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

OK, so Vader redeems himself, fulfills the prophecy and destroys the sith...or at least we were told.

(not in chronological order)

Then Lumyia (sp?) comes along.

And Caedus.

And Shadowspawn

And Sidious comes back

And Exar Kun does some stuff

Then Krayt comes along and creates a new empire

Of course, the EU authors broke the rule in order to make more books, but I still don't get Anakin's role in the grand scheme of things: the OT and PT aren't really any more important than the KOTOR era, Legacy era or most other eras. It's just another series of wars in an endless conflict that will never end as long as Star Wars keeps on making money.

Lucas considers the movies to be a separate universe from the EU. For him, Palpatine doesn't come back. For us, the Chosen One prophecy was bullshit.

I've been wondering, did the prophecy say that sith would be destroyed once and for all? Didn't he technically bring balance to the force, granted it didn't last very long.

True. Technically, there was no time frame.

If Vader would not have killed Sidious, Sidious would have killed Luke. There would have be no more hope for the jedi order. There would have been no one left to teach Leia, and she stands no chance against Sidious.

Also Sidious would have left the Death Star, because of the potential danger of it being destroyed. There would have even been a possible chance that the rebellion would not have succeeded in destroying the Death Star, because Sidious's battle meditation would have been still in effect. Sidious would have continued the war until the rebellion was wiped out. No jedi to stand in his way, he would have most likely ruled the galaxy forever.

Just my thoughts anyway. lol

But the Sith came back. Kinda makes the whole thing useless. Now if the prophecy said that the Chosen One would help destroy the Death Star II, then...

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
But the Sith came back. Kinda makes the whole thing useless. Now if the prophecy said that the Chosen One would help destroy the Death Star II, then...

Yes, but even though the sith managed to return, the jedi order also managed to be rebuilt. If Palpatine killed Luke, the jedi order would have never been rebuilt, and Sidious would have went on ruling the galaxy.

Nah. I would've taken him.

Originally posted by Eminence
Nah. Slash would've taken him.

Fixed.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Yes, but even though the sith managed to return, the jedi order also managed to be rebuilt. If Palpatine killed Luke, the jedi order would have never been rebuilt, and Sidious would have went on ruling the galaxy.

That is a really good point: Vader's sacrifice did save the galaxy. However, it doesn't "bring balance to the force".

In the EU, the Sith that Vader destroyed weren't even the "True Sith". What's to stop future Dark Jedi from unbalancing the Force, even if they don't call themselves Sith?

As alternate explanation of the prophecy, the dark side became stronger than the light side, or obscured the Force for the Jedi.

YODA: Blind we are, if creation of this clone army we could
not see.

MACE WINDU: I think it is time to inform the Senate that
our ability to use the Force has diminished.

The New Essential Chronology says that the Force began to become obscured to the Jedi about 200 BBY. By killing Sidious, Vader did restore the Force to its state prior to 200 BBY.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
That is a really good point: Vader's sacrifice did save the galaxy. However, it doesn't "bring balance to the force".

It brought balance to the Force at that time, they never specified how long for.

As I recall (read: remember but can't cite) GL said that the Sith themselves imbalanced the Force- the antithesis of the Jedi was the problem more than the Dark Side itself. GL didn't make provisions for 'Dark Jedi' (DS users not Sith) because the two were inextricably linked. The probability that a Jedi would fall without the Sith around may be zero.

Barr, I don't think you get any more "true Sith" than Palpatine.

Originally posted by Eminence
Barr, I don't think you get any more "true Sith" than Palpatine.

He's not of the Sith species! (The SWTOR devs seem to like to emphasize how their Empire is "True Sith", despite appearing to be humans in the webcomic...)

As for the other explanation, I'm just offering up an alternate explanation that the EU may be using, which diverges from Lucas' explanation of the prophecy out of necessity.

Originally posted by Elite Hunter
I've been wondering, did the prophecy say that sith would be destroyed once and for all? Didn't he technically bring balance to the force, granted it didn't last very long.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
That is a really good point: Vader's sacrifice did save the galaxy. However, it doesn't "bring balance to the force".



The whole "brings balance to the force" thing was fulfilled by Anakin, if you remember, in RotS Yoda says "A prophecy that misread could have been."

Look at it all, he becomes a jedi, trains himself to extremely high standards and skill, then turns and becomes all he can (with the suit and all). At one point making the Jedi the more feared side, then when he turns, making the Sith the more feared side.

Then he redeems himself to undo what he has done and make both sides equal; weak and low in numbers (because lets face it, the Rule of Two applied throughout, but there are always more sith then let on, and the jedi weren't destroyed, just scattered)...

Originally posted by mattatom
It brought balance to the Force at that time, they never specified how long for.
My thoughts exactly. Regardless, I consider nearly all sith after VAder to be pretenders, except for the Sidious clone...

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
That is a really good point: Vader's sacrifice did save the galaxy. However, it doesn't "bring balance to the force".

No one really knows what "bringing balance to the force" really means. We do know that Anakin was the chosen one, because GL says so.

I maintain that it means destruction of the Dark Side via the Sith. So much for that.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
I maintain that it means destruction of the Dark Side via the Sith. So much for that.

I agree this is Lucas' intent. The movies never reference a "light side", the Jedi just use "The Force". Thus, rather than the Force being a Yin Yang, the Force is what the Jedi use, and the dark side is a corruption or unnatural perversion of the Force, which is why it is out of balance.

Unfortunately, the earliest of Expanded Universe literature (I'd guess West End Games d6 RPG, although it doesn't use the ridiculous light-dark scale that Bioware did with KOTOR, but a "dark side points" system which is superior) adopted the "light side" nomenclature and the yin yang analogy that comes with it, to the point that Jacen Solo, before becoming a Sith Lord, decides that he serves "the Force" which also encompasses the dark side.

Edit: I'm guilty of using the term "light side" in my earlier post.

Originally posted by CadoAngelus
The whole "brings balance to the force" thing was fulfilled by Anakin, if you remember, in RotS Yoda says "A prophecy that misread could have been."

Look at it all, he becomes a jedi, trains himself to extremely high standards and skill, then turns and becomes all he can (with the suit and all). At one point making the Jedi the more feared side, then when he turns, making the Sith the more feared side.

Then he redeems himself to undo what he has done and make both sides equal; weak and low in numbers (because lets face it, the Rule of Two applied throughout, but there are always more sith then let on, and the jedi weren't destroyed, just scattered)...

"Jedi the more feared." I don't think they would like that.

Originally posted by Barringer
I agree this is Lucas' intent. The movies never reference a "light side", the Jedi just use "The Force". Thus, rather than the Force being a Yin Yang, the Force is what the Jedi use, and the dark side is a corruption or unnatural perversion of the Force, which is why it is out of balance.


That is a very good point. Never thought of it that way, but it makes a lot of sense.

Well to me to "Bring Balance To The Force" means destroying The Old Jedi Order & The Old Republic and remaking them brand new kind of like Japan in WWII. they were a ok country but when they were bombed and nearly destroyed by the USA they rebuilt thier country and remade it twenty times better then it once was.

Originally posted by DarthLazious
Well to me to "Bring Balance To The Force" means destroying The Old Jedi Order & The Old Republic and remaking them brand new kind of like Japan in WWII. they were a ok country but when they were bombed and nearly destroyed by the USA they rebuilt thier country and remade it twenty times better then it once was. Did the intermittent government between Imperial Japan and post-WWII Japan spend about 30 years tyrannizing the entire world?

Jacen Solo aka D. Caedus did not bring balance to the Force. IMO there is no such thing because there cannot be balance without chaos. Even Luke did not bring balance to the Force because of his short stint with the dark side. Just my two cents worth.

Yes he did .

First, it is confirmed by George Lucas in the documentary on the VHS version of A New Hope: Special Edition. Second, it is confirmed by George Lucas again in the Revenge of the Sith DVD extras.

That's enough to make it irrefutable fact.

For elaboration, what does bringing balance to the Force mean? Lucas defines it as "doing away with the Sith and getting rid of evil in the universe." The New Essential Guide to Characters, the Ultimate Visual Guide, the official databank, and other sources that could be listed ad infinitum attribute it directly to the death of Palpatine. By killing Palpatine (the imbalance), Anakin restores balance to the Force.

The Sith afterwards? Pretenders and fakes, the lot of them. Palpatine's dead; as far as the Force is concerned, that's all that matters.

"true sith" are a race that revan set out to find at the end of kotor. As far as we know "sith" are extinct, and the race of "sith" is defenitely extinct. Its just a name given to dark jedi at this point. making the EU moneymilkers ****ing retards when it comes to story writing. seriously. STOP WRITING SHIT THAT COMES AFTER THE OT!
Ty.

Originally posted by Gideon
Yes he did .

First, it is confirmed by George Lucas in the documentary on the VHS version of A New Hope: Special Edition. Second, it is confirmed by George Lucas again in the Revenge of the Sith DVD extras.

That's enough to make it irrefutable fact.

For elaboration, what does bringing balance to the Force mean? Lucas defines it as "doing away with the Sith and getting rid of evil in the universe." The New Essential Guide to Characters, the Ultimate Visual Guide, the official databank, and other sources that could be listed ad infinitum attribute it directly to the death of Palpatine. By killing Palpatine (the imbalance), Anakin restores balance to the Force.

The Sith afterwards? Pretenders and fakes, the lot of them. Palpatine's dead; as far as the Force is concerned, that's all that matters.

I was having trouble with the question at first, having thought of it myself after I've read the EU stuff I get my hands on, and came to this same conclusion.

I believe Anakin was the chosen one because he destroyed the galaxy's biggest threat - Palpatine - and the cause of the imbalance. Eased the Force's mind or something I guess, so the Force let the other dark siders out to play knowing that nothing as bad as what-might've-been-if-palpy's-still-around would happen again, for the chosen one has fulfilled his destiny.

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
"true sith" are a race that revan set out to find at the end of kotor. As far as we know "sith" are extinct, and the race of "sith" is defenitely extinct. Its just a name given to dark jedi at this point. making the EU moneymilkers ****ing retards when it comes to story writing. seriously. STOP WRITING SHIT THAT COMES AFTER THE OT!
Ty.

Lucas never intended for the Sith to become a race; it was a misinterpretation by the writers of the Tales of the Jedi comics.

But yes, I don't think anyone after Palpatine should be considered a fully-fledged Sith. The Sith were the ultimate evil. Everyone that comes after ROTJ is just following their example. Lumiya had some Sith training, but like Dooku's tutorship of Ventress, I don't believe Vader gave her all the answers. Dark Jedi can be powerful without being Sith.

Originally posted by Captain REX
But yes, I don't think anyone after Palpatine should be considered a fully-fledged Sith. The Sith were the ultimate evil. Everyone that comes after ROTJ is just following their example. Lumiya had some Sith training, but like Dooku's tutorship of Ventress, I don't believe Vader gave her all the answers. Dark Jedi can be powerful without being Sith.

I'm not sure how much this is true anymore after all Krayt did train from Xoxaan who is an ancient sith and while it seems like Bane,Anddedu and Nihilus(though we dont know for sure what he said) declared him a pretender that doesn't mean he actually is. I mean Nadd called Exar Kun a pretender only for Ragnos to delcare him DLOTS afterward. I hate to admit but Darth Krayt is a true sith lord.

Originally posted by Elite Hunter
I'm not sure how much this is true anymore after all Krayt did train from Xoxaan who is an ancient sith and while it seems like Bane,Anddedu and Nihilus(though we dont know for sure what he said) declared him a pretender that doesn't mean he actually is. I mean Nadd called Exar Kun a pretender only for Ragnos to delcare him DLOTS afterward. I hate to admit but Darth Krayt is a true sith lord.

Based on what? He never actually learned at the feet of a sith lord.

Neither did Kun.

Or Revan.

Or, really, Bane.

Didn't Kun learn from Nadd's spirit?

And perhaps we'll find out Revan learned from like Ludo Kressh or some shit.

And doesn't Bane have that whole "Learned from Revan/the Brotherhood---who themselves can trace educational lineage through to the Old Sith Wars?

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Didn't Kun learn from Nadd's spirit?Nadd guided him to Korriban and goaded him into accepting the dark side, immediately after which Kun obliterated him.

Krayt actually learned from no less than four spirits, unless I'm mistaken.

Nah.

Bane was never even "christened" as a Sith Lord; he took back the title "Darth" for the first time in millenia. The insinuation was that one had to "learn at the feet of a Sith Lord" in order to be one, but if Kun, Revan, and Bane - all of whom studied nothing more than the notes of long dead men - are "real" Sith Lords, so is Darth Krayt. In fact, he'd be more of a "real" Sith than any of them.

Did XoXaan actually declare him a Lord of the Sith or merely teach him what he knew?

Anyway, the official databank says that with the death of the Emperor, Anakin "extinguish the menace of the Sith once and for all."

Originally posted by Gideon
Did XoXaan actually declare him a Lord of the Sith or merely teach him what he knew?No idea; my knowledge of the Legacy era is limited at best.

What I do know is that no elder or mentor declared Revan or Bane to be Dark Lords, either, but no one here outwardly considers them to be pretenders.

Maybe it's been retconned. I haven't seen or heard of a source other than Darth Bane who considers Darth Krayt "a pretender."

The official databank is more likely to go with the strictly Lucas view on post-ROTJ stuff.

Krayt was apparently satisfied that he had finished his training under XoXaan, but it never says if the title of Dark Lord was ever bestowed upon him.

Faunus covered most of it and I can't really add much to his points since I don't read the legacy comics.

But as far as the sw databank goes, I have to ask what is up with up it? It seems like it takes them to update it Some of the characters like Han and Luke are caught up to "legacy of the force" but others like the Solo twins and Leia's bios are only up to the end of the vong war. So it sort of makes me wonder how up to date the "sith" entry is.

Originally posted by Captain REX
Lucas never intended for the Sith to become a race; it was a misinterpretation by the writers of the Tales of the Jedi comics.

But yes, I don't think anyone after Palpatine should be considered a fully-fledged Sith. The Sith were the ultimate evil. Everyone that comes after ROTJ is just following their example. Lumiya had some Sith training, but like Dooku's tutorship of Ventress, I don't believe Vader gave her all the answers. Dark Jedi can be powerful without being Sith.

Does it matter if they're "truly" sith or not? If they're just as powerful then they are just as much of a threat.

But here's a theory: Sidious was evil at it's absolute strongest. After Sidious died, there will never again be a sith lord stronger than him.

Caedus probably could have been.

Originally posted by Eminence
Caedus probably could have been.

based on

Potential. He'd barely broken thirty and was already more powerful than Vader, who himself was 80% as powerful as the OT Emperor.

Originally posted by Eminence
Potential. He'd barely broken thirty and was already more powerful than Vader, who himself was 80% as powerful as the OT Emperor.

Which means what exactly? How do you know he won't peak at 95% of OT Emperor? And how does this have any relation to DE Sidious, who was more powerful than OT Sidious?

Not to mention Caedus was trained practically from birth, whereas Luke and Vader weren't. I'm not sure how potential plays into this since you can't really substantiate it.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Which means what exactly?That at thirty one Caedus was already more than 80% as powerful as the OT Emperor.

That's highly unlikely. One, he was very, very young, a little over a third the age of the OT Emperor. Two, he'd declared himself a Sith, what, a year before his death? He'd hardly had any time to study or train in lore, especially considering he'd been managing part of a galactic war on the side.

Point right there.

Like Caedus, Palpatine was trained from a very young age. As of ROTS he'd been a Sith for at least sixty years, twice as long as Caedus had even been alive. And in the twenty two year gap between ROTS and ROTJ he grew notably more powerful through his studies. He did it again, in the six year gap between ROTJ and DE; he's been a Sith for a little under a century by that point.

So to reason that Caedus had neared his maximum potential when he was less than a third of "peak" Palpatine's age is more than a little ridiculous.

Originally posted by Eminence
That at thirty one Caedus was already more than 80% as powerful as the OT Emperor.
Except that you're using that assertion for this conclusion:

Where potential is very hard to gauge.


He's also had the luxury of learning random esoteric techniques on his 5 year sabbatical. There's no indication that he was on track to learn nearly as much as the Emperor in terms of force knowledge, and dark side knowledge. So while it's possible he COULD have been more powerful than Sidious, there's no conclusive argument for it.


To reason that Caedus COULD have been more powerful than Sidious is a stretch.
Lebron James is better at 24 than Michael Jordan was at 24. Does that mean he's goin to be better than Michael Jordan when his career is over?

It is reasonable to assume that Caedus, under proper circumstances, could have become more powerful than Palpatine.

But that strongly depends on the quality of that which he is studying.

Are you just arguing for the hell of it?

That was what your conclusion was based on.

It's a reason conclusion or assumption to go on. Skywalkers have a tendency to learn faster than average Jedi/Sith...

Anakin was barely on par with Obi-Wan in RotS, Luke was barely on par with Vader (perhaps not as much as Anakin to Obi-Wan) in RotJ. I'm not very knowledgeable with Skywalkers before Cade and after Luke, but Cade was better than 2 jedi knight level sith and barely parred on level with a weak and dying Krayt, with very little training and a huge gap between training and picking up the saber again...

i don't see why, with the right amount of time and training, Caedus couldn't have been as if not more powerful than Sidious

that's another trait skywalkers are renowned for, using the dark side momentarily to aid in sticky situations

Back to topic or thread ic closed, folks. Question has more or less been answered anyway; imbalance = Sith, destroying Sith brought Balance.

You mean palpatine=imbalance?

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
You mean palpatine=imbalance?

Both.

The Sith, specifically Palpatine, were causing the Force to be out of balance.

too many of one thing makes something imbalanced. it would have been the jedi that were imbalancing the force. anakin simply thinned their numbers in order to bring some sort of balance.

then in turn, luke "destroys" the sith, and rebuilds the jedi order...

That's not it at all.

is there any visible evidence that this isn't a reasonable assumption to go on? it makes sense, does it not?

surely, given the amount of assumptions in the SW universe due to lack of continuity or many loose ends, people aren't just arguing personal opinion over logical conclusion...

Originally posted by CadoAngelus
is there any visible evidence that this isn't a reasonable assumption to go on? it makes sense, does it not?

surely, given the amount of assumptions in the SW universe due to lack of continuity or many loose ends, people aren't just arguing personal opinion over logical conclusion...

Every single source that mentions the prophecy of the Chosen One, including George Lucas himself, has made it abundantly clear: to balance the Force, you must destroy the Sith Order (specifically Palpatine). They are the cause of the imbalance.

Wasn't the sith order destroyed around 3500 BBY? Or rather, after the Exile? I'm using 3500 BBY because of the new SW game.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Wasn't the sith order destroyed around 3500 BBY? Or rather, after the Exile? I'm using 3500 BBY because of the new SW game.

Huh? You mean Nihilus and company or Revan and company?

As the films made clear- thought to be destroyed, in fact lived on in secret, came back, unbalanced the Force, destroyed when Anakin killed the Emperor (and himself). Imbalance gone, Balance restored.

Cado, it is manifestly NOT ying/yang Light/Dark balance as you suggest. GL has explicitly explained that the Dark Side is the side of parasitic imbalance, the Light is the side of symbiotic Balance. Light = Balance, Dark = imbalance. There is no way at all in which Jedi cause imbalance by being domnant- quite the opposite, they promote it.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
As the films made clear- thought to be destroyed, in fact lived on in secret, came back, unbalanced the Force, destroyed when Anakin killed the Emperor (and himself). Imbalance gone, Balance restored.

Cado, it is manifestly NOT ying/yang Light/Dark balance as you suggest. GL has explicityly explained that the Dark Side is the side of parasitic imbalance, the Light is the side of symbiotic Balance. Light = Balance, Dark = imbalance. There is no way at all in whuich Jedi cause imbalance by being domnant- quite the opposite, they promote it.

Out of curiosity, how do you regard the EU's retarded decision to try to "resurrect" the Sith Order in the form of Caedus, Lumiya, and Darth Krayt?

when people have a good thing, they try to use it over and over til it dies of death. same goes for star wars...

honestly though, i like the Legacy Era, and i'm currently reading the Legacy of the Force books, and finding them very interesting.

Didn't Traya say that Sith "is a belief?" Sometime in the future there will be someone stronger than Sidious. If Galen Marek remained dark and continued to remain Starkiller, he possibly had the potential to surpass Sidious. After all, he did kick Vader's ass.

Eh, Marek greatly displeases me. They made him seem godly for the sake of people being thrilled with what they could do in game, but it makes Vader and Palpatine look... well, less than formidable in contrast. Didn't like that.

I too enjoy the Legacy comics, Cado. I feel obliged to keep on top of it because it is, if you think about it, the future of Star Wars. Eventually, even if the series gets canceled at some point, they will start writing books in that time period, and video games, and so on.

I think the "no time frame" thing is really the only way to explain it. after all, sideous came back, thus no balance was achieved in the force for longer than 10 years or w/e. I think the eu writers screwed it up when they had sith anyway and we have to make dumb rationalizations to what should have ended with sideous falling down an electricity tube and the ewok song. Instead we are given all of this stuff that happens afterwords and expected to accept it as "look there is balance to the force... they just arent real sith!"

Once again, I would I ask: is there any statement that any statement that gave a time frame for how long the balance should last? I am not a fan of post ROTJ sith but technically if there isn't a time period for how long the balance would last then the authors aren't contradicting the "chosen one" prophecy.

Originally posted by Elite Hunter
Once again, I would I ask: is there any statement that gave a time frame for how long the balance should last? I am not a fan of post ROTJ sith but technically if there isn't a time period for how long the balance would last then the authors aren't contradicting the "chosen one" prophecy.

I think what some people have said rings true here, that being that the skywalker legacy is in fact the "chosen one" and the sense of bringing balance to the force is subjective to the entire lineage...

Anakin does it, til his falling (yes, ive embrassed other peoples concept of "balance to the force", Luke does it and carries it through until Cade (all skywalker blooded jedi excluding Jacen), and Cade is yet to do it...

The Prophecy is about Anakin and Anakin alone, regardless of whether or not his descendants carry out the extermination of the Sith in their own time as well.

There is no statement of time, Anakin does fulfill the Prophecy. It just cheapens his sacrifice that the Sith returned only ten years later.

Legacy would make more sense if it was lets say 500-1000 years in the future. But less than 100 years after the events of LOTF? Give me a break.

Legacy would never make sense in a post-RotJ universe. "Been there, done that" doesn't even begin to sum it up.

I was saying it would make MORE sense 500-1000 years down the line, rather than 100 years after LOTF.

Still waaaay in the negatives.

And no, we are not using mathematical negatives but logical negatives, meaning that it simply has no value until it reaches 1 so it can't possibly be "more."

You can't argue with that! PWNED

Wut?
That wasn't 'logical negative' at all. I'm not even sure if those words mean anything when strung together like that.

That's because you're a moron.

Oh. Right.

WHAT ABOUT SIDEOUS OUTLIVING VADER?!

he didn't die you know, the "true sith" lived on, thus making conflict.

Why don't we declare postOT stuff BS and move on?

Originally posted by Gideon
Out of curiosity, how do you regard the EU's retarded decision to try to "resurrect" the Sith Order in the form of Caedus, Lumiya, and Darth Krayt?

Not the EU's finest hour. It's not that I think the Dark Side should be dead and buried forever- it is, after all, the primary Star Wars antagonist- but you can only beat a dead horse so much, and this one also, as discussed, rather contradicts the spirit of the movies. It's just lazy storytelling for effect (because readers think the Sith are cool), a habit some sections of the EU suffer from (re: some of the superweapons the early EU came up with).

Time to put the Sith to rest, I think, unless you are makng a historical novel. There are other ways to explore the Dark Side.

As for time scaling- well yes, there's nothing to say that the FOrce will never be unbalanced again, but logic as to the point of the Prophecy, not to mention simple dramatic necessity, says that the whole of the Star Wars Saga should have some significant effect, not be just a blip.

Of course, GL has made understanding all of this harder by never explaining any of the fundamentals inside the films.

Obviously time scaling would help. but to almost instantly have MORE SITH out the wazoo, kind of makes the whole ancient prophecy/messiah thing empty and worthless. Sure... why not 100 years later have some threat happen. not with the same characters that were in the ot for christ's sake. and then instead of having a minor problem, it goes on for 105 years or whatever it is all the way up to whatshisfaces in legacy vector comics. seriously. Its like 'oh look he brought balance to the force, lets have a whole fortnight of being sith free before we go back into 100 years of turmoil.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Not the EU's finest hour. It's not that I think the Dark Side should be dead and buried forever- it is, after all, the primary Star Wars antagonist- but you can only beat a dead horse so much, and this one also, as discussed, rather contradicts the spirit of the movies. It's just lazy storytelling for effect (because readers think the Sith are cool), a habit some sections of the EU suffer from (re: some of the superweapons the early EU came up with).

Time to put the Sith to rest, I think, unless you are makng a historical novel. There are other ways to explore the Dark Side.

As for time scaling- well yes, there's nothing to say that the FOrce will never be unbalanced again, but logic as to the point of the Prophecy, not to mention simple dramatic necessity, says that the whole of the Star Wars Saga should have some significant effect, not be just a blip.

Of course, GL has made understanding all of this harder by never explaining any of the fundamentals inside the films.

You don't think the death of Palpatine made a significant effect? There was never a sith as dangerous or as smart as he was. Chances are if Vader would not have never killed Palpatine the jedi order would have been lost forever.

But according to the EU, Vader didn't kill Palpatine.

He certainly removed him as a threat for a good... oh, ten years. Makes the prophecy look weak, though. Like Anakin gave his life to end the Sith for very little outcome.

I think DE was simply the death throes of a defeated, embittered man. Dangerous to be sure, but as far as the Force was concerned, he was done.

From what I understand, Dark Empire was originally supposed to take place shortly after Return of the Jedi. But then they got Zahn to write his trilogy, and he refused to acknowledge Dark Empire, so they were forced to place Dark Empire AFTER Zahn's trilogy, where it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense, insofar as that at the end of the Thrawn trilogy the New Republic was in possession of most of the galaxy, and suddenly in DE they're pushed back into the fringes of the Outer Rim.

It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me that Palpatine would do nothing while a lot of Imperial warships are destroyed and great minds like Thrawn are killed.

Wasn't he in limbo during that time?

He was recovering in a clone body since it was the first time he cheated death. Then he spent a lot of time rebuilding his military and infrastructure.

He was fully recovered during the Thrawn trilogy, per the Dark Empire Sourcebook.

The Thrawn trilogy spanned over a year? He was rebuilding his military.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
The Thrawn trilogy spanned over a year? He was rebuilding his military.

It's my understanding that he was rebuilding his military through the six year period from Endor to the beginning of Operation Shadow Hand. Byss has its own shipyards, and apparently Black Sword Command was given orders to retreat to the deep core from the Koornacht Cluster before it was captured by the Yevetha.

Anyway, what better way to rebuild his military than by contacting Thrawn, letting him know the situation, and pooling their resources?

That is explained within the DESB.

Originally posted by Gideon
That is explained within the DESB.

The DESB claims that Thrawn claimed himself Emperor.

"When his servant, Thrawn, made his claim, Palpatine could only watch in sadness. He had hoped Thrawn would know better."

That's simply a crap retcon to explain why Palpatine sat on his hands while Thrawn was active.

Thrawn did claim himself de facto Emperor. He also refers to the Emperor with great disrespect to Mara Jade during Dark Force Rising.

Originally posted by Gideon
Thrawn did claim himself de facto Emperor. He also refers to the Emperor with great disrespect to Mara Jade during Dark Force Rising.

I only remember Thrawn bashing Vader, not Palpy, but I haven't read the original trilogy in quite some time. Obviously Thrawn was de facto Emperor, but that's not something you claim, it was just a fact, because Palpy didn't inform Thrawn he was still alive. What was Thrawn supposed to do? Let the Empire disintegrate because Palpy, whom he thought was dead, would get mad if he tried to right it by taking a position of leadership?

Originally posted by Gideon
I think DE was simply the death throes of a defeated, embittered man. Dangerous to be sure, but as far as the Force was concerned, he was done.

Yeah, DE Sidious just seemed too desperate. He was mentally never the same.

I'd be a little cookoo too if I had to live in a rapidly aging clone body while my Empire has been crumbling around me.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
I'd be a little cookoo too if I had to live in a rapidly aging clone body while my Empire has been crumbling around me.

All because of Vader's sacrafice.

I thought that the Galactic Empire was actually doing very well for itself during Dark Empire, but Palpatine's insanity led him to prioritize his "Dark Side Elite" ahead of the Empire.

He had the New Republic to the point where it was hiding on a space station, and before that, a planet deep in Hutt Space (which was destroyed). What does it say for the New Republic's territory that their leadership is forced to hide in Hutt space, when a year earlier, they held Coruscant? And this is before they knew Palpatine could destroy planets again with his Galaxy Gun (although the World Devastators were attacking Mon Calamari).

And despite all this leverage, at the end of Dark Empire, he brings his fleet to Da Soocha V, and offers the Alliance a peace treaty if they hand over Leia and her unborn child. And then when beaten by Luke in a duel, he uses his Force Storm ability to destroy the Rebel fleet, rather than just using the Imperial fleet to do so, which results in his own (temporary) demise.

I remember reading that, as of Thrawn and the DE, that the Empire was still the dominant power in the galaxy, only it was divided by internal strife and warlordism. Thrawn and Palpatine "simply" unified them.

Originally posted by Gideon
I think DE was simply the death throes of a defeated, embittered man. Dangerous to be sure, but as far as the Force was concerned, he was done. orly? at the point where he could ravage planets like i ravage b00bs? the fact that he didn't die at all and remained the sole dlots just compromises anakin's victory.

i lyke b00bz

Bewbs ? Where ?!

boobs the size of planets, that ressurected palpatine ravages.

he seems more like the type of guy that likes boobz the size of stars...to me anyways...

yea but he has no chance of getting the power to ravage the surface of boobs the size of stars.

thats a good point...i don't think anyone has that much power

I've come to refuse to read anything post-ROTJ in the EU. I tried to explain to a guy what the movies meant; that they're the tale of Anakin Skywalker saving the galaxy and destroying the Sith.
Reply: He didn't even really kill Palpatine and teh galaxy is as dangerous as ever.
Me: Well...um...

A moment of realization. The new Sith are shit and should be ignored.

that's old news.

Tell that to the people who read Legacy and Legacy of the Force.

They know it's old news.

You misunerstood.
Tey like to read shit that toally renders the films pointless. So they obviously don't get it.

there is nobody like that around here. so who are you talking to?

People in general.
And I thought there were LOTF or Legacy fans here?

Everyone who's ever played/watched/read the star wars saga or EU will know that the Sith were a huge power in past history.

Everyone who's ever played/watched/read the star wars saga or EU will know that the Jedi overthrew the Sith at a point and thought then extinct.

Everyone who's ever played/watched/read the star wars saga or EU will know that the Sith rose again (not in as many numbers) to destroy the Jedi again...

It's a never ending loop thats happened before and it's not unreasonable to believe it will happen again. Tbh, i think the Skywalker prophecy is irrelevant mostly, unless it applies to the entire Skywalker legacy - seeing as most if not all Skywalkers have become successful Jedi and fought to defeat the Sith (unless they become one)

He did bring Balance to the Force by leaving two Jedi at the end of the Jedi Purge.

Two Jedi + Two Sith = Balance.

Originally posted by DarthLazious
He did bring Balance to the Force by leaving two Jedi at the end of the Jedi Purge.

Two Jedi + Two Sith = Balance. Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha oh hee hee ha ah ooh hee ha ha. And I thought my jokes were bad.




No.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha oh hee hee ha ah ooh hee ha ha. And I thought my jokes were bad.




No.

You have an interesting sig. The guy makes no sense but it's still interesting.

No sense, or implode?

maybe you're just too dum 2 understand n e thing so we shud just stop takin 2 u, u piss-poor excuse of a people!

Also:

Originally posted by Nephthys
No sense, or implode?

HEY!

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
maybe you're just too dum 2 understand n e thing so we shud just stop takin 2 u, u piss-poor excuse of a people!

trying to understand that made me hurt...

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
maybe you're just too dum 2 understand n e thing so we shud just stop takin 2 u, u piss-poor excuse of a people!

No I understand it, it's just stupid. Like your mom

My mom is a super lady. You are free to go kill yourself any time you'd like.

>:'|

Red, I've never seen you double post before.

What gives? Are you drunk?

No.

No? Or implode?

Sorry, I had to say that at least once.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
No I understand it, it's just stupid. Like your mom That's only because God is awesome for you. Epicurus was targeting (a) religious God(s), whose followers preached his/their divine goodness but he/they still allow evil to exist. Kinda makes God(s) look like (a) jackass(es).

Theodicy FTW.



God bless Sam Harris.

Deism FTW.

Deism is an unnecessary compromise: "No, you are wrong about the attributes and qualities of a god because you have no proof but there is a god, even though you have no proof."

I strive for agnosticism (I wish that I was mature enough not to believe in entities that may not exist or disbelieve in entities that may exist) but usually end up with Atheism. Ardent rationalism, especially in the face of the ludicrous is a difficult obstacle to coexistence for me to overcome.

I strive for apatheism. But to those who require a prime mover, I feel deism is the way to go. No organized religion or belief in intervention.

Ok, getting back to the MEANING of the thread, Vader DID bring balance to the force, as by the time of episode 4, there were 2 Sith Lords, and the Inquisitors were dark jedi, with the Shadowguards, and there were 2 Jedi Masters, with a handful of knights and some padawans, so the numbers were essentially equal, thereby balancing the "scales" of the users of each side of the force.

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
"true sith" are a race that revan set out to find at the end of kotor. As far as we know "sith" are extinct, and the race of "sith" is defenitely extinct. Its just a name given to dark jedi at this point. making the EU moneymilkers ****ing retards when it comes to story writing. seriously. STOP WRITING SHIT THAT COMES AFTER THE OT!
Ty.
HELL ****ING YEAH!!!