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

Whos the weakest sith to ever exist. They MUST have a name, and be a canon sith. so no unknown guys. Revan and Malak are ok. So are Ragnos, and Sadow, Kressh, Hord, and them. One Sith DO NOT count. They are a bunch of posers anyways. Other than the ones i have stated, only sith in the Rule of Two count. Lumiya does 2. As does Caedus. Dark side Luke dosnt.

The weakest sith ever? Darth Sidious and Darth bane.

Uhh, how exactly do you figure THAT?

By means of sarcasm.

The weakest Sith that actually has a name that I can think of would be Bandon. He wasn't actually weak, but compared to those of other eras, he hasn't got much to his name.

Yeah, your probably right. But what about the other guys? Who would you place right below Sidious. I know you would put him on top.

Caedus, most likely. The guy was a monster in the Force second only in his era to Luke. Bane and Vader come up 3rd or 4th. Galen would likely come next--he defeated Vader and stalled Palpatine. That's as far I can number really, Exar Kun and Revan are in there too, as well as Krayt and Nihilus. Oh and Dooku.

Wait, I would have said that Bane kills Caedus. What does flow walking even do? i cant find any legacy comics or books. And what about the fact that Bane mastered practically every single lightsaber form available to him at the time? He would have to have in order to rebuild the Sith effectively.......

Originally posted by Incanus
Yeah, your probably right. But what about the other guys? Who would you place right below Sidious. I know you would put him on top.

WE don't put sidious on top CANON places him on top.

These aren't in any order just listing off my head
Under sidious Caedous, Kun, Bane, vader,

And galen marek

Originally posted by Wolverine2179
And galen marek

I wouldn't count him as a sith.

Well, he was never ment to be a sith. He was merely a pawn of Vader to do his work. a quote from the game :"I lied, as i have from the very beggining." "You never ment to destroy the Emperor!" "Not with you, no." meaning he was a pawn.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
of The weakest Sith that actually has a name that I can think of would be Bandon. He wasn't actually weak, but compared to those of other eras, he hasn't got much to his name.
Bandon is a beast. I mean he force pushes a trooper into a computer for no better reason than he walked in front of him!

Originally posted by Incanus
Wait, I would have said that Bane kills Caedus. What does flow walking even do? i cant find any legacy comics or books. And what about the fact that Bane mastered practically every single lightsaber form available to him at the time? He would have to have in order to rebuild the Sith effectively....... I've never read the Legacy books either, but judging from what I've read on Wookiee and heard around this grapevine, Caedus can withstand an extreme amount of pain and physical damage. And that he was able to compete with LotF Luke Skywalker makes Caedus, if not on Palpatine's level, at least 2nd.

Seriously guys, what does the Aing-Tii Flow Walking do?

Originally posted by ares834
Bandon is a beast. I mean he force pushes a trooper into a computer for no better reason than he walked in front of him! In terms of sadistic random killing badassery, he takes the cake. Well, what remains of it after Vader.

Originally posted by Incanus
Seriously guys, what does the Aing-Tii Flow Walking do?

go read about it on wookieepedia

Originally posted by xxxpoppunker182
go read about it on wookieepedia
Don't do it... You will be happier not knowing what it is.

Originally posted by Incanus
Seriously guys, what does the Aing-Tii Flow Walking do? it's the its the imbred brain child of a retard.

Uh, i just havnt read Legacy, but i read it and it is irrelevant to combat, as it only shows the past and future, it is like a crystal ball or something, i dont know. It is just irrelevant to combat. Cant use it.

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
it's the its the imbred brain child of a retard.
This is truth.

I believe we should remain on topic, here... though the topic is obviously not something intensely interesting. If this weakling Sith needs a name, let it be Bandon. Otherwise, it is some stupid Sithling grunt who died at some point after doing something unimportant.

Originally posted by ares834
Bandon is a beast. I mean he force pushes a trooper into a computer for no better reason than he walked in front of him!

So he's a pitiful little bully-boy who has to hurt others to make himself feel like a big man. What's "beast" about that?

Originally posted by chilled monkey
So he's a pitiful little bully-boy who has to hurt others to make himself feel like a big man. What's "beast" about that?

Still haven't learned about sarcasm, have you?

The weakest sith ever is probably some unknown, never talked about baby who was brought up to be a sith only to die when he/she was 1 year old.

Probably that first Sith Jaden Korr killed. Losing to a guy with no connection to the force whos barely used a lightsaber= epic fail.

That wasn't a Sith, and Jaden Korr did have a connection to the Force.

Yeah he did, and Jaden was powerful enough to defeat Marka Ragnos possessing Tavion when he was a jedi knight. At that time however, he was no push over but not powerful enough to do half the setuff he did later.

Why did you make this thread?

Just wanted to know, but Bandon dosnt count read the first for who does. Only the ones in the rule of two and the others i named.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
The weakest sith ever is probably some unknown, never talked about baby who was brought up to be a sith only to die when he/she was 1 year old.

Well I get where your coming from with the sith thing, But Korr didn't have a connection to the force, he had potential, but no training and no ability to use it (which is what I meant). Though with the restrictions of the thread... Hetton probably. He was trained by the sith and had sith followers, so he should count, but was weak as a kitten.

Mr. Creator of thread.. dude technically, Revan created the rule of two, (bane implemented it) and Bandon is the weakest. obviously.

Also: Flow Walking can be used in combat as explained in the second FOTJ book.

One can use flow walking to completely predict the outcome of an entire battle. Its like one has forseen a possible future, and can take measures to avoid the fatal errors or avoid things. yeah I'm using "things" cuz it can be anything.

like Jysella Horn used flow walking to predict how she was unable to escape, and deliberatly did something different. She knew exactly where the security droids were and was able to disable them before their activation. But she was still caught, so obviously flow walking isn't omnipotent, and can predict only one possible future. Also, while flow walking, time seems to slow or stop because Horn saw the whole scene while just standing there, where someone could clearly get to her by the time it takes for her to finish flow walking.

well idk if what I just typed made any sense at all, cuz I'm really obsessed with getting a hacked psp... Probably some sentences were not as "up to par with the standards of punctuation/grammar/etc."

But then it is not in combat, it is in preparation. It cannot be considered a combat feat if not used during combat. Like if Caedus uses it before fighting Luke to kill him, Luke would improvise. Not that effective if not for a large scale encounter.

Originally posted by kotorfan
Mr. Creator of thread.. dude technically, Revan created the rule of two, (bane implemented it) and Bandon is the weakest. obviously.

Revan did not create the Rule of Two. He simply said each master should have but one apprentice... Bane took this a step further and said that there could only ever be one master and one apprentice hence only two sith at a time.

Revan had an army.

Of Sith.

yeah but they weren't sith.. they were sith soldiers, not apprentices. They never had a chance to be master.

Only Malak was the one to succeed Revan, no other one would. They were not taught alot, just a few little pieces, though they hungered for more. He knew that if they grew to powerful "then the weak would rise up against the strong in a gross perversion of the natural order." i think that was from Bane POD while learning from Revans holocron. Malak knew the same, and he picked Bandon. besides, if Bandon was considered strong in that army, then they must have a shortage of sith.

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
Still haven't learned about sarcasm, have you?

I have. I just don't always recognise it.

Originally posted by Wolverine2179
The weakest sith ever? Darth Sidious and Darth bane.

What? They are two of the strongest Sith ever to exist.

I'd have to say Vader when he got trapped in the suit. How he was able to easily defeat Rahm Kota, I do not know.

Vader is actually one of the most powerful.

Isnt Vader supposed to be second? I think he is at least in the top 5.

He is.

ok

Vader is one of the most powerful, but there are quite a few sith lords that surpass him.

The ones i can think off(i exclude unknowns)
Sidious, caedus, bane, exar kun, nihilus.

I may have missed out a few but vader isn't top 5, maybe top 10.

Ugh, this was bothering me (not in a personal way, pop).

Originally posted by xxxpoppunker182
WE don't put sidious on top CANON places him on top.

Actually, canon doesn't put anyone "on top", it's all in this forum's mentality. I remember when someone from this forum asked Leland Chee on the official site message boards who was more powerful: Ragnos or Sidious (in hopes to end a raging debate that used to go on here). His answer was that there are no "established power charts" and that there is no canon list of "who's better than who", stating -at any point- one character could become more powerful than another if an author chose.

So, really, it is "we", and by "we", I mean, you. And by "you", I mean some members of this forum. Did I do that right?

quotes are meaningless without feats to go with them.

at least in my opinion.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
quotes are meaningless without feats to go with them.

at least in my opinion.
Quotes are canon... Plus Sidious has the feats to back them up.

Quotes > your opinion. Sorry but its like that, you can't just discredit quotes to firm your argument and thats not how things work here, if the writer or author states something then it is that way, like quigon being legendary.

Revan had plenty of quotes but little feats actually seen yet most of us consider him a strong force user and an excellent combatant.

What advent say does make sense about the author choosing one character to be more powerful than an already powerful character.

Hell even if lucas pleased he could make vader or even jar jar more powerful than any force user, if karen traviss wanted to make caedus more powerful than sidious, she could very well do so.

If Kevin J anderson wanted exar kun to be the ultimate force user, he could very well do so.

And ares, i advice you just don't argue with advent, she can tear you a new a$$h0l3 after breaking down your arguments.

But yes, sidious is number one sith due to quotes and feats, but there are other characters potentiall stronger in a sense that authors can simply make up a character more powerfil or overpower a single character(think of that idiot galen marek).

i didnt say they werent canon i said theyre meaningless by themselves. theres a very distinct difference.

Originally posted by Wolverine2179
Quotes > your opinion. Sorry but its like that, you can't just discredit quotes to firm your argument and thats not how things work here, if the writer or author states something then it is that way, like quigon being legendary.

Revan had plenty of quotes but little feats actually seen yet most of us consider him a strong force user and an excellent combatant.

What advent say does make sense about the author choosing one character to be more powerful than an already powerful character.

Hell even if lucas pleased he could make vader or even jar jar more powerful than any force user, if karen traviss wanted to make caedus more powerful than sidious, she could very well do so.

If Kevin J anderson wanted exar kun to be the ultimate force user, he could very well do so.

And ares, i advice you just don't argue with advent, she can tear you a new a$$h0l3 after breaking down your arguments.

But yes, sidious is number one sith due to quotes and feats, but there are other characters potentiall stronger in a sense that authors can simply make up a character more powerfil or overpower a single character(think of that idiot galen marek).

if lucas came out and said that jett zukassa was the most talented duelist in the order id say that he was full of shit and id denounce the quote as so. if that means im breaking kmc rules then so be it. id rather leave the forum then lower my intelligence to such a level that i ignore basic logic that even a small child can understand.

Sorry for mis-reading it then. But it isn't exactly meaningless because the author simply wishes the reader to know that so and so is pretty powerful or skilled in a particular field.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
if lucas came out and said that jett zukassa was the most talented duelist in the order id say that he was full of shit and id denounce the quote as so. if that means im breaking kmc rules then so be it. id rather leave the forum then lower my intelligence to such a level that i ignore basic logic that even a small child can understand. Don't be dense, thats how canon works. If a higher authority says it is, it simply is regardless of how silly it may be.

Nobody can denounce lucas statements, you can claim it makes no sense, is full of shit or doesn't make sense but you can't change the fact that what he say is canon "fact".

Look at marvels authors, they are even worse than SW authors in a sense that they can make the not so strongest character duke it out with cosmic beings.

Originally posted by Wolverine2179
Don't be dense, thats how canon works.

If a higher authority says it is, it simply is regardless of how silly it may be.

Nobody can denounce lucas statements, you can claim it makes no sense, is full of shit or doesn't make sense but you can't change the fact that what he say is canon "fact".



thats how canon works here. i personally dont have to believe something just because he says it. objectively speaking whatever lucas or his ilk says goes. but from my own observations that isnt always true. what they say and what the characters do can at times contradict one another. so i dont feel that i personally am obligated to believe something just because they say it.



exactly. if we went just by what marvel says then we can say that spiderman is indeed > firelord. or that captain america would beat spiderman the majority of the time they fought. if you take into consideration what the two have consistently done that isnt the case.

Originally posted by ares834
I disagree... And so does canon.

Chris Cerasi, who is an editor for LucasBooks, doesn't agree with you:



And,



So simply, the authors are making their interpretation of the character, meaning statements like "the most powerful ever" are totally fair game to be questioned. Think about it. I don't have a problem with people being called the best of the era in EU, that makes more sense than a definitive "ever", past, present and future.

Leland Chee doesn't agree with you:

Originally posted by Advent
I remember when someone from this forum asked Leland Chee on the official site message boards who was more powerful: Ragnos or Sidious (in hopes to end a raging debate that used to go on here). His answer was that there are no "established power charts" and that there is no canon list of "who's better than who", stating -at any point- one character could become more powerful than another if an author chose.

Ushgarak, the law of the forum, doesn't agree with you either (link):



And most importantly, I don't agree with you because you're spouting off hyperbole and ambiguous quotes to support your disagreement. Who's the most powerful man in America? You could argue the president, but that doesn't make him capable of tearing down buildings with his bare hands. Even one of your own quotes support the idea that "powerful" can be taken in the sense of political influence, wealth, or knowledge.



Nice job knowing that the narrator of the NEC is Voren Na'al, a fictional character. The book is written from his perspective (meaning in-character fallibility), and seeing that some young historian from the NJO era wouldn't be capable of measuring the power of the Sith Lords of old, he's either delusion, exaggerating or considering political influence, wealth, and knowledge when using the word "powerful".



I'm not sure what perspective Death Star is written from, but it's likely the case of being third-person limited narration rather than a completely omniscient source. Either way, it's bunk until you prove the writing style or that there are "established power charts" contrary to Leland Chee's statement. May I remind you that Chee is the guy who actually works in handling and making decisions on canon for LFL.

Here is the quote I was referring to above,



"Vader imagined the power that could be his if he crushed Palpatine and established his own rule over the Empire."

The 'power' that Sidious had was defined by Vader as being political influence, more specifically, the head of a galactic government. We know this is the case since he isn't going to gain extraordinary Force power by just killing someone.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
thats how canon works here.

Sorry but thats how canon works for SW anywhere, hell go read wikipedia or wookiepedia for a better defination of canon.
Originally posted by Ms.Marvel

i personally dont have to believe something just because he says it. objectively speaking whatever lucas or his ilk says goes. but from my own observations that isnt always true. what they say and what the characters do can at times contradict one another. so i dont feel that i personally am obligated to believe something just because they say it. So if thats the case then anakin isn't the chosen one, then anakin wouldn't have been the most powerful force user had he not sustained any of his injuries because there is absolutely nothing to prove it other than the words of lucas himself. Lucas words are law hun, just deal with it seriously.

If you can't accept it you are very welcomed to leave this forum or section and quit debating about star wars entirely.

What the authors says is fact, cold hard fact weather it makes sense or not it is still fact, if you can't accept that then don't bother arguing with anybody in this forum.

The writers decide what happens in the SWU or whos better than who, you do not.

I apologise if you think im being a jackass but it is very annoying that
defy canon and choose to blatantly ignore it when you are wrong or when the autors disagree with you.


Originally posted by Ms.Marvel

exactly. if we went just by what marvel says then we can say that spiderman is indeed > firelord. or that captain america would beat spiderman the majority of the time they fought. if you take into consideration what the two have consistently done that isnt the case. I repeat again, if the authors wished, they could even make someone like wolverine stand up and defeat even the white phoenix of the crown. The fact is they have the power to do these things weather it makes sense or not.

Apparently, you have a huge lack of understanding for actual canon.

Maybe i do, best to concede it then. But could you substantiate it for me?

Originally posted by Wolverine2179
So if thats the case then anakin isn't the chosen one, then anakin wouldn't have been the most powerful force user had he not sustained any of his injuries because there is absolutely nothing to prove it other than the words of lucas himself. Lucas words are law hun, just deal with it seriously.

The characters in the movies themselves admit that Anakin is the Chosen One and the capable of becoming the most powerful openly.



No. Interpretation of a character isn't fact, it's subjectivity.



Leland Chee decided that there was no "power charts" on who can beat who.

Originally posted by Wolverine2179
Maybe i do, best to concede it then. But could you substantiate it for me?

Read my post to ares.

Originally posted by Advent
Leland Chee decided that there was no "power charts" on who can beat who.

Mr. Chee had best take it up with his employer, because if Mr. Chee is to be taken at his word, then there is no established power hierarchy anywhere. Which applies to the movies. Which must mean that Maul certainly isn't better than Qui-Gon, Dooku certainly isn't better than Obi-Wan, Obi-Wan certainly isn't better than General Grievous, Sidious certainly isn't better than Kit Fisto, Yoda certainly isn't better than Sidious, and Anakin really doesn't have a midichlorian count exceeding Yoda's.

Originally posted by Gideon
Mr. Chee had best take it up with his employer, because if Mr. Chee is to be taken at his word, then there is no established power hierarchy anywhere. Which applies to the movies. Which must mean that Maul certainly isn't better than Qui-Gon, Dooku certainly isn't better than Obi-Wan, Obi-Wan certainly isn't better than General Grievous, Sidious certainly isn't better than Kit Fisto, Yoda certainly isn't better than Sidious, and Anakin really doesn't have a midichlorian count exceeding Yoda's.

not certaintly possibly. and imo thats true. except for the midichlorian count thing which is a bit more cut and paste imo i dont think you can say with absolute clarity that maul is certaintly better than quigon or dooku is certaintly better then obiwan etc.

Originally posted by Advent
Other than the plethora of lines in EU materials like novels, comic books, magazines and so on? Many sources note Anakin as being the Chosen One and being capable of becoming the most powerful other than Lucas. Most importantly, the characters in the movies themselves admit this openly.



I know this, but ms.marvels claim was that if there is nothing on panel or feats to substantiate the quote, it is non applicable and bullshit.

I know that many other sources and several characters know that he is potentially the strongest, but in ms marvels point of view, that just because most of it were just statements of anakin potentially being the strongest and there are no actual feats to back it up, she will disregard it.

Bah i don't know how to explain this any better.

You know, I realize that it's late where I am (12:43 am to be precise), but this makes absolutely no sense. If you're defending Anakin's status as the man with the greatest potential ever, why are you now trying to use sources that -- in this very discussion -- you seek to invalidate on grounds of unreliability?

This is more or less the problem that I have with anyone else who hides behind the "foggy window" line.



None of which matter, since there aren't any power charts.



Characters are fallible. Kind've like Voren Na'al.

i think her point is that there are more then enough sources that state that in one way or another. there isnt just one or two semi-ambiguous quotes. theres enough that we can logically trust the statement.

Originally posted by Gideon
Mr. Chee had best take it up with his employer, because if Mr. Chee is to be taken at his word, then there is no established power hierarchy anywhere. Which applies to the movies. Which must mean that Maul certainly isn't better than Qui-Gon, Dooku certainly isn't better than Obi-Wan, Obi-Wan certainly isn't better than General Grievous, Sidious certainly isn't better than Kit Fisto, Yoda certainly isn't better than Sidious, and Anakin really doesn't have a midichlorian count exceeding Yoda's.

You're taking the quote out of context by far. Everything you described has been tested and proven in the movies.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
i think her point is that there are more then enough sources that state that in one way or another.

No, I don't think so.

Because if that is Advent's point, then I question her (previously) unquestioned intellect, integrity, and physical vision.

I've got enough sources proclaiming Palpatine's strength to literally bury her alive. So if she's saying "more = better," then I say bring it on.



If you look hard enough, you can question or spread ambiguity just about everywhere.



Sidious has the quotes and the feats. So, no, I don't think that's where Advent is going with this.

Originally posted by Gideon
No, I don't think so.

Because if that is Advent's point, then I question her (previously) unquestioned intellect, integrity, and physical vision.

I've got enough sources proclaiming Palpatine's strength to literally bury her alive. So if she's saying "more = better," then I say bring it on.

If you look hard enough, you can question or spread ambiguity just about everywhere.

Sidious has the quotes and the feats. So, no, I don't think that's where Advent is going with this.

i wasnt aware you and her were talking specifically about sideous.

Originally posted by Advent
You're taking the quote out of context by far.

I don't think so. How so?



Where has Anakin's potential been proven in the movies? And any enemy can be defeated given certain circumstance. Who's to say that, under other conditions, Grievous wouldn't have handed Kenobi his ass?

Maybe he was getting stressed due to the appearance of clones.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
i wasnt aware you and her were talking specifically about sideous.

That's the example she used.

Originally posted by Gideon
Who's to say that, under other conditions, Grievous wouldn't have handed Kenobi his ass?

Maybe he was getting stressed due to the appearance of clones.

i agree.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
i think her point is that there are more then enough sources that state that in one way or another. there isnt just one or two semi-ambiguous quotes. theres enough that we can logically trust the statement.
And there is plenty information to support the fact that Sidious is the most powerful Sith ever. He has been shown to destroy fleets, drain planets, use lightning that can incinerate squads of Stormtroopers, bests Luke in duel, defeats Yoda, kills three of the orders greatest swordsmen in ten seconds, clouded the jedi from the force, And countless other things.

im not talking about sideous. i never was. im a firm believer in his dominance. but not because there is some quotes saying that he is.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
i agree.

I don't.

But that's because my methodology, in all cases, assumes that most statements and events are to be taken at face-value. They have the canon stamp of approval. Now if there is heavy confliction or contradiction, then a responsible logician should question the statement.

But Advent hasn't provided any reason why we should disregard all those statements about Sidious.

I mean no disrespect to her, but it seems to be the behavior of someone who wants to cherrypick.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
i think her point is that there are more then enough sources that state that in one way or another. there isnt just one or two semi-ambiguous quotes. theres enough that we can logically trust the statement. Funny you say this yet you deny exar kuns combat prowess and quotes despite plenty of feats to substantiate them.

Originally posted by Gideon
I don't.

But that's because my methodology, in all cases, assumes that most statements and events are to be taken at face-value. They have the canon stamp of approval. Now if there is heavy confliction or contradiction, then a responsible logician should question the statement.


thats interesting. youre certainly entitled to that methodology, i feel that one of gods greatest gifts to us is the ability to be different, even among ourselves, but i feel differently. challenge everything, imo.

Originally posted by Wolverine2179
Funny you say this yet you deny exar kuns combat prowess and quotes despite plenty of feats to substantiate them.

hm?

just because i stated what i think she was saying doesnt mean that i agree with wholeheartedly.

whats up? i thought that my stance on issues like this would be relatively clear for the most part by now. am i putting out mixed messages?

well im tired so leave me alone.

Well, until Advent responds, I guess I don't need to stick around. I'm here to note observations, not make judgments.

And this is what I see:









I see Advent make a systematic attempt to invalidate or question the legitimacy of EU materials, tossing out "hyperbole" and "ambiguity" to particular statements.

And yet I see this:



When it suits her, the EU materials "like novels, comics, magazines and so on?" become ironclad and unquestionable. There are many words that can be used to describe this... inconsistency.

I'll just use the word "questionable."

I have nothing against Advent, but I'm waiting for this newfound faction of skeptics to make up their damn mind.

Edit: Oh, and an alternate interpretation could be that Mr. Chee's quote applies simply to the victor of the fight. That characters can still be established as more powerful, stronger, or smarter, but that there is no chart as to who will emerge victorious in a fight.

That makes much more sense.

But, what do I know?

edit.

Firstly, not everything is a debate about Sidious. My problem stems from the fact that hyperbolic and ambiguous quotes are used as a substitute for actual substance in proving what makes character X better than Y. I have no problem accepting Sidious as the "most powerful" Sith Lord, by what we know about him, he pretty much is (not in every aspect, but overall). Ignoring all those "most powerful" quotes, there is still mountains of evidence. However, we're ultimately calling him the most powerful. As Leland Chee said, it's possible for another character in the mythos to surpass any other (specifically, he did mention Sidious).

Anyways, let's look at what you originally said:



Then,



It's cute how you mention it being "late" (as if that somehow hinders my capabilities being a night owl and all) as a possible reason I'm not making sense. The lack of sense I see here can be contributed to complete and utter vagueness. Explain what you mean by "certainly isn't better". The second part of what you've said supports the idea that there, in fact, aren't any "power charts on who can beat who" since it's possible for Grievous to beat Obi-Wan under certain circumstances.

As for Anakin's potential in the movies, if you recall, Qui-Gon takes a midichlorian sample from Anakin when he is on Tatooine and has Obi-Wan test it using scientific devices, which conclusively proved Anakin's midichlorian count would be greater than Yoda's.

Originally posted by Gideon
I see Advent make a systematic attempt to invalidate or question the legitimacy of EU materials, tossing out "hyperbole" and "ambiguity" to particular statements.

And yet I see this:



When it suits her, the EU materials "like novels, comics, magazines and so on?" become ironclad and unquestionable. There are many words that can be used to describe this... inconsistency.

I'll just use the word "questionable."


Before you decide to type something: THINK. I edited my post long before you ever entered the fray, so clearly, I revoked that.

If your post about it was unintentional, that's a mistake on your part. If it was intentional, you need to stop trolling.

Originally posted by Gideon
Edit: Oh, and an alternate interpretation could be that Mr. Chee's quote applies simply to the victor of the fight. That characters can still be established as more powerful, stronger, or smarter, but that there is no chart as to who will emerge victorious in a fight.

That makes much more sense.

But, what do I know?

That's my position...

For instance, when people use Sidious quotes of "being the most powerful" alone as evidence that he would beat any Sith Lord before him. You do make sense to me, but only because it's what I believe, too.

Originally posted by Advent
Firstly, not everything is a debate about Sidious.

It was the example that led you to enter this thread and thus start this horribly complicated discussion.



How so?



You seem to have been resisting most powerfully thus far. It's rather like squirming in a straightjacket, I'd imagine.



Still with you.





No, we aren't.



It was never in question that there couldn't be a character, somewhere down the line, to surpass Palpatine.



Explain how an alteration in circumstances would somehow support your idea that there aren't any power charts. Grievous could certainly take a comatose Kenobi, but does that make him better?

No. That's the problem: you assume that "most powerful" = "who always wins the fight!"



Because a fallible third party said so? Was Kenobi guessing? Was he adding the numbers up in his head? Was he looking at a list? Was there a glitch in said list?

And how does having a higher count than Yoda mean that Anakin has the highest count in history which is, if I recall, what you were defending?

Originally posted by Advent
Before you decide to type something: THINK.



Huh?

Before we carry on, I have to note the irony and humor in this situation. You berate me, telling me to think.

And then your next words mention a situation where you apparently forgot to do so yourself, thus forcing you to "revoke" a poorly worded conclusion.



My post was intentional. I saw that Wolverine had it quoted and I didn't bother to look as to whether or not you had edited it out.

Originally posted by Advent
That's my position...

Eh?

...

WTF.

Wait a minute, wait a minute. Where the hell did this come from? I didn't see anywhere that you were contesting "who'd win in a fight," but rather "who was the most powerful."

One's up for discussion, the other isn't.



There must be some miscommunication here. Advent, I referenced the time because it's late for me, meaning I might not understand what you're saying. But you aren't making sense. You're questioning who is the most powerful, not who would win in a fight.

Please, don't tell me what I'm questioning. You clearly just didn't grasp the argument and jumped at the chance to defend Sidious' position, even though it wasn't being attacked.



^ This is what we're talking about. The crux of it. Sidious merely sparked the discussion. We're discussing a general view of the versus forum as a whole - the forum's "mentality". If you noticed, the response I got to my original post was three quotes calling him the most powerful, which is the kind of shit I'm talking about.



Thanks for admitting your mistake.



The term "ever" means past, present and future. The phrases "the most powerful in history" means past and present. So, where is the room for a Sith Lord character to become more powerful than Sidious if he's the most powerful ever to exist?

Anyways, I have no idea what the argument is going to be about now. But about this whole "power charts" issue, I'm not sure what there is to discuss. Ushgarak weighed in a long time ago and brought the gavel down:

Originally posted by Advent
Please, don't tell me what I'm questioning.

You're absolutely right; I can't tell you what you're questioning, since you seem to be leaping to stance after stance after stance.

"no sidious is not the most powerful leland chee said that there are no power charts"

"Anakin's potential is the highest because said so!"

Would it be too much trouble for you to make up your mind?



Wasn't it being attacked? You were the one who said that there weren't any power charts and that it was open to question and interpretation.



What's your point? All we have are quotes regarding Anakin's potential. Guess they mean nothing.



No problem.

I will keep it in mind to double check everything you say, in the future, just in case you realize it was something silly and feel the need to edit it out.

^ That was sarcasm. I'm not obligated to keep hitting the refresh button to see whether or not you decide to drop a point. Concede it or don't.



I never said Sith. I said character.

Originally posted by Advent
Anyways, I have no idea what the argument is going to be about now. But about this whole "power charts" issue, I'm not sure what there is to discuss. Ushgarak weighed in a long time ago and brought the gavel down:

How did you know that Lucas posts under Ushgarak? I guess if you read, very closely, you'll note that Ushgarak is an anagram for George Lucas.

Oh, wait.

It doesn't matter, though. This startling revelation means that everything can be questioned: everything from Anakin's potential to just how badass Coleman Trebor actually was if he hadn't been so unfairly taken advantage of by Jango Fett.

It's probably why Fett was so quick to kill Trebor; he knew that, if given the chance to fight properly, Trebor would probably hand Dooku his old ass.

Originally posted by Gideon
You're absolutely right; I can't tell you what you're questioning, since you seem to be leaping to stance after stance after stance.

"no sidious is not the most powerful leland chee said that there are no power charts"

"Anakin's potential is the highest because said so!"

Would it be too much trouble for you to make up your mind?

There's your problem: a complete lack of understanding of the arguments at hand. My position was never that Sidious isn't the most powerful because "Leland Chee said so". It's that quotes about Sidious being the most powerful aren't solid evidence that he is the most powerful. See here:

Originally posted by Advent
Chris Cerasi, who is an editor for LucasBooks, doesn't agree with you:

"The further one branches away from the movies, the more interpretation and speculation come into play. LucasBooks works diligently to keep the continuing Star Wars expanded universe cohesive and uniform, but stylistically, there is always room for variation. Not all artists draw Luke Skywalker the same way. Not all writers define the character in the same fashion. The particular attributes of individual media also come into play. A comic book interpretation of an event will likely have less dialogue or different pacing than a novel version. A video game has to take an interactive approach that favors gameplay. So too must card and roleplaying games ascribe certain characteristics to characters and events in order to make them playable.

And,

The analogy is that every piece of published Star Wars fiction is a window into the 'real' Star Wars universe. Some windows are a bit foggier than others. Some are decidedly abstract. But each contains a nugget of truth to them. Like the great Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi said, 'many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view.'

So simply, the authors are making their interpretation of the character, meaning statements like "the most powerful ever" are totally fair game to be questioned. Think about it. I don't have a problem with people being called the best of the era in EU, that makes more sense than a definitive "ever", past, present and future.

Leland Chee doesn't agree with you:

Ushgarak, the law of the forum, doesn't agree with you either (link):

Final word- it's all interpretation, which is ultimately all opinion. There is no universal unambiguous soruce of relative power levels, nor is such a thing desirable as it would be a very petty creation.


And most importantly, I don't agree with you because you're spouting off hyperbole and ambiguous quotes to support your disagreement. Who's the most powerful man in America? You could argue the president, but that doesn't make him capable of tearing down buildings with his bare hands. Even one of your own quotes support the idea that "powerful" can be taken in the sense of political influence, wealth, or knowledge.



If you tossed those quotes out the window, that has an effect of exactly squat on his position.

Did I say he wasn't the most powerful with the Force? Did I call someone else the most powerful with the Force? No? Then just stop while you're behind, because you'll hit China by morning if you keep digging yourself any deeper.



You can't concede a point you never made. However, you can concede that you made an obvious mistake in trying to call me out on things that I didn't subscribe to. And, as it appears, you did since you admitted as much.



Let me make that point you responded to a bit more clear as it pertains to the discussion:

We're skipping to summations. You're a tricky minx, trying to get me to devote more time to a place from which I am attemping to escape, but no moar.





I took issue with this because such "power charts" exist within the movies themselves, since we see ample demonstrations of "who can beat who," regularly.

Meaning that Mr. Chee has screwed the pooch, and is contradicted by both the movies and his boss, who as (at least once) mentioned that Vader cannot defeat the Emperor.



No.

There is a vague reference to Anakin's potential exceeding Yoda's, and Sidious's equally vague reference that Vader "will become more powerful than ."

Since Sidious and Yoda cannot be established as the most powerful, simply being stronger than them doesn't mean he would be the most powerful in history. Or even of the time.



If Mr. Chee is to be taken at his word, then LFL (which includes the movies) has no power chart. Meaning no one is more powerful than the other in the movies.

It's all fiction. If you want to interpret sidious as Impotent or omnipotent, that's your choice, but for the purpose of this forum and these debates, ush has not only said this:

This was, in fact written for the sole purpose of basically telling Gideon "shut up, you made your point." And it was in reference to "Power charts", and people saying they couldn't debate because there were not power charts. Out of context it says that all material is interpretation and thus if you interpret 'A New Hope' to be a prequel to 'Howard The Duck', it's just as much cannon as george lucas telling the world that "Sidious is the most powerful". You can't void parts of the story you don't like with your own interpretation and then bring it into a forum and expect to win debates. Its star wars, not the infallible word of god.

On a side note, Ush also said this:



Since george lucas officially stated that Sidious is the most powerful sith, sidious is the most powerful sith. This is not to be twisted by your interpretation.

There's nothing more to argue. This debate is off-topic to both my original point and to the thread itself. My initial argument was that quotes of being "the most powerful X" are a poor substitute for actual evidence when you consider it's "all interpretation". This is supported by Chris Cerasi, editor for LucasBooks, Leland Chee, a Lucasfilms official monitor of continuity and Ushgarak, who decides the rules around here. The "hyperbole/ambiguity" question is a completely valid point, as well, and appears true in -at least- two cases (tNEC and Vader: Ultimate Guide).

Case closed.

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
Since george lucas officially stated that Sidious is the most powerful sith, sidious is the most powerful sith. This is not to be twisted by your interpretation.

George Lucas never officially stated anything about that, as far as I'm aware. If he did, please show me such and I'll go away forever. I honestly doubt that he ever did say this because I'm sure Lightsnake would be tossing it out right and left (love you, sweety!).

Also, first triple post ever, but you all really need to head over to Caedus vs. Yoda and input some more thought. It'd be much appreciated and, of course, heavily vetted.

Originally posted by Advent
George Lucas never officially stated anything about that, as far as I'm aware. If he did, please show me such and I'll go away forever. I honestly doubt that he ever did say this because I'm sure Lightsnake would be tossing it out right and left (love you, sweety!).

Yes he did, in his rots commentary. And its been common knowledge, what planet have you been on since 2005?

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
Yes he did, in his rots commentary. And its been common knowledge, what planet have you been on since 2005?

George Lucas stating Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord ever is "common knowledge"? That's news to this entire forum then. No one has ever brought it up. It certainly would've made things easier for Lightsnake in...2005 and 2006.

What does he say then, exactly, word-for-word?

Originally posted by Advent
George Lucas stating Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord ever is "common knowledge"? That's news to this entire forum then. No one has ever brought it up. It certainly would've made things easier for Lightsnake in...2005 and 2006.

What does he say then, exactly, word-for-word? I think its during the duel with mace windu, but I am not sure. I find commentaries boring so i don't watch them multiple times. Hold on a minute and i will be right back.

Oh and screw you guys, Law & Order: CI is on.

Originally posted by Advent
Oh and screw you guys,

So many possibilities...

Yes, also its very possible star wars takes place in a microscopic scale in lucas rectum.

Originally posted by Advent
George Lucas stating Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord ever is "common knowledge"? That's news to this entire forum then. No one has ever brought it up. It certainly would've made things easier for Lightsnake in...2005 and 2006.

here is a thread with details from 2006.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=499884&highlight=title%3A(palpatine)

oh look!! here is another from 2006.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=400581&highlight=title%3A(the+most+powerful+sith)


Also, you will probably see it in every thread with palpatine or sidious in the title. guess who fails? oh, you! look at that!

Originally posted by Advent
Oh and screw you guys, Don't mind if I do, thank you.

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
guess who fails?

You. For not proving up on what you were supposed to.

Where, in any of that, is there a direct quote from George Lucas himself stating Sidious is "the most powerful Sith ever"?

Originally posted by Advent
You. For not proving up on what you were supposed to.

Where, in any of that, is there a direct quote from George Lucas himself stating Sidious is "the most powerful Sith ever"?

There isn't one. The commentary thing is an urban myth perpetuated by numerous fansites.

Not that it matters. I have this invincible essay proving Palpatine's superiority.

Anyways, I'm off.

Well, good night then, Gideon. However, you aren't going anywhere, Neo. At least, your reputation here isn't. Quit making things up; it affects your credibility. And not in a good way.

Oh yeah, I went there.

Originally posted by Advent
Oh and screw you guys, Law & Order: CI is on.

I concur, that does indeed take priority.

I don't think Lucas ever said that Sids was the most powerful to ever exist- it was stated in Dark Empire, but that is not quite Lucas' mouth, is it? In any case, Gid's essay is outstanding on the topic of Palpatine's power.

Originally posted by Advent
Well, good night then, Gideon. However, you aren't going anywhere, Neo. At least, your reputation here isn't. Quit making things up; it affects your credibility. And not in a good way.

Oh yeah, I went there. Oh please, as much as I appreciate your piteous self congratulations on "going there", I have shown that it has been common knowledge since 2006, and it has been said in literature at least twice. your unintelligible blathering about the lack of power charts and thus the inability to debate "who would beat who" potentially, that is if you could make a sensible debate of it, makes this entire forum pointless.

I have made nothing up, I heard from word of mouth that George Lucas say that Sidious was the most powerful. I have heard it multiple times on this forum, and have read it on theforce.net. If Gideon says that it is an "urban legend" i believe him, but i will not concede the point that it is at least C-Canon. Dark Empire definitely states it, as does the dark side source book, making it canon one way or another.

So, what you are saying is: you were wrong.




Interesting....

Originally posted by Nephthys
So, what you are saying is: you were wrong.




Interesting....

I'm sure Advent would welcome the company.

Aren't you retired?

Originally posted by Nephthys
Aren't you retired?

I

...



Yesnomaybe?

Not that it matters, since the vs. forum is broken.

Originally posted by Nephthys
So, what you are saying is: you were wrong.




Interesting.... partly wrong, but mostly right still. it still is common knowledge and it it still is canon. just not G-Canon.

You're a complete popinjay, Mr. Anderson. Do you recall how you initiated this discussion with me? You said that George Lucas stated Sidious as "the most powerful Sith ever", which was a fabrication. I never questioned whether or not he was the most powerful (in fact, I openly admitted it in this thread), only whether or not Lucas said so.

Try to keep up with your own debate.

Advent, after reading this, I'm convinced you are in dire need of medical, psychological or therapeutic treatment. Perhaps a day at the spa, followed by electroshock treatment?

Heh. Funy.

Originally posted by Advent
You're a complete popinjay,

Isn't that a bird?



Advent, have you been drinking?

Nah, its a legitimate insult. It's olde-english for an overly-flamboyant homosexual, so its more than applicable here.

Originally posted by Advent
You're a complete popinjay, captain obvious saves the day again!

No, i didn't even claim to be able to keep up with this claim, but nevertheless it is valid. If you will go back and use your eyes and your brain to read it, the statement "sideous is the most powerful in history" was used as an example, not as a direct argument. The validity of the statement has no effect on the example.

I didn't think we were debating about the strength of sidious, but on how power =/= the ability to win in a situation. either way you are wrong. It is at least C cannon, and as I have no intention of watching rots ever again, much less rots with commentaries, much less posting the video on youtube for the sole purpose of proving a person commonly known on this forum as a moron wrong, who decided, instead of directly challenging my debate to challenge the validity of a statement used as an example, i will leave it at C cannon. Now, my idiotic freind, I leave you to reply and prove yourself more stupid.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Nah, its a legitimate insult. It's olde-english for an overly-flamboyant homosexual, so its more than applicable here. I know what it means.

I was talkin to Gid.

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
No, i didn't even claim to be able to keep up with this claim, but nevertheless it is valid.

You're arguing in circles, Anderson.

If it's valid, then why did you admit that you were wrong in saying it was true?



Here's what you said and what I responded to:

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
Since george lucas officially stated that Sidious is the most powerful sith, sidious is the most powerful sith. This is not to be twisted by your interpretation.

Here's what I said:

Originally posted by Advent
George Lucas never officially stated anything about that, as far as I'm aware. If he did, please show me such and I'll go away forever.

Here's what you responded with:

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
Yes he did, in his rots commentary. And its been common knowledge, what planet have you been on since 2005?

Here's what you later admit to:

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
I heard from word of mouth that George Lucas say that Sidious was the most powerful.

Stop trolling.



I'm wrong either way? How can I be wrong on something I'm not arguing? Oh? What's that? I can't? You're using a strawman? And in the most obvious way? Good game.

Firstly, quotes - my Buddha, quotes stating "the most powerful of X". Not showings of power, not the character's knowledge or abilities, but simply: a quote. As I've explained, these quotes about "being the most powerful ever (past, present, future)" are just bullshit. The problem I have is when you state that according to canon character X is better than character Y based on just these encompassing quotes, which are not descriptive action or anything of the sort.

Using Leland Chee's words, they don't have any "power charts" documenting the entirety of the mythos. Hence why Gideon's comments were taken out of context. For example, there is nothing that he looks to that says -absolutely- Sidious is more powerful than Ragnos or Nihilus. It's dependent on the author and his interpretation of the characters or what's needed for the story. Which Chris Cerasi, editor for LucasBooks, confirms.

That means, in most cases, that we're examining the characters and deciding who's better than who. That's the whole point of a hypothetical Vs. match and the entire sub-forum! LucasBooks' canon apparently doesn't give a shit about Yoda vs. Caedus...so, is it their view that Yoda is more powerful than Caedus? We don't know. We have no idea if Yoda could beat Caedus in a straight fight. Nothing canon says definitively.

Simply, Ms. Marvel's post exemplifies my point:

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
im not talking about sideous. i never was. im a firm believer in his dominance. but not because there is some quotes saying that he is.

That's all. "Not because some quotes saying that are". And this is why the Vs. forum exists. Instead of hiding behind ambiguous phrases and hyperbole, we actually put down some substance. Or am I wrong? Do you guys enjoy "LOL YODA CONFIRMED MOST POWERFUL JEDI UP TO PT! ROTS NOVEL NUB. U LOSE!" type of debate?



Yawn.

I'm "commonly known as a moron"? That's news to this whole forum again. You should become the KMC Newscaster. You are such a coxcomb. Did you realize people considered me among the most knowledgeable, proficient debaters? Yes, that includes Lightsnake, Dr. McBeefington, Elite Hunter and the resident forum troll retired debater: Gideon. Hell, my first mega-post on the forum earned praise from Janus, IKC and Illustrious. From Janus so much so that he invited me to his original forum when it first started and even asked me to take over in a debate for him.

Frankly, if I had a phallus on this forum, it'd be huge. But enough about my accolades on the Vs. forum, what have you done here other than cement your stupidity in history with non-editable posts?



Yes, considering you can't even spell "friend" right, I'm not sure why you feel to the need to attempt to please your clearly undersized e-peen by challenging my intellect.

But if the case is that there are no power charts, and all are equal, you are saying that Bandon is as powerful as Sidious, wwhich we all know he is not. You are saying that a sith that died and didnt even have a line, just "and there was a corpse in the left hand corner of a sith" that he is as powerful as Sidious. If that were the case, he wouldnt be a corpse in the left hand corner that didnt even have a line or name, now would he?



plz correct me if my idea is wrong. And plz give reasons as to why it is wrong.

Originally posted by Advent
Yawn.

I'm "commonly known as a moron"? That's news to this whole forum again. You should become the KMC Newscaster. You are such a coxcomb. Did you realize people considered me among the most knowledgeable, proficient debaters? Yes, that includes Lightsnake, Dr. McBeefington, Elite Hunter and the resident forum troll retired debater: Gideon. Hell, my first mega-post on the forum earned praise from Janus, IKC and Illustrious. From Janus so much so that he invited me to his original forum when it first started and even asked me to take over in a debate for him.

Frankly, if I had a phallus on this forum, it'd be huge. But enough about my accolades on the Vs. forum, what have you done here other than cement your stupidity in history with non-editable posts?





Could this be the same woman who underwent a colossal b1tchfit about my ego?

Surely not.

And it's not nice to call other people trolls. You're not exactly Ms. Sensitivity when it comes to debating.

Honey, your hypocrisy's showing.

What? No, I'm not at all saying they are equal. If you want to use the word "equal" in my argument, you could say that all the characters start off equally in the Vs. realm. Then we factor in what they have done, their powers, their abilities and from there, you can see who's better than who. I'm saying that no power chart of the entire mythos exist.

Originally posted by Gideon


Could this be the same woman who underwent a colossal b1tchfit about my ego?

Surely not.

And it's not nice to call other people trolls. You're not exactly Ms. Sensitivity when it comes to debating.

Honey, your hypocrisy's showing.



Troll post, moving along.

And for the millionth time (and with all due respect), that's WRONG

Tehn we aparently made one, unofficaial as it is. Or the Vs forum wouldnt exist..........

Originally posted by Advent
What? No, I'm not at all saying they are equal.

I'm glad you cleared that up. We were quite literally on the verge of having you committed.



I'm with you so far.



Not really, since by the quotes you provided from Chris Cerasi, we can't even trust the source material.



Once again, Mr. Chee ought to consider taking it up with Mr. Lucas.

Originally posted by Incanus
Tehn we aparently made one, unofficaial as it is. Or the Vs forum wouldnt exist..........

EXACTLY!

Originally posted by Advent
Actually, canon doesn't put anyone "on top", it's all in this forum's mentality.

So, really, it is "we", and by "we", I mean, you. And by "you", I mean some members of this forum. Did I do that right?

MY GOD, INCANUS. YOU ARE A GENIUS!

YOU HAVE JUST GONE UP +1 IN MY BOOK, SIR.

You use that word a lot, anymore.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
And for the millionth time (and with all due respect), that's WRONG

No, because I fear Advent is a graduate of Illustrious's School of Selective Logic.

Anakin, for example, still has the highest potential evar, even though all that confirms it are... quotes.

Originally posted by Gideon
Anakin, for example, still has the highest potential evar, even though all that confirms it are... quotes.

George Lucas' words are considered gospel, however. One thing I should point out, as it's terribly important - when I responded to Wolverine and Ms. Marvel's discussion, I wasn't fully aware of what Ms. Marvel was arguing.

Her view is that no quotes from anyone can tell her what's right. My view slightly differs in that I hold George Lucas' words as absolute G-canon, since they are according to the canon policy.

Originally posted by Advent
George Lucas' words are considered gospel, however.

Please provide the quote that says Anakin has the highest potential to use the Force evar, plz.



I accept your concession.



Guess the boss had better take it up with his employer. Seems like they have some stuff to work out.

So why did you claim i didn't fully understand canon when i argued to ms marvel that what lucas say = law in canon? I know that i was wrong in some posts but i was right when it came to the lucas quotes.

Just look at ms marvels post, she even claimed that she wouldn't believe lucas despite being the "gospel".

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
if lucas came out and said that jett zukassa was the most talented duelist in the order id say that he was full of shit and id denounce the quote as so. if that means im breaking kmc rules then so be it. id rather leave the forum then lower my intelligence to such a level that i ignore basic logic that even a small child can understand.

Originally posted by Gideon
Please provide the quote that says Anakin has the highest potential to use the Force evar, plz.

We all know it's true.



If that's what stimulates you.



Chris Cerasi agrees that George Lucas' words are G-Canon. He was referring to the materials under G-canon level.

Wolverine,

Originally posted by Wolverine2179
What the authors says is fact, cold hard fact weather it makes sense or not it is still fact, if you can't accept that then don't bother arguing with anybody in this forum.

Chris Cerasi:

Originally posted by Advent
We all know it's true.

You mean like Mr. Anderson "know it's true" that Lucas proclaimed Sidious the most powerful Sith "lawl evar!!1!" in the RotS commentary?

Yeah, no. Sorry. I'll need that quote by the end of business.

plz.



You stimulate me, baby.





Quote, plz?

And since Chris Cerasi is not George Lucas, then we cannot trust Chris's own words that he accepts Lucas's words as G-canon.

The window might be foggy.

Lucas stated that Anakin had the potential to be twice as powerful as Sidious. That's enough for me.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Lucas stated that Anakin had the potential to be twice as powerful as Sidious. That's enough for me.

Well, we really don't know how powerful Sidious is, do we? According to Advent, the quotes, feats, and events are all invalid.

I'm twice as powerful as my goldfish (well, maybe). Doesn't mean I'm the best evar!!1!

And you're still here. Trolling. This must be your newest hobby.

Originally posted by Advent
And you're still here. Trolling. This must be your newest hobby.

And you're still here. Evading. This must be your newest hobby.

I can do that, too.

Really, Advent, either way, I still win. You can evade to your heart's content; everyone else will still see you running from something.

What have I run from? I've argued this with you and Mr. Anderson for some four pages. I'm continuing this debate in my own thread. Did you somehow think everyone would overlook that? Now you're asking me to give you George Lucas' words on Anakin having the highest potential and questioning how good Chris Cerasi is at his job.

Originally posted by Advent
What have I run from?

I honestly don't know, sugarbear. That's what I'm here to find out. You come here with borrowed arguments straight from Illustrious's failbag of tricks and you've become the Tazmanian Devil of backpeddling. I don't know what you're running from.

But running is never the answer.

Unless you're being attacked by polar bears.



We have very different standards of what constitutes "arguing."

Plz retaliate with "troll."



Yes, I need you to provide me the quote about Anakin's potential. It's critical to myyour argument.

Originally posted by Advent

Stop trolling.
learn the definition of trolling.

Oh, snap! a strawman of a strawman. what a parody that would be? too bad i didn't use a strawman.


Nobody gives a shit if they warp your pitiful interpretation of a fictional universe. Canon is canon, and the quote is canon. Representing the quote is bullshit on no other grounds than the quote doesn't give you a "why".



Wrong!! The darkside source book says so definitely, as does Dark Empire.
apparently the author states that sidious is the most powerful sith in history.
Sure, absolutely, except when we have absolute narrative that claims someone is the best. No Idea, but they said sidious is the most powerful sith in history, so its obvious their view is that sidious is more powerful than revan or nihilus. The author's interpretation says so, as does anyone who owns a pair of brain cells and has read the quotes.
insufficient. the canon states that sidious is the most powerful sith in history.
that is substance. The most powerful foe the darkness had ever known will defeat any other foes of the darkness, quite obviously. Interpretation can and will render the entire vs forum pointless. I can interpret anything i want to into the movies. I interpret that vader broke through obi-wan's soresu in episode 4 and defeated him making vader's djem so better than obi wan's soresu, or that vader was more powerful than sidious because he killed him.

It doesn't work.



Well, i guess so because everyone knows it now.

hmmmmm is this as dirty as i want it to be?

musta gotten senile since then. All the technique and proficiency in "debating" won't help you if you are wrong. And you, sir, are wrong. Might I also point out that this is nowhere near debating, this is an internet argument. This is where we both yell our opinions until we are bored and never concede.



Ah the good old days, i might as well just send out for some ice cold lemonade as long as we are sitting here on your black granny's porch. I don't give a flying f**k about your "legendary proficiency" in debating and how everyone loved you back in the old days. I'm thrilled that you have that much flexibility now that you are in your proverbial golden age as a debater, as you manage to retain proficiency in sucking your own dick and kissing your own ass.

I'm not the type to write a three paragraph essay concerning how awesome i was back when we were still waiting for star wars III. It's off topic, it's vain, it's pointless, and it gives you a reputation as an egotistical autophiliac.
I'm sorry, thank you for pointing out my type-o. It makes me feel good to know that when I accidentally switch two letters, while writing at 45 wpm Senility will catch up with me.

Originally posted by ~:Mr.Anderson:~
This is where we both yell our opinions until we are bored and never concede.

Why was anything more than this necessary?

A (the one quoted as more powerful) hasn't slept for a month, has all his limbs broken and is high as a kite on morphine. He must fight B (one not quite as powerful), who is in possession of the Lightsaber of wtfpwnage, which cuts through anything (even other lightsabers) and is a mile long in diameter and length. Who wins?

Originally posted by Nephthys
A (the one quoted as more powerful) hasn't slept for a month, has all his limbs broken and is high as a kite on morphine. He must fight B (one not quite as powerful), who is in possession of the Lightsaber of wtfpwnage, which cuts through anything (even other lightsabers) and is a mile long in diameter and length. Who wins? smartass.

I can't help it, my ass was blessed from birth.

Originally posted by Gideon
But running is never the answer.
Unless you're being attacked by polar bears. What if they are grizzly or American balck bears? Then do you run, or die?