuity since we began using the Holocron database to track it.

http://blogs.starwars.com/holocron/4

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Because, frankly, those of you trying to argue the definition of 'powerful' are being incredibly pedantic. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that when someone is defined as 'the most powerful Sith Lord in history', they mean POWERFUL. Don't mess around saying they mean the wrong sort of power, it is VERY clear what is meant. Your tactics are those of extreme desperation, and your accusations of fanboyism look very hypocritical in lieu of that.

Anomaly's question is the cogent one. Are the sources good for what LS thinks they are or not? If they are, then he is right, and all of that crap about super powers in the earlier works are simply wrong- made up stories sourced from very over-active imaginations.

Not that I know why people try to defend them anyway. All those stories about Sith with godlike powers were shit- lazy power inflation on the part of the authors. Same problem with that they did with Luke in NJO. In their defence, though,. I would point out they are comic books, and hence things in them are exaggerated, as they were in the Clone Wars cartoons. Some of these things are, therefore, not to be taken literally as they would be on screen.

Not to mention how utterly, utterly silly this 'bastard swords are better than lightsabres because they are heavier' thing is. Cretinous nonsense. And if you are going to try and claim that Sidious is inferior because he doesn't have the physique as some previous Sith Lords, then I have to question whether you actually ever watched Star Wars at all, that being such a huge own goal in power logic in SW.

Also, I don't think it is appropriate for posters to immediately assume that that email is faked; the posters offer for you guys to email as well has rather called you out on that one.

LMAO, Ushgarak! You and Lightsnake are related! You both scuttle off quietly after getting pwned and then come back for more!

Originally posted by Traya
Anomaly, the Essential Guide compiles events. It's cannot make new things up and neither does it have the power to retcon other events.

Which is funny as now the Sith Empire starts at 7000 BBY because of the NEC.And guides have created new planets...and technology...and given us new info about alien species, even the Vong

Traya, you're attempting to fight an unofficial source with proof it counts and maybe, just maybe, you should read the links. Especially as, well, your points have been debunked in the 'they can't create canon'...you know what? They didn't, they just compiled it and that canon was that Sidious was the strongest

WTF? The Sith Empire starting ar 7000 BBY makes no sense whatsoever...

Nope, sorry. Leland Chee confirmed it. And the only place that EVER gave the Sith Empire's age? A sourcebook! And it's been retconned! And confirmed! The 25,000 year schism was due to Zendor and eight thousand years later, was Ajunta Pall's rebellion:

http://www.starwars.com/eu/lit/ref/f20051025/index.html

I wouldn't want you to miss this quote:

is an epic that spans over 25,000 years of continuity, from the founding of the Republic to the formation of the Galactic Alliance. The newly updated book, written by Daniel Wallace (with Kevin J. Anderson), provides an overarching view of the many stories set in the Star Wars universe, finally fills in the gaps of the prequel trilogy and The New Jedi Order, and connects the many eras and tales with newly revealed information

Newly revealed info...this from Star Wars' official site!

I have to say that Lightsnake is making hella good points here, and has the stuff to back it up.

if the NEC is not a guide, but rather considered a book, then Lightsnake is right...

I've seen nothing from anyone else that says otherwise, all everyone keeps saying is either "lmao lightsnake, your back" or throwing out "guides are not canon"...the thing is, this book is apparently not a "guide" its at the same level as a book or comic...

NO ONE else has refuted anything that Lightsnake has said thus far with any supporting evidence...so I'm inclined to believe LS.

I've actually read through everything that he has been saying (without bias) and what he's saying makes sense. What he is saying is apparently official..

Thank you, Anomaly...I'd like people to just check out the links I provided and the NEC's summary on the OFFICIAL STAR WARS site said it provides new info.

Well I don't make a habit of just ignoring things because of who is saying it. Not if they have links and scans to back it up.

My computer monitor is large enough to read the NEC scan and it does indeed say what you said it does.

And the levels of canon are set, and this book DOES seem to fall under it, making it C-canon. As well as the comments by Dan Wallace prove it further...and unless someone can find an official source either discrediting the book as C-canon, or something that discredits Dan Wallace's comments, then....well LS your right...and it makes no difference that other people don't like you...

I don't mind not being liked but it honestly grates my cheese that whenever I actually tried to debate civilly, I was flamed and bashed to hell and back

I will never understand why people get pissed over who's the most powerful in a fictional fantasy setting...

WTF? The Sith Empire starting ar 7000 BBY makes no sense whatsoever...

But it happened.

Anyways, again I don't see the fuss outta this. What's wrong with Palpatine being the most powerful? It doesn't make sense? Destroying suns doesn't make sense. Manipulating black holes doesn't make sense. "The Force" doesn't make much sense either. It's Star Wars. It's fiction. If Palpatine is the strongest, then so be it.

But then, everyone in the PT would receive a massive surge of power. If Palpatine is more powerful than Ragnos, then Yoda is too.

Well, in the novelization and a few other places, Yoda's stated power is quite a bit. It doesn't mean Ragnos is weak, it just means the people in the PT, like Mace and the like are really strong

I was under the impression that if Yoda ever turned to the DS he would wipe his ass with Palps.

It might mean the PT people had a higher tier to them. Compare Mace Windu to say... Agen Kolar or Saesee Tiin during their fights against Palpatine. Mace is head and shoulders above them, even though they're all Council Members.

And yes, Jonathan that is correct. Dooku says so himself in Dark Rendezvous.

IMO it's still best to avoid comparing those from different eras... It gets a bit sticky.

That was Dooku's impression, yeah, though one could argue that was what Yoda wanted him to see. Though "Give me my rose" was infinitely badass

And I wouldn't rule the PT greats being higher than ancient greats. ISsue is, one appears in a comic and one in a movie and some tend to be...overblown.

Originally posted by Jonathan Mark
I was under the impression that if Yoda ever turned to the DS he would wipe his ass with Palps.

Maybe. Sidious had enough difficulties defeated him when he was a Jedi. Image if he was Sith.

Woohoo!

Yup. Like the Clone Wars cartoon. Everyone is over the top.

I'm not sure Sith are inherently more powerful than Jedi...if that were true, the Brotherhood of Darkness might have done much better. Plus, Yoda'd be fighting on Palpatine's turf there. He realized himself: You can't fight the master of darkness with darkness

Originally posted by Lightsnake
I'm not sure Sith are inherently more powerful than Jedi...if that were true, the Brotherhood of Darkness might have done much better. Plus, Yoda'd be fighting on Palpatine's turf there. He realized himself: You can't fight the master of darkness with darkness

Of course Sith are more powerful than Jedi. Sith are trained to hunt Jedi, kill things, use their powers for offensive domination and to train themselves to their extents to MURDER. They're raised as Warriors.

Jedi train to oppose that force, of course. But they spend more time with verbal persuasion and peacekeeping techniques to try to stop a fight before it starts. Not to mention the Jedi hadn't seen the Sith for a thousand years. They weren't ready for such a faction to return.

In pure combat the Sith would have an advantage.

But since the Jedi work together and rarely betray each other, they always win in the end.

The Sith empire forgot the Jedi completely. Jedi are trained to fight as well, to eliminate darkness.

And by the same token, the Jedi hadn't seen the Sith in a millenia by Kun's time, a bit over a millenia I believe. Moreover, Yoda was the only living Jedi who knew of the possible Sith survival after Ruusan and it was implied in a few places he'd faced them once.

Problem with Sith is their power hunger, inabilities to fathom compassion and self sacrifice and total nature weakens them seriously. And the Jedi is Ruusan wrecked the Sith who ruled the galaxy for centuries and continued the training as warrior peacekeepers to Yoda's time. Ulic as a Sith Lord was beaten by Vodo and Nomi, Freedon Nadd was apparently killed by a Jedi or by an uprising. , the pinnacle battle, Luke and Palpatine, ended in Luke's win-albeit with some aid- and Luke's defeated Lumiya, many of Kaan's Sith lords were beaten in single combat, including some of his predecesors.

By the way, Sorgo, anything to say about the Sidious= strongest ever thing in light of the book and links I posted?