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

Each character is at his best from what we've seen so far, and Luke gets no rest in between fights. None.

1. Darth Vader.
2. Yoda.
3. Jacen Solo.
4. Kas'im.
5. Revan.
6. Kyp Durron.
7. Exar Kun.
8. Darth Bane.
9. Darth Sidious.
10. Darth Nihilus.

Luke will fall at #4 or #5, he's too weak from the previous duels.

I'm guessing this is LOTF Luke? He gets through the first 4 pretty easily. 5, 6 and 7 start to get tough because those guys are strong and Luke will probably be getting tired, 8 and 9 will be bitches. If he gets past them he loses at Nihilus, I'd say 9 or 10. I'm not really sure how tired he'll get.

He probably loses at 9. Luke still kicked a lot of ass when he was tired (read the Unifying Force).

I would, but I haven't read any of the NJO, except the first 3 books like a year ago, so I'll probably be really behind.

Originally posted by Sexyback
I would, but I haven't read any of the NJO, except the first 3 books like a year ago, so I'll probably be really behind.

I've read excerpts of the final battle. He kicks some serious, serious ass. He fights through an army of Yuuzhan Vong to then engage in single combat against their leader. Jacen's description of Luke is outrageous.

I'd say its like 80% possible that he makes it all the way.

Actually, I don't think he will. Between Sidious and Nihilus, I don't know.

By the way the Legacy of the Force storyline is going now then i would say that Luke would loose against Jacen Solo. In either Betrayal or Bloodlines (don't remember which) there was a scene where Luke and Jacen fought illusions of each other, where the illusions were controlled by the one it was an illusion of. Like an advanced simulator. Here we saw that Jacen Solo was not at par with Luke yet, but clearly on his way. So if Luke has already fought Vader and Yoda then he should be too strained to manage a fight against Jacen.

Luke would get to at least 9....if he made it there, he'd make it

Originally posted by Gideon
Actually, I don't think he will. Between Sidious and Nihilus, I don't know.

Yea I dunno. Jedi can go a long time with being completely exhausted and injured and still preform to the top of they're abilities. Mace in Shatterpoint is a testament to that, and Luke is far and away better then Mace at everything. Luke would take all of these people alone with relative ease so...I dunno. I still think Luke could do it, he's pulled off some insane things before with being bruised and beaten and exhausted. He fought Dolph (AKA. Kueller) with being injured to the point of almost collapse (broken ankle etc.) and he stayed with Dolph during they're whole fight (until the end). And Mara said (referring to Dolph) that she hadn't felt such power from anyone since the Emperor in his early days. So all in all I think Luke could do it if he had to do it.

But didn't he get bested by Lumiya in LotF?

No. She attacked him when he was distracted and got a lucky wound in.

Still though as much as you defend it, you can't deny the fact that it STILL should have been no contest, Luke should have killed her in a second distracted or not.

I can simply point to a stupid author, and accept a massive inconsistency.

Luke's going to face a line of the strongest Jedi and Sith, he'll be more than simply exhausted. He might lose at # 7 or # 8 for all we know, but he's definately going down at # 9.

I'd personally say he falls at 7, he'll be tired as hell.

Luke can use the Force to keep himself going in any time of exhaustion, even to the extent of becoming one with it. Exhaustion will not get to him

Exhaustion DID get to him against Lumiya though.

Originally posted by Gideon
I've read excerpts of the final battle. He kicks some serious, serious ass. He fights through an army of Yuuzhan Vong to then engage in single combat against their leader. Jacen's description of Luke is outrageous.

Are you saying that you've never actually read it? I suggest you do, as his actions in it have been, in my opinion, overrated and exaggerated over time.

Anyway, I definately don't see Luke winning. Even at full strength Sidious would push him to his limit. After fighting Yoda he'll be tired and I can see Jacen being able to knock him around a bit but still losing. Kas'im and Revan tire him and then he eventually loses against Kyp.

well, to be honest, Luke could just emerald lightning all of them and move on to the next...no way that ROTS Yoda will compare to LoTF Luke...Vader, please...Jacen i think deserves to be higher on the list, but he could give him trouble, but then could us Kas'im as a cool down match...i dunno, I'd say he makes it to sidious, who should be number 10.

Exhaustion, plus a pierced and burned lung against Lumiya.

Seriously, Luke isn't losing until high numbers if he loses at all.

Pierced and burned lung?

Originally posted by Darth Subjekt
well, to be honest, Luke could just emerald lightning all of them and move on to the next...no way that ROTS Yoda will compare to LoTF Luke...Vader, please...Jacen i think deserves to be higher on the list, but he could give him trouble, but then could us Kas'im as a cool down match...i dunno, I'd say he makes it to sidious, who should be number 10.

Emerald Lightning has never been proven to be as great as it's made out to be, as it has never been tested against any powerful force user, and if he really could pwn anyone with it, wouldn't he have used it against lomi Plo, or Lumiya?

Luke is not invincible.

He will stop at 5th character after constant battle with already very powerful enemies.

Lumiya's attack did just tat to him, Glentract.

And Legend? Luke is nearly invincible as far as SW is concerned. He makes it to 9 at the very least

If he's almost invincible, how the hell did Lumiya beat him? She's not very powerful, if he was almost invincible, wouldn't he never lose to her in a million years?

ok, well Luke beat vader, anakin beat dooku, ob1 beat anakin, vader killed sidious, ob1 beat maul...the best doesn't always win...and luke didn't die so the fact he was beaten while caught off guard, isn't really a valid argument against him being virtually invincible.

Lumiya beat him? Huh, I recall Lumiya lying on the floor, injured at the end...Lumiya got an initial advantage nbecause she destroyed one of his hands and pierced his lung when Luke was distracted by the possible death of his wife.

no, i wasn't saying that Luke lost, i was simply pointing out to him that the best doesn't always win, giving reason for the initial wounds inflicted on Luke.

I heard from Glentract that he lost.

I will agree that Lumiya's advantage was rather understated, though significant. For, earlier in Tempest, a no-name Jedi by the name of Tresina Lobi (no name in comparison to Luke) was able to engage Lumiya and Aleema (a dark Jedi) in combat simultaneously. Lobi more than held her own against these two, and would comfortably beat either of them in a straight up fight (think of Maul vs. Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon).

However, as pointed out, Luke's power varies from author to author. For example, Timothy Zahn was not pleased with how certain characters were becoming like "Supermen", including Luke (though it is ironic... he tries to put a no-name dark Jedi on par with the Emperor), and so for the novel Survivor's Quest (which is several, several years after DE), he arranges a situation that pits Luke and Mara up against a slightly modified droideka (a single one), and they have immense difficulty between the two of them to kill it.

Unless it changes, I consider DN/NJO Luke to be the strongest incarnation of Luke. And, though I think he'd defeat any other SW character in single combat, I think Glentract has a point - he's not skilled enough to breeze through everybody.

Originally posted by Sexyback
I heard from Glentract that he lost.

No you didn't.


Lumiya's attack did just tat to him, Glentract.

I thought meant that he went into the battle with a pierced and burned lung. This makes more sense.


Oh, and Escape, the fact that Lobi had been a long-term member of the Jedi Council might make you feel better about her lasting against Lumiya and Alema for as long as she did. It made me feel better about it anyway.

Yeah, a bad injury, plus the loss of a hand effected Luke's ability. In most cases, he'd gesture and burst apart Lumiya's life support

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Yeah, a bad injury, plus the loss of a hand effected Luke's ability. In most cases, he'd gesture and burst apart Lumiya's life support

Lightsnake, no offense, but I think if he had that option, he'd have taken it. You can blame it on the author, but Luke was far from all powerful in Tempest. If we go by that incarnation, I think Palpatine'd wipe his ass with him.

If that were written by another author, that's exactly what would've happened

Originally posted by Lightsnake
If that were written by another author, that's exactly what would've happened

No.

It would have still had to have been a dramatic and powerful fight. On paper? Yeah, Luke should be able to lift a finger and Lumiya would fall over dead. On paper, though, an 900 year old Jedi Grandmaster should be able to wipe his ass with any Dark Lord of the Sith - and yet that's not the case. On paper, the most powerful Sith Lord in history should be able to crush Luke Skywalker in a fight - and yet this is not the case.

My opinion hasn't changed; Luke's probably the most powerful fighter in single combat. But, in my opinion, he's no longer leagues above the likes of Yoda or Sidious or Mace. After reading that damn book, I don't think he'd waste anybody on their level of power. Beat? Probably. But obliterate? No.

So could the antediluvian's view on him be the right one?

Originally posted by Sexyback
So could the antediluvian's view on him be the right one?

Depends.

My opinion stems from the inconsistency with Luke's power. And since it's all equally canon - we just have to accept that there is no logical explanation for the fluctuations in his power other than sheer author inconsistencies. Luke as of the Unifying Force would indeed defeat the likes of Kas'im, Mace, or Bane in a fight. In the zone that he was in? Probably very easily. But LotF Luke? Not so sure.

LOTF Luke would likely still beat anyone he focused on. He might have a time of it, but he'd comfortably win.

Yeah, NJO/DN Luke did some incredible things. Might he just be getting too old?

The average human lifespan is over a hundred. Luke's 'etting too old' wouldn't happen in the span of a couple years

It looked like Mace got rather old in the span of 13 years, there's deep lines where there weren't before.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
LOTF Luke would likely still beat anyone he focused on. He might have a time of it, but he'd comfortably win.

Sorry, but I actually don't think so against someone like Yoda or Mace. Let alone DE Sidious...

But Luke's high usage of the force was stated to be making his body weaker, wasn't it?

Originally posted by Sexyback
But Luke's high usage of the force was stated to be making his body weaker, wasn't it?

In one instance, I believe, during DN. Because he lacked the control, and the raw power was so intense.

I understand what you're saying Escape but at the end, Luke Skywalker is the most powerful force user the galaxy has ever seen, according to GL of course if you use logical deduction and his statement, so you'd have to take his power inconsistencies as author inconsistencies. For instance, DE Sidious, no matter how powerful he gets, won't be able to take a full potential Anakin or Full Potential Luke because that would contradict what George Lucas said.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
I understand what you're saying Escape but at the end, Luke Skywalker is the most powerful force user the galaxy has ever seen, according to GL of course if you use logical deduction and his statement, so you'd have to take his power inconsistencies as author inconsistencies. For instance, DE Sidious, no matter how powerful he gets, won't be able to take a full potential Anakin or Full Potential Luke because that would contradict what George Lucas said.

At their full potential? Hell no. They'd be twice as strong as he is. But there's no indication that Luke has reached it. The point is, by DN or whatever, I don't think he is a mile ahead of Sidious. They're probably rivals in power.

Potential hardly means everything, I'm actually of the belief that Sidious' power has much much more to do with his knowledge of the force and time spent mastering it than simply his potential.

Originally posted by Gideon
At their full potential? Hell no. They'd be twice as strong as he is. But there's no indication that Luke has reached it. The point is, by DN or whatever, I don't think he is a mile ahead of Sidious. They're probably rivals in power.

Maybe by NJO, but by the end of the Vong War he's displayed feats and mastery of the force that not even Sidious has displayed. I'm pretty sure GL says somewhere that he reached his potential by DN or even LOTF and was declining, which could have been a logical reason for the supposed author inconsistencies. Then again, how the most powerful force user ever could decline so quickly, I have no idea.

If it continues, Bane may just become more powerful. I mean, what people seem to forget is that he was only 26 by BotS, and had only about 2 years experience studying the darkside.

Originally posted by Sexyback
If it continues, Bane may just become more powerful.


Not even close Nebaris. George Lucas already stated that Anakin and Luke>everybody else. You have DE Sidious in second place. You might think potential means nothing, but potential is everything in the star wars universe. For instance, Obiwan would never ever be as powerful as Sidious, or Yoda would never be as powerful as DE Sidious. The only exception to that rule seems to be Jacen Solo, whose power increased exponentially during his 5 year hiatus. Then again he might have reached his potential very fast with those 5 years, or his potential might be that of Anakin and Luke, which I would highly doubt considering the fact that he's the grandson of Anakin, and not a direct lineage.

Well while I disagree, I can see that you're dead set on Luke being born with more potential, so I won't argue that, but at least consider that Bane's strength in the darkside would have been increased to a degree after gaining the orbalisk armour (they pump dark side energies into his body), and the fact that he's a darksider also puts him at an advantage.

Originally posted by Sexyback
Well while I disagree, I can see that you're dead set on Luke being born with more potential, so I won't argue that, but at least consider that Bane's strength in the darkside would have been increased to a degree after gaining the orbalisk armour (they pump dark side energies into his body), and the fact that he's a darksider also puts him at an advantage.


It's not what I'm dead set on, it's what is fact. Who cares what Bane's strength in the darkside was? For all you know he reached his potential at 26. Hell Exar Kun was powerful at a young age, but does that mean he would have surpasses the Skywalkers? Luke was untrained and hardly better than an average Jedi at a young age but does that mean his force abilities sucked? You can't quantify Bane's potential, but we know Bane wasn't even the most powerful of his order, so him being anything other than #2 in his order is purely speculation.

After Luke did the same technique again a short time later, he'd mastered it so his body suffered no ill effects

Being a darkside doesn't necessarily make you better. While you do unleash your full potential without limits, you also become cocky and arrogant(see Anakin during fight with Obiwan), so it goes bot h ways Nebaris.

It's never been confirmed that Luke has the higest potential.



I do.



After just 2-3 years experience studying the darkside, half of that based on flawed teachings? No way, he was only really just coming into true sith teachings by the end of BotS.



I actually view Exar like I do Bane, maybe slightly lesser, so if he never died, it's possible.



Luke wasn't properly trained.



Yes we can. He was able to pull a moon out of orbit, by the age of 27, after less than 3 years experience studying the darkside, with half of that time based on flawed teachings.

Let's compare him to RotS Palpatine, who he was quite clearly better than by Bots. Palpatine had much more training (decades, in comparison to two), based on better teachings (all the holocrons from Bane's order), and he was much older (more than double his age actually), so we can speculate that Bane's potential is quite far above Palpatine's, just like Luke's.



'When the Sith finally emerged from a thousand years of watching and waiting, they numbered in accordance with the tradition set down by Darth Bane, only two. The most powerful of these was Darth Sidious, an ice-cold, diabolically calculating genius equipped with the strengths of the dark side of the Force, as well as an enormous wealth of Sith artifacts, equipment, and knowledge. Perhaps the best weapon in his arsenal was his keen understanding of galactic politics, and his seemingly unlimited ability to engineer situations that ultimately served to further empower the sith'

You are referring to this, correct?
If so, then there are two major flaws.

1. 'The most powerful of these was Darth Sidious.' - you assume that the 'these' refers to the entire order of sith lords that was set down by Darth Bane, when it can just as easily be interpreted that the 'these' refers to the then current two sith lords. So basically, the argument is inconclusive, and can't be used.

2. Power is ambiguous, you can't deny this. Now when the passage states that Sidious is the most powerful, it also lists his weapons (some would define 'weapon' as 'tool of power', so to speak) as not only strength in the darkside, knowledge of the darkside, and an enormous wealth of artifacts and equipment, but also political knowledge and skills in manipulation; intellect related attributes, so in this context, power is clearly not purely related to combat prowess, but intellect as well.

Originally posted by Sexyback
It's never been confirmed that Luke has the higest potential.
Yet it's been confirmed that Anakin has the highest potential, and that Luke was going to become what his father couldn't. Logical deduction states that Luke=Anakin.




You have no idea of Bane's potential. Notice how Yoda was in his prime 20 years before his death, while Anakin at 22 had easily become one of the most(if not the most) powerful jedi in the galaxy. It has EVERYTHING to do with potential.



Ok that's your opinion.




So? Yet I make my point clear about potential, when you take into account that Luke more than held his own against Vader in ESB, took him down in ROTJ, destroyed the death star in ANH, did simultaneous force chokes in ROTJ, all with little to no training.




You've been proven wrong on this account so many times, it's not even worth a rebuttal.


TPM Sidious is confirmed to be the most powerful in Bane's order. So Bane is already #2 at best. No we CANNOT speculate Bane's potential to be even near Sidious' or Luke's. That's ridiculous and illogical beyond belief. In fact what we CAN do is speculate that Sidious had the most force potential than anybody in the star wars universe other than Anakin/Luke. Even by DE(which makes Sidious superior to all other sith lords by miles), we don't know if he hit his potential.




That statement is OBVIOUSLY referring to Bane's lineage at the VERY LEAST. It CLEARLY states that he is the most powerful of Bane's order, but you enjoy arguing against facts.



No, power is NOT ambiguous, ESPECIALLY not Sidious', who demonstrated more raw power than any other star wars character, other than Luke. Power is pretty self explanatory and obvious, especially in that statement. Sidious WAS the darkside, and this is not an exaggeration. I'd like to think Sidious was to the darkside what Luke was to the lightside. They are avatar's of their respective sides.

You misinterpreted the statement, nowhere in the Rolling Stones interview (you are clearly referring to it) does it say that Luke = Anakin in respect to potential, how about posting the link so I can provide an explanation.



Yes we do, refer to my explanation at the end of my last post.



No proof for this.



I don't really get why you're saying this in response to what I said, it doesn't seem like you're making sense.



I never denied the advantages of having a high potential, I really don't see why you keep on giving me lectures on potential when it's not relevant to my point, and I never asked for it.



Refer to my 'Bane = uber' thread, in my sig.



You seem to have posted this while ignoring what I posted, try and read it again, you might get some answers.



It's up to interpretation, actually.



Again, You seem to have posted this while ignoring what I posted, try and read it again, you might get some answers.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Yet it's been confirmed that Anakin has the highest potential, and that Luke was going to become what his father couldn't. Logical deduction states that Luke=Anakin.

Actually, if you logical deduce from that statement made here (for reference, Sexyback), all it means is something that isn't inclusive of Luke equaling Anakin's potential by any means.

"He tries it with anybody he thinks might be more powerful, which is what the Emperor was looking for in the first place: somebody who would be more powerful than he was and could help him rule the universe." (George Lucas, Rolling Stone)

Now, it states that "the son could become that". If we take a look at what "that" actually is, it's merely someone more powerful than Darth Sidious. Lucas says that Obi-Wan ended the chance for Anakin to become more powerful than the Emporer when he lay waste to Anakin's remaining limbs, and left him burnt to near death.

So, since Darth Vader couldn't overthrow the Emporer, Luke could, so long as he doesn't end up like Anakin on Mustafar (which he didn't).

Alternatively, you could perhaps also say that it means Luke could be the most powerful Force user ever ("the son could become that", but not necessarily rivaling Anakin's own potential. That's stretching it by far, though, in my opinion.

Advent, it mentions that Anakin was never what he was supposed to be, but Luke could become that. It's hardly THAT big a stretch

Advent, Lightsnake is right. It states that Anakin isn't what he was supposed to become, implying he was the chosen one and was supposed to become the most powerful force user ever. However, his son COULD become that, also implying that Luke, while maybe or maybe not having ANakin's potential, could also become the most powerful force user ever. The implication that Luke=Anakin is more logical than anything else.

How can he be right? I've given a perfectly valid reason to back up my interpretation on the matter, so obviously he's not (100%) right. Can I ask, did you even read what I wrote? You see you're misinterpreting the statement, though. George Lucas makes clear what it is that Anakin couldn't become. Again, here it is:

"He tries it with anybody he thinks might be more powerful, which is what the Emperor was looking for in the first place: somebody who would be more powerful than he was and could help him rule the universe."

That is what Anakin couldn't become, that is what Luke could've became. Even looking at the sentence immediately after, it's saying that Obi-Wan ****ed Anakin up to the point where that's impossible:

"But Obi-Wan screwed that up by cutting off his arms and legs and burning him up. From then on, he wasn't as strong as the Emperor "

Now, what did Obi-Wan screw up? "That". What is "that"? The chance for Anakin to become more powerful than the Emperor (see: previous sentence). He outright says that he won't be as strong as Sidious, which is what the statement is all about - being more powerful than Sidious, not rivaling Anakin or being the most powerful.

To say that Lucas is implying Luke has the second most potential, thus now the highest current, is a stretch, like I said. The statement really isn't as complex as you're making it out to be. The son could become what Anakin couldn't, which was "somebody who would be more powerful than he was".



Actually, that's not even the second most logical explanation for the statement, let alone the most. If you're referring to potential, that is.

Planet, just so I can make this clear with you, there is no way to argue whose potential is superior out of character X and character Y. Not even by the feats they perform at a young age. Anakin is the Chosen One. Birthed by the Force itself (someone can interpret this as literal midichlorians). And yet, he did not perform the skills that one would believe he should accomplish given that his potential exceeds all others. Still, though Bane performed better feats, his potential does not rival Anakin's and his potential does not surpass Anakin's.

If you disagree, I'm sorry, but your argument is illogical and baseless. As for Sidious vs. Bane, the Dark Empire sourcebook has named Sidious the most powerful that has ever lived, combined with countless other sources that make Sidious's phenomenal strength in the dark side concrete. Hell, I could argue that Sidious's raw power is miles ahead of Bane - as it was to the point that it was destroying his body.

So, let's just say that you were right and Bane's potential did surpass Sidious's own - he never achieved it. "The most powerful Sith that ever lived" - was Palpatine not Bane.

Advent, gotta tell ya, after reading the entire interview, i tend to lean towards what they're saying. I see how it could go either way, but those were different sentences, and it doesn't state that he was only to become more powerful than Sidious. It says, "He wasn't was he was supposed to become. (the most powerful Jedi ever a'la the Chosen One) But the son could become that."

To me, and obviously a few others, it was stating that Vader was looking for anyone who was more powerful than the Emperor to kill him and help him (Vader) rule the galaxy, which is what the Emperor was also trying to do all along. However, Ob1 killed Vader's potential of being the most powerful ever, which would subsequently and obviously put him above Sidious. But now Anakin couldn't be that, but Luke could.

Originally posted by Darth Subjekt
but those were different sentences

What?

The entire thing ties into one whole point, which is what Anakin was suppose to become, but couldn't. And now Luke can. What Anakin was suppose to be was more powerful than Sidious, that's what Lucas is talking about.

The entire answer George Lucas gave has nothing to do with just Anakin and Luke, as everyone seems to insinuate. It's about killing Sidious and surpassing him, a feat not attainable by Anakin, but instead now by Luke. It's only dealing with growing past Sidious' power, not Anakin's full potential, other than being able to eliminate Sidious.



Wow, clearly you don't know what he was suppose to become in regards to the response given. That's my entire point that everyone eludes. Look, this is what he was going to evolve into:

"Somebody who would be more powerful than he was."

I really could give less a shit if anyone disagrees, because you're plainly wrong. If anyone here actually knew how to read, you'd see that Lucas is referring to Darth Vader becoming more powerful than Sidious, and now since he can't (due to the Mustafar incident), we find out that Luke can.



Was there an actual reason to state this? It was meaningless quite frankly.



And? This doesn't imply having the highest potential in the galaxy, nor the same. The only thing in similarity about their potentials is that they'd grow stronger than Darth Sidious, which still leaves room for others.



Again, you're wrong. Obi-Wan ****ed this up for Anakin:

"Somebody who would be more powerful than he was and could help him rule the universe"

This is where everyone seems to falter. George Lucas says "But Obi-Wan messed that up", what exactly do you think "that" is? It's clearly referring to something previously stated just before. I believe we've covered that in the third grade.

Where does potential in terms of being the highest come into play? The entire thing is talking about Anakin's potential to be more powerful than Sidious and being able to kill him, likewise with Luke.

Not that Luke and Anakin have the same potential, or that Luke's is the (current) highest. To say that you can make a deduction based on that statement like that is ridiculous, at least the part about having the same potential, because even if I accepted your premise, "the son could become ", would only be the most powerful Force user. Something like full potential Anakin versus full potential Luke, and them having equal power isn't implied whatsoever. Assuming both characters had the same amount of and same exact training.

Being stronger than Sidious, and having the next highest potential are really the only two viable options. The latter is stretching it to the limit, as well.

Advent, where is the entire quote again. I didn't actually read it, just what you wrote.

OK here's what I derive from the statement Advent. I see what you're saying about what Lucas is saying but you can add more logical deduction to it. Anakin was supposed to become more powerful than the emperor, in fact according to Lucas, twice as powerful. This statement is saying that Luke is supposed to become what Anakin didn't, which would be twice as powerful as Sidious as originally stated by Lucas. So if you add all that up, you get the insinuation that either Luke=Anakin or both Luke and Anakin would be twice as powerful as the emperor, and Luke's potential compared to Anakin's is still unknown. This however doesn't really take away from the fact that Luke really is the most powerful star wars character ever created.

Originally posted by Advent
What?
Being two separate sentences could lead one to believe two different points are implied.
Originally posted by Advent
The entire thing ties into one whole point, which is what Anakin was suppose to become, but couldn't. And now Luke can. What Anakin was suppose to be was more powerful than Sidious, that's what Lucas is talking about. Right, he was supposed to become more powerful than Sidious by being the Chosen One, and being the all time most powerful. Now, I'm not saying that Luke could be the Chosen One cause he can't, but he can be the next highest.

Originally posted by Advent
The entire answer George Lucas gave has nothing to do with just Anakin and Luke, as everyone seems to insinuate. It's about killing Sidious and surpassing him, a feat not attainable by Anakin, but instead now by Luke. It's only dealing with growing past Sidious' power, not Anakin's full potential, other than being able to eliminate Sidious.
The way I understood it (although I see your perspective) was that he(Lucas) said "he was like Maul or Dooku. He wasn't what he was supposed to become." which was the most powerful, although I know that neither Dooku nor Maul were able to overthrow Sidious.


Originally posted by Advent
Wow, clearly you don't know what he was suppose to become in regards to the response given. That's my entire point that everyone eludes. Look, this is what he was going to evolve into:

"Somebody who would be more powerful than he was." I understand that Advent, but he would do so by being the absolute best. That's what i'm talking about, and obviously the answer isn't so definitive if so many people are interrupting differently.

Originally posted by Advent
I really could give less a shit if anyone disagrees, then why push so hard?Originally posted by Advent
because you're plainly wrong. If anyone here actually knew how to read, you'd see that Lucas is referring to Darth Vader becoming more powerful than Sidious, and now since he can't (due to the Mustafar incident), we find out that Luke can.
Well, i wish i knew how to read, however that's not the issue at hand. If luke becomes the most powerful ever, being that Anakin did not, then yes, he would be above Sidious...that's not my point. I didn't mean to ever imply that Luke's potential equalled Anakin's full potential, and if that's the impression i gave, then forgive me. My whole thing is, since Anakin was meant to be the most powerful ever, and now he can't be, that Luke would take his spot as the most powerful ever. Not his equal in FP, just the undisputed best ever.


Originally posted by Advent
Was there an actual reason to state this? It was meaningless quite frankly. Yes, you are stating what you feel is meant in the answer, and I was saying that I, along with others, believe what I was about to type. Meaningless? About as much as insulting ones who don't agree with you. However, unlike Kadesh, I don't take them to heart.



Originally posted by Advent
And? This doesn't imply having the highest potential in the galaxy, nor the same. The only thing in similarity about their potentials is that they'd grow stronger than Darth Sidious, which still leaves room for others.
yes, and as i stated above, i didn't mean to insinuate that their potentials were equal, just that Luke would take Anakin's spot at the top of the food chain, not to be surpassed.


Originally posted by Advent
Again, you're wrong. Obi-Wan ****ed this up for Anakin:

"Somebody who would be more powerful than he was and could help him rule the universe"

This is where everyone seems to falter. George Lucas says "But Obi-Wan messed that up", what exactly do you think "that" is? It's clearly referring to something previously stated just before. I believe we've covered that in the third grade.
OK, so not to put words in your mouth, but if you're saying I'm wrong about OB1 messing up Anakin's ability to be the most powerful force user ever, then what did stop Anakin from achieving that goal? And OB1 only messed up Anakin's chances for being more powerful than Sidious? Well, being the most powerful, and being more powerful than Sidious are one in the same. I wish i would have made it to third grade...
Originally posted by Advent
Where does potential in terms of being the highest come into play? The entire thing is talking about Anakin's potential to be more powerful than Sidious and being able to kill him, likewise with Luke.
In the beginning of the the paragraph, however at the end, he states he was now like Maul or Dooku, and not what he was meant to be, which would ultimately be the most powerful ever,
Originally posted by Advent
Not that Luke and Anakin have the same potential, or that Luke's is the (current) highest. To say that you can make a deduction based on that statement like that is ridiculous, at least the part about having the same potential, because even if I accepted your premise, "the son could become ", would only be the most powerful Force user. Something like full potential Anakin versus full potential Luke, and them having equal power isn't implied whatsoever. Assuming both characters had the same amount of and same exact training. That's what I said up top. Not that they were overall equals, but just that Luke would be the undisputed "best and most powerful ever". Again, that may have been my fault if i gave that premise.

Originally posted by Advent
Being stronger than Sidious, and having the next highest potential are really the only two viable options. The latter is stretching it to the limit, as well. So, Luke having the second highest potential behind his father is stretching it the limit? How so? Why would that be beyond comprehension? He's obviously displayed feats not done by others, and has already been said to be the most powerful of all times, so why not say that his potential was second only to Anakin's full potential?

Darth sexy: here ya go"

"He's not Satan, he just goes down to the corner and gets Satan's cigarettes.

You got it. And when he finds out Luke is his son, his first impulse is to figure out a way of getting him to join him to kill the Emperor. That's what Siths do! He tries it with anybody he thinks might be more powerful, which is what the Emperor was looking for in the first place: somebody who would be more powerful than he was and could help him rule the universe. But Obi-Wan screwed that up by cutting off his arms and legs and burning him up. From then on, he wasn't as strong as the Emperor -- he was like Darth Maul or Count Dooku. He wasn't what he was supposed to become. But the son could become that."

No, Advent's quite clearly right here. The 'But the son could become that' quite clearly refers to the 'somebody who would be more powerful than he was and could help him rule the universe'.

Originally posted by Sexyback
No, Advent's quite clearly right here. The 'But the son could become that' quite clearly refers to the 'somebody who would be more powerful than he was and could help him rule the universe'.

Thats still questionable. Its a definite possibility, but its still questionable. The only person who actually knows is Lucas himself. I can quite honestly see it both ways, and its difficult to determine what GL's meant to be saying..

Ok, in general, what was Anakin supposed to become? The most powerful force user ever. What messed that up for him? Ob1 by cutting his limbs off. If Luke is second only to Anakin, and Anakin doesn't take his place at the top, then who is next to be the best? Luke.

I acknowledged that what Advent is saying is one way of looking at it, but as i said, and like Anomaly just verified, it's not a definitive statement, otherwise there would not be this much speculation and differences of interpretation among all of us.

But tell me that my logic is wrong. It's not, but try to tell me why you might think that logic is incorrect.

I've already tried explaining it, and Darth Subject is right. What was Anakin supposed to become? The most powerful force user ever, and twice as powerful as Sidious. His son could become that, so while I will agree with Advent for the time being and say it's not logical to compare force potential, we can derive from that quote that Luke was supposed to become the most powerful force user ever, just like Anakin was supposed to.

Well the way I'm looking at it, it's pretty conclusive. Just carefully read Advent's post, it's pretty clear.

I have read it carefully and it's obviously not that clear. When Lucas flat out said, "Anakin is the Chosen One." that was clear, and you still managed to try to argue it, now that Advent is saying what she believes, then it's clear. Let me ask you, if Kadesh made the exact same argument, or even Lightsnake, would you still agree? I'm guessing not because of who they are, much like how alot of people tend to flat out agree with Advent because of who she is. She knows her shit and is very good are articulating her arguments. However, while I respect her as a debater more than anyone else on here, well maybe tied with Ush, Escape and PVS, I don't simply agree with her on this. That's not to say she's 100% wrong, because I can definitely see why she feels that, and it is warranted, but we feel he meant something more than that.

Probably not.
No, but seriously speaking, if they made an argument as good as that, then sure, I would agree with them. It's not who's arguing it, it's the argument itself. And it's not like I've never agreed with Lightsnake, because I have very many times. Me and Kadesh just don't share any of the same views whatsoever, though I do recall agreeing with him in a Nihilus thread for example.

Originally posted by Darth Subjekt
Being two separate sentences could lead one to believe two different points are implied.

Which are two separate sentences? The two I provided in my initial post (about Kenobi and being more powerful than Sidious)?

If so, then it's clear it refers to one point. I've already went over those two specific sentences step by step, and explained in perfect detail to the point where it's irrefutable regarding what "that" is when he talks about Obi-Wan ****ing up Anakin's chances, anyone with half a brain can see that the sentences come right after another, and can see what Lucas is referring to when he states that.

If not, then what specifically are you talking about?



Just to make clear about the Darth Maul and Count Dooku comment, for the general public, if you would've read the entire article, and the questions and answer made before, you'd see see the exact meaning behind him talking about Darth Maul or Count Dooku, which is quite simply just being a subordinate of Sidious, who does his bidding:

"Everybody worries about the top man, they don't worry about his goon. So it's even more tragic, because he's not even an all-powerful bad guy, he's kind of a flunky."

Anyways, what you don't understand is that you are taking the answer given out of context, and putting your own definitions behind his words whereas I'm using strictly what he said, not things that might not necessarily need to be added. There is no hidden agenda behind what Lucas is talking about, he is not referring to Anakin being the Chosen One, or Luke rivaling his potential.

As a matter of fact, all he's talking about is someone who could have a greater scope of power than the Emperor himself. Someone who could kill the Emperor, really. Which was what Obi-Wan ****ed up for Anakin (in regards to this), as I made perfectly clear, and thus "what he was supposed to become".



Since when is that the standard for killing Darth Sidious? There are no set requirements of being able to kill him, the only one - which is painfully obvious - is being more powerful than he is.

This is another point that falters easily due to the lack of logical reasoning behind it. It's tantamount to me saying that a requirement for defeating Batman in hand to hand combat is being the best melee fighter there is. When, in reality, one only need be more skilled and powerful.

Unless you can prove definitively that no one aside from Anakin and Luke could be more powerful than Sidious in potential, then it really doesn't matter. He's the best Sith Lord so far, which still leaves room for people like Jacen Solo, earlier eras, and later generations of Sith to be more powerful in potential. The former, in my opinion, could be greater than Luke himself eventually, although I cannot say for definite, we'll have to wait.



I've only said that it's wrong to say Anakin and Luke have equal potentials, I've stated since my initial post that there's only two options, and the one that leans towards your end of the fence is pretty far fetched.

Again, aside from Luke rivaling Anakin, everything else is just an opinion on my part. I don't feel the need to add things like "IMO" often, because in discussions like this, it's quite clear it's opinion (save for obvious facts, and things that cannot be deduced or logically stated). Much like stating things such as "X is right!" or "X is wrong!", which I do.

They may seem absolute, but it's much less bothersome to remove things like "Well, it could be either way, and I believe..." or "In my opinion", or "From my perspective" every other line.



Even if I don't care if anyone disagrees, it doesn't mean that I don't want to make my facts known for the purpose of my own pleasure.



Hooked on Phonics.



See above, see previous posts.

Again, George Lucas makes specifically clear as to what it is that Anakin lost the chance to become in that specific case, what it was that Darth Vader was looking for, and what Luke could become.

Which again, was this:

"He tries it with anybody he thinks might be more powerful. Somebody who would be more powerful than he was."



No, the "along with others" part is what really had no business being mentioned, ergo it was "meaningless". I'm fairly (100%) certain that I wasn't referring to what you believe, but mentioning other members is irrelevant.

That's not to say that me pointing it out wasn't also meaningless, as well.



Yeah, I believe that's exactly what I said.



I barely insult those not deserving. I haven't insult everyone who has disagreed with me, so get your facts correct.

Even if you want to be a prick about it, and consider something going along the lines of taking a subtle blow about eyesight or literacy, then I still haven't done that to all who have opposed me.



I'm not saying that Obi-Wan didn't mess that up, I'm saying that the only thing that Obi-Wan messed up, in the context, is becoming greater than Darth Sidious.

I don't think Lucas had more in mind than what he directly said.



In the context of the entire response given, yes.



See above, see below.

No, they aren't. For that to be true, Sidious' potential would have to be the second (current) highest. Can you offer up any proof whatsoever that Sidious' potential surpasses that of everyone (for definite)? Oh? You can't?



Originally posted by Advent
Anyways, what you don't understand is that you are taking the answer given out of context, and putting your own definitions behind his words whereas I'm using strictly what he said, not things that might not necessarily need to be added. There is no hidden agenda behind what Lucas is talking about, he is not referring to Anakin being the Chosen One, or Luke rivaling his potential.

As a matter of fact, all he's talking about is someone who could have a greater scope of power than the Emperor himself. Someone who could kill the Emperor, really. Which was what Obi-Wan ****ed up for Anakin (in regards to this), as I made perfectly clear, and thus "what he was supposed to become".



You definitely did give the impression that you were swayed by what the opposition (Lightsnake and Darth Sexy) was saying. It really doesn't matter, though, it's not like it hinders much to either side of the argument.



In this context, yes it is. I'm not saying that Luke cannot possibly have the second highest, but if you were to use this statement as your sole evidence that he's got the greatest potential currently, then that is pushing it. Even using the response Lucas gave at all is still right up there, next to that, since other people can have a higher potential than Darth Sidious himself (possible candidates: Exar Kun, Darth Bane, Darth Zannah, Jacen Solo).



Feat Wars aren't really applicable in this debate.



Who cares if he is the most powerful Jedi in regards to his powers at that time? Others haven't even gotten a chance to reach their own potential, so it's not fair or definite to say something like that.

We'll have to wait and see when the possible happens, Jacen becomes more powerful. That doesn't have to happen, but it would bear to light some new arguing material.

Regardless of the above, it's apparent that neither side will fold, and neither side's interpretations can be made absolute to each other. I would say just agree to disagree, as lame as it may be, seeing as we've been arguing in circles since my initial post. That doesn't mean that I won't continue to argue this later, or right now even (if you weren't to submit), but currently I really don't feel any progress will be made.

And to note, sorry for the double, but I exceeded the allowed length of a post.

Edit:

Actually, I'm not sorry, as I could give a shit less.

Originally posted by Gideon
Planet, just so I can make this clear with you, there is no way to argue whose potential is superior out of character X and character Y.
Not even by the feats they perform at a young age. Anakin is the Chosen One. Birthed by the Force itself (someone can interpret this as literal midichlorians). And yet, he did not perform the skills that one would believe he should accomplish given that his potential exceeds all others.

That's why I so often ask for proof that Anakin's potential is indeed the greatest.



Proof? It is highly implied that Bane is the sith'ari, the sith's chosen one, so it would make sense that his potential would at least rival Anakin's.



It's funny, the quote you gave ('the most powerful sith who had ever lived had risen') was nowhere to be found in the DESB, not on the page you originally supplied, and nowhere in the sourcebook (I have the sourcebook in acrobat reader form, so it's very easy for me to check up on these things).



Phenomenal, yes, but a valid source has still never been brought to my attention that labels Sidious as the most powerful sith who ever lived, so Bane could still easily surpass him.



That argument would be invalid, as you would be ignoring other variables, such as the age and strength of his body, his willpower, his control of his powers, how often he used the darkside etc..



I am right.



Again, Palpatine has never been confirmed as such, and even if he had, it's not like statements like that have never been retconned.

I'll be back later, but I would suggest correcting your sources. AcStyles provided the quote from the sourcebook, not me.

Ac said he got it from you.

Originally posted by The Sith'ari
Ac said he got it from you.

:erm:

I don't even own the sourcebook. I remember him making an argument with you about it being mentioned from the DE sourcebook on page 109.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/435031_24-darth-nihilus-and-darth-sion-vs-the-rots-jedi-order


Originally posted by xxXAcStylesXxx
This is straight from Escape and I never seen him lie, and Advent would have corrected it by now as its been posted many times, so either

A. Your Lying (the most likely)

B. Your not looking hard enough.

If not scan page 109, and prove me wrong.

Like I said, I don't own the sourcebook, hence why I rarely attempt to use quotes from Dark Empire. I don't like the comic and I don't own the sourcebook. The only time I remember ever citing that is after seeing that argument from him against you.

Well, clearly, the quote doesn't exist then. So would I be right in saying, that as of now, there is not one valid factual statement stating Sidious to be the most powerful ever? Then clearly, I have an argument.

Yes, there is a valid factual statement saying Sidious is the most powerful.

Where?

Databank is one place.

There's still the NeC, and the DE sourcebook apparently. Plus Heritage of the sith.

In other words, Sith'Ari's full of shit as usual

Advent, respond to my interpretation of Lucas' quote. I'm pretty sure I understood it perfectly and yet I got a completely different theory.

Edited... this thing messed up, lmao.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Advent, respond to my interpretation of Lucas' quote. I'm pretty sure I understood it perfectly and yet I got a completely different theory.

Your explanations ultimately all fall under the same points no matter how you word them, or what variation there may appear to be. There isn't much difference, honestly. You're both not adding much supplementary information, and I'd just be parroting my arguments again.

But, to entertain:



What was Anakin supposed to become in this specific context? "Somebody who would be more powerful than he was and could help him rule the universe."



In the context of what George is talking about, yes. He could surpass Sidious, but that's the only implication George gives about what Anakin was supposed to become at this point.

The only actual part about Anakin's potential in regards to the response is that he could've eclipsed Sidious in power (and taken his rank by eliminating him). He doesn't necessarily have to be talking about his potential to become most powerful.



Originally posted by Advent
What?

The entire thing ties into one whole point, which is what Anakin was suppose to become, but couldn't. And now Luke can. What Anakin was suppose to be was more powerful than Sidious, that's what Lucas is talking about.

The entire answer George Lucas gave has nothing to do with just Anakin and Luke, as everyone seems to insinuate. It's about killing Sidious and surpassing him, a feat not attainable by Anakin, but instead now by Luke. It's only dealing with growing past Sidious' power, not Anakin's full potential, other than being able to eliminate Sidious.

Furthermore, through your arguments, you must realize that you're setting a prerequisite for being able to be stronger than Darth Sidious in potential, which would require one to be have to have the highest potential to surpass him. Seeing as, if we follow your line of logic, Darth Sidious has to have the third highest potential ever, and the second highest currently. Do you have any proof to back up that?

If you intend to answer that question for whatever odd reason, keep in mind feat wars are not relevant to the discussion, and things like "X is the most powerful", even stated by a narrator, also aren't suitable to be added, seeing as many haven't reached their potential (either because they are still training (Jacen Solo) or because they died) and/or we don't know what happens to them.

It's not to say that Darth Sidious doesn't or can't have the third highest ever, but since that's not set in stone, your perspective on the discussion isn't either.

Not necessarily, although I do believe Sidious is the most powerful Sith and could possibly have the 3rd-4th highest potential. However I'm not saying that to be stronger than him you have to have the highest potential, I am instead saying that the only two characters that were going to be TWICE as strong as Sidious at his peak, ARE the two characters with the highest potential ever, so I don't think it's a stretch to say that only someone with some of the highest potential in the SW galaxy, could be twice as strong as Sidious.



All of that is logical deduction I believe. However, while you are focusing on the statement that GL made alone, I'm focusing on it plus what he said about Anakin, which would ultimately back his interview up, unless of course you'd say the two are independent of each other, and I would disagree. George Lucas originally states that Anakin was supposed to become the chosen one, the most powerful force user ever, twice as powerful as Sidious, etc. And I see Lucas reiterating that point in the interview even though he mentions overthrowing Sidious. To me I see that "He didn't become what he was supposed to become", as "he should have been twice as powerful as Sidious and had the most potential ever/strongest force user ever", and "his son could become that", as "his son had the ability to become twice as powerful as the emperor and be the most powerful force user ever". But that's just me.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Not necessarily, although I do believe Sidious is the most powerful Sith and could possibly have the 3rd-4th highest potential.

He may be the most powerful Sith in power, but potential? That's up for discussion, and cannot be proven.



I thought you were taking the position of Darth Subjekt (saying you must be the best to be stronger than Sidious), but since you made clear the differences below, that was my fault, but I can comprehend what you meant now.



The only added difference, from what I was saying and what Subjekt believes, is that you seem to operate under the assumption that Luke Skywalker will become two times as powerful, correct? Which would require you to prove that Luke's potential even goes that far as to eclipse Sidious' own by double.

So, care to prove up? Also, prove that Luke's potential as being the (current) highest is absolute, anyways; both without the use of the allegedly cryptic quote made by Lucas.



Well, I do.



Good observation skills.

It's not that "I'd say" it, it's that I've said it already. I have constantly stated "in this context" and that George isn't referring to other things associated with Anakin's potential, which obviously signifies that I'm assuming George Lucas is disassociating the other factors of Anakin's potential, and defining a new one for the purpose of that sole statement.



So? I would and have disagreed with the majority of things stated thus far on your behalf.



He talks about Anakin Skywalker and all this prophecy and potential nonsense in other interviews, other discussions, and statements. In this specific interview, he makes it clear as to what it was that Obi-Wan ****ed up (in this context), and why Darth Vader is "a lackey", and thus looking for Luke; like the Emperor was.

He's obviously not outlining anything about being the Chosen One, as Anakin fulfilled that destiny.



I've already made known exactly what I am lead to believe regarding the dispute at hand on numerous (every) occasions, so I'm not repeating myself, but like I said, it's just a circular discussion, because you're not saying much of anything different from what Subjekt was saying other than one specific part.

Originally posted by Advent
He may be the most powerful Sith in power, but potential? That's up for discussion, and cannot be proven.
Yes that is a huge discussion in itself.



Well again, we come to I believe the ROTS commentary, some sourcebooks and various sources lightsnake has where GL states what Anakin is and should be. I believe that his interview complements his stance on Anakin and Luke, saying Anakin is supposed to become the most powerful force user ever and twice as powerful as Sidious, and he didn't but Luke would become that. But neither of our interpretations is really wrong, so we'd be sitting here endlessly debating them.


How would you prove potential without quotes? It's not something you can logically deduce, so I don't understand why you're taking away a source and asking me to prove the impossible without that source. The source itself is what is up for logical deduction/debate.




But I interpreted this statement in regard to what I heard on the ROTS commentary and the various lightsnake sources, so your view makes them independent, and my view makes the statements compliments. Again, I don't think either is wrong but they are two contrasting views.




Again, I see "someone who would be more powerful than him, becoming what he was supposed to become". When I word it like that I'm sure you understand my stance on it and where it comes from. The whole issue is whether the statement is independent from other statements or a compliment to others.





Perhaps, but I can(and I think I have) justify what i'm saying, just like you did. It's just two different perspectives.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Well again, we come to I believe the ROTS commentary, some sourcebooks and various sources lightsnake has where GL states what Anakin is and should be. I believe that his interview complements his stance on Anakin and Luke, saying Anakin is supposed to become the most powerful force user ever and twice as powerful as Sidious, and he didn't but Luke would become that. But neither of our interpretations is really wrong, so we'd be sitting here endlessly debating them.

Neither is wrong at this point (and the truth will probably never be found out unless one of us talks to George Lucas himself), but one of the judgements is unquestionably wrong; which one we don't know. That's the actual problem.

Anyways, what was your motive for those last few words, really? Haven't I already stated that it's a "circular discussion" on this page, and tried to agree to disagree on the previous? Why yes, I have.



Without a quote, you mean? I was referring to a single thing, not multiple sources, but it's okay, I know what you're saying with that.

To actually answer the question, it's not up for me to tell you how to find something, the onus was on you to do such (don't respond to this, just see below).



If you cannot comprehend, let me explain. I wasn't meaning for you to actually back up the assertion anyways. I already knew it would be impossible, but that was my point.

The source is ambiguous, that's why you cannot use it. Why should I allow you to use that to support your argument? I'd submit even if I were to concede (which I wouldn't), I'd only be agreeing to the part about Luke being the most powerful ever, not necessarily being two times greater in power than Sidious, which would mean rivaling Anakin's potential.



You act as if I need this shit spoon fed to me, I know what you're talking about. You don't have to repeat it over and over.

One of them is wrong, but at this point in time neither can prove, as an absolute, what he was talking about. In general, and to either side, from what I now gather. So, this is why I said:

Originally posted by Advent
Regardless of the above, it's apparent that neither side will fold, and neither side's interpretations can be made absolute to each other. I would say just agree to disagree, as lame as it may be, seeing as we've been arguing in circles since my initial post. That doesn't mean that I won't continue to argue this later, or right now even (if you weren't to submit), but currently I really don't feel any progress will be made.



What the hell is your point? I already know this, but it doesn't mean that I still can't try to sway your views (obviously I care, even a little, if people disagree).

If people are still going to argue back, I don't let much go unanswered. Which is why we're still discussing this when all I needed was a simple "Okay, Advent. I'll agree to disagree, seeing as neither side can be proven to each other, or in general (as definite)".



See above.

Again, what the hell is your point? I already know this. Another thing is, you, along with Lightsnake, have used this as a definitive source before regarding potential (in this thread even; albeit, not stating it as definite as before, but to the point where you would lead one to believe it's definite) and if I can recall, about Luke being the most powerful, so even if it is open to interpretation, then it cannot be used in the way you have done such.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
There's still the NeC, and the DE sourcebook apparently. Plus Heritage of the sith.

In other words, Sith'Ari's full of shit as usual

1. tNEC is fallible, the statement inside is nothing more than an opinion, I've explained why very many times.

2. DE sourcebook says jack, and seeing as the statement just kinda came up out of the blue with nobody taking responsibility for it...

3. Until you can actually prove that it's in Heritage of the Sith, I see no reason to believe you as every other source you have given has been proven fallible, and many of your claims have been proven lies. I'm not saying this in a mean way, it's just the truth, that's all.



Strange, I couldn't find it anywhere in the databank. Could you maybe give a quote?

The two entered into a spectacular duel -- a contest between the most powerful practitioners of the Force's light and dark sides.

- From the profile of Yoda

No one is quite sure how Palpatine was first introduced to the power of the dark side, or how he came to be Darth Plagueis' apprentice. He is the most powerful practitioner of the Sith ways in modern times. He studied the ancient ruins on the Sith mausoleum world of Korriban. He unlocked secrets of the Force from a captured Jedi Holocron. The dark side energies flowing through Palpatine's body were so intense, that they ravaged his mortal frame. The very source of Palpatine's strength was killing him.

- From the profile of Palpatine

In addition, there are tremendous feats and other sources I'm sure that prove Sidious to be the strongest Sith.

Originally posted by Advent
Neither is wrong at this point (and the truth will probably never be found out unless one of us talks to George Lucas himself), but one of the judgements is unquestionably wrong; which one we don't know. That's the actual problem.

Anyways, what was your motive for those last few words, really? Haven't I already stated that it's a "circular discussion" on this page, and tried to agree to disagree on the previous? Why yes, I have.



Without a quote, you mean? I was referring to a single thing, not multiple sources, but it's okay, I know what you're saying with that.

To actually answer the question, it's not up for me to tell you how to find something, the onus was on you to do such (don't respond to this, just see below).



If you cannot comprehend, let me explain. I wasn't meaning for you to actually back up the assertion anyways. I already knew it would be impossible, but that was my point.

The source is ambiguous, that's why you cannot use it. Why should I allow you to use that to support your argument? I'd submit even if I were to concede (which I wouldn't), I'd only be agreeing to the part about Luke being the most powerful ever, not necessarily being two times greater in power than Sidious, which would mean rivaling Anakin's potential.



You act as if I need this shit spoon fed to me, I know what you're talking about. You don't have to repeat it over and over.

One of them is wrong, but at this point in time neither can prove, as an absolute, what he was talking about. In general, and to either side, from what I now gather. So, this is why I said:





What the hell is your point? I already know this, but it doesn't mean that I still can't try to sway your views (obviously I care, even a little, if people disagree).

If people are still going to argue back, I don't let much go unanswered. Which is why we're still discussing this when all I needed was a simple "Okay, Advent. I'll agree to disagree, seeing as neither side can be proven to each other, or in general (as definite)".



See above.

Again, what the hell is your point? I already know this. Another thing is, you, along with Lightsnake, have used this as a definitive source before regarding potential (in this thread even; albeit, not stating it as definite as before, but to the point where you would lead one to believe it's definite) and if I can recall, about Luke being the most powerful, so even if it is open to interpretation, then it cannot be used in the way you have done such.

Ok, fair enough, makes sense. So as you said lets agree to disagree.

Originally posted by General Kenobl
The two entered into a spectacular duel -- a contest between the most powerful practitioners of the Force's light and dark sides.

- From the profile of Yoda

This only applies to the time, this in no way proves that he's the most powerful sith ever.



This only applies to the time, this in no way proves that he's the most powerful sith ever.



Highly irrelevant.

How about trying again.



Sure, there are tremendous feats that would naturally place him as #1 given what we already know, but that in no way prevents the chance that someone like Bane or Zannah will rise and take his place.



No, not one, all have been proven to be fallible.

It does apply to time, but sorry, the meaning still stays the same. "You have lost".

When Sidious is said to be the most powerful practioner of the Dark Side, it means that up to that point of time in all of the Sith Lords ever, Sidious is the "most powerful" in the use of the Dark Side of the Force.

There's nothing in that line that proves in the year "19 BBY, Darth Sidious is the strongest known Dark Lord".

Another statement backing this up is when the ROTS novelization calls Yoda the strongest Jedi up to that point of time. The Databank is on concurrence with this, by saying Yoda is the strongest Jedi in the whole Old Republic Jedi Order, as is Palpatine is the strongest in the whole Old Republic Sith Orders.

As we know of of course, there is no other Sith Lord besides Sidious himself that is stronger in the years of the New Republic, ergo Palpatine is the greatest DLOTS ever and the most powerful in the use of the Dark Side.

The two entered into a spectacular duel -- a contest between the most powerful practitioners of the Force's light and dark sides.

Originally posted by General Kenobl
It does apply to time, but sorry, the meaning still stays the same. "You have lost".

Are you stupid, it is clearly speaking in respect to the time.



Funny, you clearly don't know how to read, because I didn't see any 'up to that time' in the passage.



"The two entered into a spectacular duel" - quite clearly talking in respect to the time of the duel.



1. That wasn't factual, but a belief that Yoda mystically came to.
2. Even if that quote was valid, I don't see how Yoda being the most powerful jedi ever backs up Palpatine being the most powerful sith ever, unless you want to argue that the most powerful jedi ever would have to be as powerful or more powerful than the most powerful sith ever.



Where does it say that? And if it does, I can assure you that, again, it's referring to the time.



1. If that really did come from the databank, that Palpatine was in fact the most powerful sith ever in his particular order, this doesn't account for previous orders, so you still fail.

2. Methinks that you need to go back to your debating classes (I find that hilarious by the way) and stop forming these ridiculous arguments.

Sith'ari, why the hell do you constantly lie and twist facts?

Yoda being called the strongest up to that point is NARRATIVE and approved PERSONALLY by Lucas.


And are you trying to say the Jedi are so much weaker than the Sith? The NEC confirms Palpatine as the strongest Sith as of ROTS, the Dark Side sourcebook and DE Sourcebook confirm him as well. You need to get off your high horse, already and realize that maybe, because Bane had a book on him, he's just not all that

1. You're the biggest liar here, and quite clearly a hypocrite too.
2. It's funny how whenever you call me a liar, you always fail to back that up.
3. Where did I lie or twist facts?



Where?
The RotS novelisation statement that you refer to is narrative dependant on invalid events, and thus is also invalid. It is also Yoda himself miraculously coming to this belief, not the omniscient narrator factually stating it...



No, that's not what I'm saying, what I was saying was that even if Yoda was the most powerful jedi ever, you cannot absolutely prove that the most powerful jedi ever would have to be stronger than the most powerful sith. And jedi tend to be weaker than sith, yes.



The NEC is written by a historian inside the SW universe, he's basing that opinion off of inconsistent and sometimes inaccurate historical material, his opinion is in no way better than mine or your's, it's actually most probably lesser. The point is, that does nothing in proving that Palpatine was the most powerful sith lord ever.



This argument has been constantly defeated, power in that context wasn't purely related to combat prowess.



I searched through the DE Sourcebook, the quote was nowhere to be found. Nobody's claiming responsibility to originally coming up with that either. In other words, the quote doesn't exist, it's a lie.



Bane's arguably the most powerful sith ever (force and saber, though I'd agree that he's currently #3 based on what we know), and he's only 27, has been studying the darkside for less than three years, half of that time from flawed teachings. He's quite easily going to surpass Sidious.

Originally posted by The Sith'ari
1. You're the biggest liar here, and quite clearly a hypocrite too.
2. It's funny how whenever you call me a liar, you always fail to back that up.
3. Where did I lie or twist facts?
In that last post, mayb?
And where do I 'fail to back it up? Do you not read?
And I'm a liar? Lol



False. Prov it. I have statements from Leland Chee and Matt Stover, as well as the personal approval from Lucas and btw, that part of the fight scene contradicts nothing.
Btw, it's still narrative and thus G-canon


:
Sure you can. The light and Darkside are equal.
there you are, wrong again. Jedi are weaker than Sith? Lol.





Uh, uh, uh! It's STILL a representation of the out of universe facts and Voren Na'al is the top historian of a league of historians who bases his apparent opinion ON the facts. He has knowledge of Marka Ragnos and Bane quite intimately it seems



Liar. Escape owned you there



You're the liar. I don't believe you even have it. Escape's provided the exact page number



Hahaha. Bullshit.
Bane's inferior to revan, Palpatine, Exar Kun and probably a few others.
and wow, he's only 27! That hurts your argument more than anyting, given how the Jedi apparently handed him his ass

Learn English hyprocrite. I said it does apply to time.



And yet, you say it applies to time. Hyprocrite again.

It says a "contest between the strongest practioner of the Force's light and dark sides" which means that Yoda and Sidious were the strongest ever users of the Light and Dark and that they fought. However, since Luke Skywalker ends up stronger than Yoda and ROTS indicates Yoda being the strongest Jedi up to that point, it does refer to time.



It means that in that point of history, Yoda and Sidious were the strongest Light and Dark fighters and that they dueled. In the future, Luke surpasses Yoda.



OMG, stupid sock, when I said in the "Old Republic Jedi Order", of course I mean time you idiot.



Yes, it proves my argument that Palpatine is the strongest Sith in the Old Republic Sith Orders. Obviously, you don't get it.



Well, some tips for your debating skillz {which you have none btw}

1.) Don't lie in debates
2.) Don't use insults to further your arguments. You'll only get even more hatin'
3.) Stop being a sock Nebaris, you'll lose respect.




As Blaxican says, I think you need to cut down them bane porn you're on. It'll cool down the fanboyism.

I read what the databank said and Sith'ari is right for once. That specific databank ONLY applies for that specific time. There is NO way to twist that around, not even logically. However, lightsnake has various OTHER sources that prove Yoda is the most powerful Jedi until Luke, and Sidious is the most powerful sith ever. I think, that is. But no, you two are wrong. The Databank SPECIFICALLY talks about current time.

I DO NOT OWN THE DE SOURCEBOOK.

For the final freakin' time! LS, you know that, I asked you if I should buy it or not and you said "don't waste your money".

Whoops, sorry, Escape. Got mixed up.

And I still stick by that. On the other hand, try the Complete Visual Guide, worthy investment

From the Complete Visual Guide (specifically the page after the introduction to the Attack of the Clones section.

Sidious is referred to as: "The greatest master of evil ever to use Sith power."

Originally posted by Gideon
From the Complete Visual Guide (specifically the page after the introduction to the Attack of the Clones section.

Sidious is referred to as: "The greatest master of evil ever to use Sith power."


There we go. I was strictly talking about the databank, as that what the argument was really about. I need to get the complete visual guide.

Originally posted by The Sith'ari
Highly irrelevant.

How about trying again.


:erm:

The quote that Prodigal provided is absolutely relevent to the discussion, Sith'ari. I've been over this with multiple people, and my point remains clear: do not attempt to deny, refute, or worm around the fact that Palpatine's raw power was so intense that it was killing and decaying his body. Hell, if you want to get technical, at the end of Dark Empire - when he planned to use Anakin Solo's body as his vessel, he even knew that that wouldn't contain his essence - and he planned to simply use Anakin's body for the genetic material required for a strong set of clones.

It is directly implied that no body (not even his own, or not even a Skywalker's) could maintain Palpatine's raw energy for too long.

Gideon, is the Complete Visual Guide and the Ultimate Visual Guide the same book?

Anyways, greatest =/ most powerful, again, all these statements quite clearly are flawed.

Add that to his near 'becoming the Dark Side itself' thing...

And can you stop denying evidence as you will, Sith'Ari?

Originally posted by The Sith'ari
Gideon, is the Complete Visual Guide and the Ultimate Visual Guide the same book?

No. The Complete one is simply the prequel visual guides and the original trilogy Star Wars visual guides compiled into one massive book. The Ultimate Guide goes deeply into the Expanded Universe, too.



:erm:

No, not in this context. This statement was made during the AotC visual guide - Sidious had not completed his plans for domination and had not executed them completely. They were in their infancy. Not everything as far as "greatness" or "power" are ambiguous, Sith'ari. Especially when a similar statement would be "the greatest swordsman of the age" directly refers to skill and/or power. This statement about Palpatine involves the same thing.

If you disagree, you will need to offer proof.

Sith'ari, you're a moron

I don't quite understand what you mean by specific time. If you mean up to that point, yes Sidious and Yoda were the strongest Light and Dark Side users. Afterwards, Yoda is surpassed by Luke but Sidious is still top dog. Ergo, it proves Sidious is the strongest Sith Lord ever. This is in concurrence with the many other souces that shows Sidious is the strongest DLOTS to ever live.



How so? It's pretty clear in Databank its referring to combat prowess and strength of their Force, not anything else. The Complete Visual Guide again refers to Force strength.

Originally posted by Gideon
:erm:

The quote that Prodigal provided is absolutely relevent to the discussion, Sith'ari.

Wrong, you really should read more clearly before stepping in. I was asking for statements that suggest that Palpatine was the most powerful sith ever, as he originally claimed there were. So no, it was irrelevant.



Again Escape, you're ignoring other variables, such as the age and strength of his body, his willpower, his control of his powers, to what magnitude he used the darkside etc.. I never denied that it suggests his power was great, but you have tp consider the other variables.



Link please, it shouldn't take you too long to supply one from SWTimline. And anyways, Palpatine is perfectly fallible, and he was also arrogant, he might have believed that no body was capable of holding his power, but he could easily have been wrong.



How so? Post a link.

Okay. Respond to my other posts, while I look for the link.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Sith'ari, you're a moron

Sexy, I'm not alone in saying that all you do is troll and attack other people's arguments without offering your own, now please, quit being annoying.

Wow you sure havnt read DE at all for sure

Originally posted by The Sith'ari
Sexy, I'm not alone in saying that all you do is troll and attack other people's arguments without offering your own, now please, quit being annoying.


No no, you are alone indeed. Not to mention you're already first in the race for the biggest dumbass to ever come to this forum. Stop embarassing yourself by arguing against facts and throwing in ZERO arguments. You were a funny joke before, now it's just sad.

Originally posted by Gideon
No, not in this context. This statement was made during the AotC visual guide - Sidious had not completed his plans for domination and had not executed them completely. They were in their infancy. Not everything as far as "greatness" or "power" are ambiguous, Sith'ari. Especially when a similar statement would be "the greatest swordsman of the age" directly refers to skill and/or power. This statement about Palpatine involves the same thing.

If you disagree, you will need to offer proof.

Bad analogy. Obviously 'the greatest swordmaster' is pretty clearly in respect to the swordmaster's combat prowess, that's pretty much all their is to being a swordmaster; combat, but 'the greatest evil master to ever use sith magic' doesn't quite have the same effect.

Lets see, greatest evil master to ever use sith magic=greatest and most powerful sith ever, dumbass.

Originally posted by The Sith'ari
Bad analogy. Obviously 'the greatest swordmaster' is pretty clearly in respect to the swordmaster's combat prowess, that's pretty much all their is to being a swordmaster; combat, but 'the greatest evil master to ever use sith magic' doesn't quite have the same effect.

No. It is an effective analogy.

As I said before, "greatness" in terms of accomplishments does not apply yet. Palpatine had not conquered the galaxy or destroyed the Republic and the Jedi at the time.

As I told you before, Sith'ari. If you disagree, offer proof. Or are you lacking it and simply attempting to refute mine?

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Lets see, greatest evil master to ever use sith magic=greatest and most powerful sith ever, dumbass.

LOL what kind of logic is that? that means by teh planets logic, naga sadow and nadd should be the strongest becuz they use sith magick!

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
No no, you are alone indeed. Not to mention you're already first in the race for the biggest dumbass to ever come to this forum. Stop embarassing yourself by arguing against facts and throwing in ZERO arguments. You were a funny joke before, now it's just sad.

I recall Glentract noticing it too. Lightsnake pointed it out as well.

Also, pointing out how something isn't a fact isn't arguing against facts, dumbass.

And I throw in zero arguments? I'm the one person who has been effectively arguing against Sidious. Oh, and who was it that proved that Bane pulled a moon out of orbit? Was it me? Oh yeah, that's right. Now please Sexy, name one original argument you have come up with.

Originally posted by Kadesh
LOL what kind of logic is that? that means by teh planets logic, naga sadow and nadd should be the strongest becuz they use sith magick!

Uh what?

Not Sith "magic", Sexy. Sith "power".

Originally posted by Kadesh
LOL what kind of logic is that? that means by teh planets logic, naga sadow and nadd should be the strongest becuz they use sith magick!

That's really not my logic...
Seriously Kadesh, go back to Thailand.

Originally posted by The Sith'ari
That's really not my logic...
Seriously Kadesh, go back to Thailand.

LOL need i repeat im not from thailand? How bout you go back to preschool to actually learn how to read and unserstand a sentence when some one writes it down?

Obviously you dont go to school, you dont learn to understand sentences and you make shit of you own "Freedon nadd is teh chosen one!" That proves your a clown

Originally posted by The Sith'ari
I recall Glentract noticing it too. Lightsnake pointed it out as well. Just because I get in an argument with someone and we engage in name calling, doesn't mean I'm a troll, but thanks clown. Glentract is a nobody who gets his arguments destroyed because he gets them from EOD members, so he complains. YOU on the other hand have been embarassed, humiliated, made fun of, etc, by virtually everybody that's active on this forum, hence being the forum clown.


No dumbass, arguing against what is fact makes you a moron. See your arguments against George Lucas, clown.


There's something wrong with you(besides denial), if you still think you've had one effective argument while nobody else does. I can appeal to majority on this forum because there are people that can differentiate between a valid argument and an invalid one. With that said, you've shown virtually nothing except your repeated attempts at denial. Oh yea, and your bane thing? I think everyone got a good laugh at you for that one, yet you still parade like you proved something when all you did was throw a bunch of speculation around. Nice going dumbass, no wonder you're #1 in the wrong category.

WTFOMGBBQFFSJC PWNAGE!!!!

http://www.swtimeline.ru/?comics=126&page=164

That one, Sith'ari, speaks of Palpatine wishing to "restore his line of clones".

http://www.swtimeline.ru/?comics=126&page=165

That one, Sith'ari is where Palpatine's physician says that a set of clones from a strong Jedi bloodline will be required.

I'll try to find some more of when Palpatine himself declares his intent.

Originally posted by Gideon
No. It is an effective analogy.

No it's not. There's nothing more to being a swordmaster than your combat prowess, it's pretty conclusive. However, being called the greatest evil master to ever use sith magic doesn't have the same effect.



You're implying that Palpatine hadn't achieved anything, which is wrong. Palpatine had already achieved quite a lot. Think about it real hard, if you still don't get it, I'll tell you. Here's a hint: He was able to sit on Yoda's lap in the jedi council meetings!



Your argument isn't flawless Gideon, I've quite clearly explained why.

this kid loves lying to himself.

Indeed, the clown is back for more humuliation

Ok I'm done in this thread, if you guys can't keep it civil and refrain yourself from burying the actual relevant arguments inside a gazillion posts, I see no reason to continue.

heh, you are the forum troll and now you want to be civil?

"The greatest master of evil ever to use Sith power."

Get it right.

And, no, the analogy is effective. Especially when one takes into consideration that Palpatine's plan did not come into effect nor was it accomplished at the time that that quote was made.



Lmao.

a.) Being able to have a conversation with Yoda and the Jedi without them being any the wiser in regards to his Sith heritage is impressive. However, if that is the case, then you are saying his ability to do that puts him on a pedestal in accomplishments above every other Sith - including Bane and Revan.

I'd think very hard about that.

b.) No. Palpatine hadn't exterminated the Jedi Order yet or destroyed an ancient Republic. He did not achieve the goals of the Sith at that time. His ability to cloak himself in the Force is nice, but at that time, he was not "greater" than any other Sith.



No. You have not.

I won't repeat myself to you again, and further commentary on this topic will simply be ignored. If you disagree, provide proof. Simply attempting to point out the flaws in mine (and then failing) is not proof in itself.

Think hard. Think closely.

No, I think you've understood that you've contributed nothing to this forum except for self humiliation. For your sake and health, I suggest you move on.

Quit it. I'm debating with him. If you wanna insult him, do it via PM. Likewise, Sith'ari, after making such a statement, I'll automatically report you every single time I see you bash another player. Like it or not, you bash just as much as these guys do.

I don't want to bash him but when you're a fool you're a fool. When it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's most likely a duck Escape.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
I don't want to bash him but when you're a fool you're a fool. When it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's most likely a duck Escape.

That's cool. I'm not the biggest fan of the guy, but I've been civil to him. The only time I'm not is when he irks my patience with his aggressive and rude behavior, hence the ultimatum. He will either provide proof, or this discussion is over, and we'll all continue it without him.

Edit: In fact, I'll even wipe my profile of his quotes.

Originally posted by Gideon
"The greatest master of evil ever to use Sith power."

Get it right.

And, no, the analogy is effective. Especially when one takes into consideration that Palpatine's plan did not come into effect nor was it accomplished at the time that that quote was made.



Lmao.

a.) Being able to have a conversation with Yoda and the Jedi without them being any the wiser in regards to his Sith heritage is impressive. However, if that is the case, then you are saying his ability to do that puts him on a pedestal in accomplishments above every other Sith - including Bane and Revan.

I'd think very hard about that.

b.) No. Palpatine hadn't exterminated the Jedi Order yet or destroyed an ancient Republic. He did not achieve the goals of the Sith at that time. His ability to cloak himself in the Force is nice, but at that time, he was not "greater" than any other Sith.



No. You have not.

I won't repeat myself to you again, and further commentary on this topic will simply be ignored. If you disagree, provide proof. Simply attempting to point out the flaws in mine (and then failing) is not proof in itself.

Think hard. Think closely.

Actually Gideon, I'd say being able to manipulate events around himself to the point where he was able to secure his place as ruler of the Republic puts him as arguably the greatest ever. He pretty much had power over the entire jedi council, to the point where he was able to decide on jedi matters that even Yoda was against. Also, didn't you ever think that maybe the plans that he was already putting into effect factored in on the statement at all?

No. He became "the greatest ever" when he curbstomped the Jedi and the Republic in one fell swoop and managed to place himself in the uncontested galactic seat of power. Remember - this quote was made during Attack of the Clones. Sidious's political power as Chancellor was still ridiculously limited. He was not in control of the galaxy. The Jedi were still around (and in full control of their own duties) and the Republic still functioned.

The events you speak of happened in Revenge of the Sith. Am I to take this as a statement of you lacking proof?

He was arguably 'the greatest' due to accomplishments and plans before that point, Gideon. And IIRC, didn't he gain emergency powers during AotC?

Yeah, Sith don't really measure greatness unless one manages to achieve great power in the Force and stomp the Jedi.

Kaan built a huge empire and he's remembered as a weak fool

Originally posted by The Sith'ari
He was arguably 'the greatest' due to accomplishments and plans before that point, Gideon. And IIRC, didn't he gain emergency powers during AotC?

"Arguably"? For what, Planet? His goals and plans did not come into fruitation 'til RotS. Otherwise, what did he do? He got himself elected to the highest office in the Republic. Yeah. That's cool. But he was a "civil servant" at the time with limited powers. Not my definition of the greatest Sith ever.

And, no.

He gained the power to create and form an army. The rest of his powers were given periodically during the war.

The emergency powers gave him limited control over the jedi, Gideon..
And again, his plans were already being put into effect (building power in the Republic, befriending Anakin and planning to turn him to the darkside and use him as his ultimate weapon, manipulating events to start the Clone Wars...), they quite clearly factor into the statement.