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

For a millennium, the Sith maintained the order in secrecy, passing down their evil heritage. As they gained knowledge of the dark side of the Force, their powers increased with each generation.
Source: Epsidode 1: The Phantom Menace Scrapbook

This is one of the sources for the idea that Bane is the weakest of the Banite line, which sort of makes sense given the point of the Rule of Two. I agree with Tempest that sort of thematic hierarchies are more consistent than feats or even accolades, and so I base my assessment of Bane mainly on this.

As I've guesstimated before, there are a lot of apprentice-master RoT transitions where the apprentice faces the master in single combat and wins. Ergo, the apprentice must surpass the master by substantial enough margin for this transition to consistently happen, and then probably continues to grow in power. We can imagine, then, that a 5% gap growth per generation would actually be fairly conservative, and given Plagueis's estimate (IIRC) of 30 sith between Bane and Sidious, Palpatine should have quadrupled Bane's power. Of course, we don't really gain much from these numbers since we don't know how significant of a disparity a % difference actually is; the more general idea is that if a one generation gap is enough for the apprentice to have a noticeably greater chance of victory (enough that the apprentice's triumph is a consistent outcome), and we compound this thirty times, by the time we reach Sidious, we've come so far from Darth Bane that Palpatine could probably one-shot him.

That's why I put Bane waaaaaay below Sidious, and probably incredibly below Dooku and Vader. I think that if you put him at Qui-Gon's level, you might get enough of a gap between Jinn and Sidious for thirty generations of power creeping.

There are a few other methods, but they're a lot fuzzier. Bane's performance against dozens of tukata is much more impressive than AotC Anakin and Obi Wan's, and he was near death and far from his prime. However, he was also on a dark side nexus, and frankly we can throw so many other things back at him, like how he struggles against X or Y fodder opponents (mercenaries, shadow guards who were stated to be "no match" for Jedi, etc.) that Anakin/Obi Wan trash with ease, that I don't take this to be a very reliable measure. His near-death and desperate state might have actually helped him draw on the dark side for a powerful wave or something.

He also mind-f*cks Andeddu's holocron which in other sources is revealed to actually contain his spirit (Drew probably didn't know this lol), but spirits tend to be weaker than their living incarnations, and we don't know much about Andeddu beyond his getting easily beaten by Wyrlock or whatever and apparently being adulated by Dooku, probably more for his esoteric knowledge than raw power.

So I currently have Bane around Qui Gon level, but I could see arguments for anywhere to RotS Obi Wan. If we used tukata scaling we could put him beyond RotS Anakin, but frankly that isn't the most reliable way of doing things.

Let's just rank him below Ezra and be done with it.

I don't buy that I'm afraid
Bane's feats are hilariously superior to jinn that it's quite silly to put them on the same level

What feats? To my memory, he has precisely two of note; knocking down the Lehon Temple and killing a bunch of tukata. Both of these are highly circumstantial.

Bane struggles with fodder opponents... okay
Let's apply that logic
Dooku anakin and obi wan get captured by some drunken pirates
Vader can't tk a holocron out of a young teenagers hand
So by this logic
Shadow guards > bane > pirates and ezra > vader anakin dooku and obi-wan
Sorry, but star wars is littered with inconsistencies so don't pretend like you can focus on just one

Good thing Bane has way more than one.

Originally posted by hutchy1345
Bane struggles with fodder opponents... okay
Let's apply that logic
Dooku anakin and obi wan get captured by some drunken pirates
Vader can't tk a holocron out of a young teenagers hand
So by this logic
Shadow guards > bane > pirates and ezra > vader anakin dooku and obi-wan
Sorry, but star wars is littered with inconsistencies so don't pretend like you can focus on just one

Yeah, that's why my primary argument comes from the conceptual underpinning of the Rule of Two.

The problem is we don't know that each apprentice succeeded their master by beating them in a fair fight. Even Sidious killed Plagueis in his sleep.

Doesn't really matter, when each generation grew progressively stronger regardless.

On the other hand, Bane instantly killing with his Force Lighting while weakened and reducing subjects to ash while not; pulping groups of beings and shattering a woman's spine with his TK; and resisting Zannah's nexus-amped sorcery with sheer strength of will, would put him well above Qui-Gon.

Tbh, I agree that he is above Jinn.

But let's not pretend this guy is top 5 material, his best showings are against non force users, whilst on a Nexus that was able to give Shan enough power to TK Juhani, Bindo and Revan.

He's impressive off nexus, I firmly believe this, but he's not top material, at least Imho

nvm

Bane isnt by all means weak in comparison, I think this is more or less fan backlash, than anything else.

Anyway, if you base your assessment on Banenite Sith mainly on one scrapbook, then how can I take this seriously.

From that logic alone I can use Old Ben Kenobi and Darth Vader from the movie entirely, and the only input I can use is from that duel alone.

Thats not very groovy is it?

(I have much more to put, but im criticizing you only using one way to make a characters power level, when there is more than one source to use)

Originally posted by TheDarthBoy

Anyway, if you base your assessment on Banenite Sith mainly on one scrapbook,

It's almost like I already gave you in particular multiple sources in a direct rebuttal to you in the Darth Bane vs. Qui Gon thread...hmm...where was it?


For a millennium, the Sith maintained the order in secrecy, passing down their evil heritage. As they gained knowledge of the dark side of the Force, their powers increased with each generation.

Source: Epsidode 1: The Phantom Menace Scrapbook


For a thousand years we continued to follow Bane's Rule of Two, existing in the shadows, bidding our time, growing in power, feeding our hatred.

Source: Insider #88: Heritage of the Sith

Ultimately, Bane's plan produced more powerful Sith Lords with each generation.

Source: Force & Destiny: Core Rulebook


^ verbatim. If you're going to condescend to people and mock "idiots everywhere" in your sig, you can try to patch up your own competency at least a little bit.

Plus, I could add on that this coincides with the very purpose of Bane's Rule of Two. Is this my own personal fan theory? Well, I do have a pretty big fan who supports me:

Bane WANTED a stronger successor to overthrow him;

From here.

Who's that, you might say? Just Drew Karpyshyn, the author of the Darth Bane trilogy. Hmmm, wow.

Your continual, unprovoked insulting and sniping of me with rather childish and uninteresting arguments isn't worth responding to anymore. Come back to me if you grow up and develop some decent respect.

Look at banes respect thread he's well above jinn

Originally posted by The Ellimist
As I've guesstimated before, there are a lot of apprentice-master RoT transitions where the apprentice faces the master in single combat and wins. Ergo, the apprentice must surpass the master by substantial enough margin for this transition to consistently happen, and then probably continues to grow in power. We can imagine, then, that a 5% gap growth per generation would actually be fairly conservative, and given Plagueis's estimate (IIRC) of 30 sith between Bane and Sidious, Palpatine should have quadrupled Bane's power.

This is ridiculous, and blatantly untrue. Zannah wasn't more powerful than Bane. And Cognus' greatest advantages have nothing to do with personal power. Her unique abilities would let her kill Zannah without overtaking her in power, just like Zannah's did to Bane. Cognus' apprentice was also a proponant of esoteric abilities that have no regard for standard power plays. Sidious wasn't more powerful than Plagueis either. And a 5% increase is completely arbitrary and speculative. It could just as well be a 0.1% increase.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
What feats? To my memory, he has precisely two of note; knocking down the Lehon Temple and killing a bunch of tukata. Both of these are highly circumstantial.

He turned a Drexl into charred meat and it's riders into ash and was stated to be able to incinerate beings in DoE as well. He disintegrated a dozen enemies casually. He moved fast enough appear to wield a dozen sabers at once to Zannah and was even faster in DoE. He overpowered Nadd's sorcery as of PoD. He overpowered Andeddu's holocron (and thus, I believe, Andeddu's spirit itself). He was able to contain life-wiping power in the Force Storm ritual. He was said to be mind-bogglingly powerful to Cognus, who'd just witnessed the Sith Lord who destroyed Ambria in a vision. He smashed a 30 meter tall blast door with a casual expression of power.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Your continual, unprovoked insulting and sniping of me with rather childish and uninteresting arguments isn't worth responding to anymore. Come back to me if you grow up and develop some decent respect.

Honestly, no one should respect your views on Bane. Calling anyone childish in regards to the topic is wildly hypocritical of you.

Originally posted by Nephthys
This is ridiculous, and blatantly untrue.

Yeah, it's not like it's a canon statement, or anything.



She wasn't as skilled of a lightsaber duelist, but she beats him in combat and then wins the telepathy battle against him. She also isn't at her prime yet, so she likely grows more powerful afterwards. Peak Zannah is canonically more powerful than Bane. I even gave you a hype in encyclopedic mediums.



Canonically wrong, and also an irrelevant distinction, since we're most interested in Bane's combat ability, so whether successors are superior in raw power or a mastery in some aspect of the Force, the aggregate affect is that they're better overall than their masters.



Which is mutually exclusive from being canonically stronger...how?



They were roughly equals to Plagueis's death, at which point Sidious gets a power boost, and then grows in power for like 36 years + his reincarnation. I'd say he's pretty substantially stronger. The question of whether he's solidly more powerful at the time of Plagueis's death is irrelevant.



The percentages themselves don't give us a particularly good idea beyond maybe scaling from the 20% Vader/Sidious gap; it's better to put it in the terms that the gap has to be significant enough that the apprentice can overtake the master in combat in the proportion of cases in which a direct confrontation occurs, and seeing as how this is sort of Bane's ideal for how the transition occurs, we can say that this probably happens in a non-trivial percentage of cases.

So imagine starting with Qui Gon, bumping him up to, say, TPM Maul, and doing this thirty times. You would probably end up with a Sidious level combatant at the very least.



So? Incinerating beings isn't an elite!!! ability - snapping durasteel probably requires more energy. Qui Gon obviously can't compete in this arena because it's not exactly in his character to incinerate beings, but he can turn invisible and accelerate at hundreds of g's on a whim, which is more impressive than turning fodder into ash, quite frankly.



These kinds of speed feats are ubiquitous and pretty useless. Mace and Sidious were fighting faster than the eye could follow to Anakin according to the RotS novelization.



Feats for spirit Nadd?



I already mentioned this, lol. Andeddu's spirit is presumably weaker than his flesh incarnation (as it always is), and his flesh incarnation isn't even that powerful.



He doesn't generate the energy himself, so it's difficult to figure out how impressive this is supposed to be.



OK buddy.



Eclipsed by padawan Anakin in OCW, who is redirecting starships, lel.



I think you've performed above average by your standards. Granted, you completely missed, and never even acknowledged, the most definitive piece of evidence I had provided to you regarding my central point, and then ignored my argument as to why these kinds of metrics are more valuable than feats, but doing otherwise would require mastery of some complex concepts. For now, your sentences were coherent, and that's good.



Making joke threads isn't the same thing as actively refusing to engage in debate and instead just sniping insults as "DarthBoy" has repeatedly done, but this concept of mutual exclusivity has been butchered in this post already, so I wouldn't expect otherwise of you.

Eliminist, Dooku couldn't incinerate people with his lightning, so why is is not an "elite" tier ability? And irrespective of whether they are "fodder", the effect of ones force powers on non-Force sensitives is a good reference point by which to compare Force users, and in that respect Bane stacks up well.

Aw shucks, I forgot about our Kyp Durron debate.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Eliminist, Dooku couldn't incinerate people with his lightning,

Is this actually stated?



Because "elite" tier lightning users have taken out AT-ATs, repowered massive engines (Starkiller), one-shotted fifty stormtroopers, and lighted up planetary surfaces (Sidious). It takes about3 gigajoules to vaporize a human, which is presumably a lot less than what it takes to knock an AT-AT out of commission, seeing as how 3 gigajoules is less than the firepower of the laser cannons on the Slave 1. Vaporizing people typically isn't enough to put you on that tier alone:

2h8HAT4tLyU

Vader walks through this like it's nothing, lawl.



Except for when he struggles with mooks that other characters can annihilate with ease.

I mean, I could easily pick out passages where Galen Marek one-shots like a hundred stormtroopers with TK while Bane struggles to defeat far less, but these feat wars are typically incredibly noisy anyway. I think the powerscaling works better.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Is this actually stated?Does it need to be? Dooku's lightning fails ever to incinerate it's targets on contact, that's an observable fact.Fair, but my intentions weren't to put Bane in the league of those invidiuals; and I highly doubt Dooku's lightning packs the firepower of the Slave 1, or it would be leaving holes in people's bodies and smash stone to bits. Which have always been circumstantial... how is that an accurate way of assessing his power?Considering I accept Starkiller is way above Bane in power, it would indeed be a waste of your time.

I mean we are trying to prove Bane is stronger than Qui-Gon here.

To refer you to my original point:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=15726400#post15726400

Bane's lightning doesn't always disintegrate people either though, and sometimes random Jedi padawans can dodge it (I don't see even Anakin dodging Dooku's lightning, lol), so saying "Dooku's doesn't!" isn't exactly definitive. Force attacks do not always produce environmental effects proportional to how "powerful" you'd expect them to be. I mean, hey, I've seen Dooku lift massive stone orbalisks, and Mace Windu Force push an AT-TE off a cliff; surely that takes a lot more force than which is needed to crush someone's spine! Yet we don't see Bane's TK pulverizing people like an AT-TE moving push would, so does that make him weak or something? It's difficult to judge feats this way.

Quite honestly, making Yoda absorb and redirect his lightning "far from easily" (AotC novelization) is probably a lot more impressive than disintegrating humans, seeing as how TFUII Vader can walk through an infinitely more energetic attack from Starkiller without needing to do anything but turn his head a little, and Yoda >.

Or how about when a random, no-name "shadow assassin" can withstand Bane's Force wave, but Dooku can ragdoll Obi Wan?

Feats war aside, I think the powerscaling from the Rule of Two is a more consistent framework than the random whims of authors.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Bane's lightning doesn't always disintegrate people either though, and sometimes random Jedi padawans can dodge it (I don't see even Anakin dodging Dooku's lightning, lol), so saying "Dooku's doesn't!" isn't exactly definitive.In DoE?I get that, but the fact remains that Bane can ash people with his Force lighting, so the burden of proof would be on you to prove those in excess of Qui-Gon Jinn can do the same.

As for those lifting and pushing showings however, those were sustained exertions, we are talking a TK shockwave, a rapid, instantaneous exertion, that was sufficient to pulp organs and smash bones.Probably, but there are conflicting sources on that, others saying he turned away his powers with ease. And that trailer isn't canon. Dooku ragdolling Obi-Wan suggests a "no-name shadow assassin" would be killed by his Force waves? Dooku can't even kill non-Force sensitives with his Force waves.

EDIT: Let me amend that, Windu could smash apart droids with his Force pushes so if we assume a level of parity its possible he could, however, it still seems rather arbitrary to claim that Dooku can kill Force sensitives with a push.Well my point is that your framework is inconsistent with Bane's feats. Now you could argue therefore Bane's showings are inaccurate, but then it becomes rather arbitrary as to how we gauge Bane's power at all, let's not pretend your calculation is accurate in this regard.

Alternatively though, we could just accept Bane is as powerful as his feats imply, and increase the standing of Palpatine accordingly.

Obviously Bane > Qui-Gon, but I don't know why it's hard to accept that successive Banite Sith Lords were simply more powerful than their predecessors. That's a fact that's been relayed through multiple sources, and you can't even twist it into "political power" or any of that rubbish.

Well really this argument seems to be entirely founded on the assumption that their individuals in the PT era like Maul and Dooku are actually anywhere near Darth Sidious in Force power, and that therefore for Bane to be so beneath him he must be an utter mook.

However realistically most people in the PT era are nothing comparatively to Sheev.

I personally have Bane around Dooku level. Which by this logic would force me to assume that Sidious is at least 4 times as powerful as Dooku. However, that seems perfectly reasonable to me, heck I'm inclined to say that Sidious is 5 or even 6 times more powerful than Dooku, maybe more. (He's certainly infinitely greater in power to the likes of Jinn.)

Because really, Dooku has done absolutely nothing that compares to Palpatine, whereas Palpatine's feats outstrip every one of Dooku's showings tenfold.

Sidious could have, with a thought, cracked the foundations of the Imperial Palace, the largest building in Coruscant; he's erased memories from the minds of thousands, if not millions of people; he's made his dark presence felt throughout the entire galaxy; he's considerably more powerful than an individual who can lift and AT-AT, weighing thousands of tonnes; and an individual who altered the path of a falling Star Destroyer, weighing hundreds of thousands and tonnes, is "no match" for him; he's dominated the likes of Marek, Anakin and Maul with TK; he's telepathically forced Vader to bend the knee from light years away and read his surface thoughts with ease; he's even survived a point blank Force repulse, induced by Marek channelling more Force energy than he ever had, without so much as singed robe to show for it.

What does Dooku have that compares to this? How large a building could he level, a few blocks maybe? That's infinitely beneath a building that spans kilometres in height and width. How many minds could he erase the memories of at once, 5, 500? Either would be a percentile in comparison to Palpatine. What's the heaviest amount he's lifted, a hundred or so tonnes of obelisks? A mere fraction of what Vader and Marek have lifted that Sidious far exceeds. Who's the most powerful person he's dominated, Kenobi? He's nothing compared to Marek. Who's the strongest person he's TP'ed? Again Kenobi it seems, with difficulty, and only when he when in a significantly hampered state. As if he could even consider invading Vader's mind, let alone from lightyears away. Instead almost everyone Sidious has easily overpowered could feasibly defeat Dooku outright.

Therefore, is it so unreasonable assume, that considering how vastly Sidious outstrips Dooku in showings, that in person he could simply snap his neck? He certainly had no trouble choking him over hologram, which is itself an exceedingly impressive display of dominance.

The only argument against this is Dooku's lightsaber feats, namely his ability to hold out against Yoda. However, I find it difficult to establish a quantifiable correlation between one's ability to contend with some in sabers and contend with them in the Force (especially when in the case of Dooku, he was deflecting rather than meeting Yoda's power) when we have featless Force users, like Siolo'urmanka, defeating Maul in combat, and even non-Force sensitives like Pre Viszla contending with the likes of Ahsoka, Kenobi and again Maul; himself going on to perform admirably against Darth Sidious.

I'm inclined to believe that skill plays a much more significant factor than Force augmentation, itself, always going to be somewhat leveled by shared physical limitations.

Sorry, but Anoon Bondara didn't defeat Maul in combat, not even close. He was completely outclassed and had to suicide. Bondara's superior in Qui-Gon Jinn was also no match for Maul.

When has Maul ever "performed admirably" against Sidious?

My bad, I meant that other guy, that forced Maul to make a saberstaff, I forget his name.

EDIT: Siolo'urmanka

And in The Lawless? He did pretty well all things considered.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
My bad, I meant that other guy, that forced Maul to make a saberstaff, I forget his name.

EDIT: Siolo'urmanka

He's an unknown, though. Can't say anything about his skill or Force augmentation.



Against a Sidious who was holding back profusely and with the aid of Savage, maybe - even then, I wouldn't call it "admirably", only decently. The only time there was even a contest was after Savage's death, when Maul was obviously fueled by immense rage.

In the novelized version of the fight, the moment Sidious got serious, Maul couldn't even keep up anymore. Hardly admirable.

Originally posted by SunRazer
He's an unknown, though. Can't say anything about his skill or Force augmentation.His skill was noted to be profound, and if his Force power was anything close to Maul (who Sidious believed could be his legit successor) it would have garnered far more attention imo.I'm talking about his final bout, and funnily enough, Maul's immense rage is where he gets his powers from.

In the novel, yes, on-screen he lands a kick on him and is contending toe-to-toe for an excess of 20 seconds. How is that not admirable? You realise he's the most powerful Sith ever and one of the great duelists ever to boot?

Originally posted by Nephthys
Honestly, no one should respect your views on Bane. Calling anyone childish in regards to the topic is wildly hypocritical of you.

I think there's more to respect about his opinions on Bane than yours, honestly.

This compliment feels strangely backhanded. mmm

Originally posted by Beniboybling
His skill was noted to be profound, and if his Force power was anything close to Maul (who Sidious believed could be his legit successor) it would have garnered far more attention imo.

Everyone and their grandmother's skill is noted to be profound - including Anoon Bondara, who lost handily to Maul.



I know you are, and funnily enough, Maul has never entered this state of rage before - especially in scenarios where it would've been very, very welcome.



It was actually just over fifteen seconds in terms of video length, but seeing as these guys are superhumanly fast and we shouldn't be perceiving their movements at all, I'm inclined to say their fight was massively slowed down for us to see. So in reality, it would've hardly been a few seconds.

Again, Sidious didn't seem to be putting in enough stick (until the saber lock, at least), and once again, Maul was performing at an unnaturally high level.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Well really this argument seems to be entirely founded on the assumption that their individuals in the PT era like Maul and Dooku are actually anywhere near Darth Sidious in Force power, and that therefore for Bane to be so beneath him he must be an utter mook.

However realistically most people in the PT era are nothing comparatively to Sheev.


mmm That's an interesting proposition. I think the only issue with it is, as you pointed out, Dooku's performance against Yoda. The AotC novelization does state that Yoda absorbs his second burst of lightning "far from easily", although tbh it might be the fact that Yoda hadn't really fought anyone of note for however many decades/centuries, lol.

It seems clear though, given Dark Rendevous's confirmation that Yoda doesn't want to kill Dooku, that Yoda is hardly going 100% in that fight.

So I could buy putting Bane on Dooku's level if it means making Sidious and Yoda gods, which would definitely help with anti-TOR wank. I don't think it's certain, though. I was in the process of typing up a few of Dooku and Qui Gon's feats that I could then cross-compare with Bane's to show superiority the other way, like Qui-Gon's Force speed and Dooku's illusions, and I have no idea how we parse whether Bane vaporizing people while Dooku doesn't with lightning beats Dooku being able to ragdoll Obi Wan while Bane can't ragdoll shadow assassins. At this point though, it becomes a mess.

F*ck, do I sh*t on Bane, or Valkorion? I have no idea.

Originally posted by SunRazer
Everyone and their grandmother's skill is noted to be profound - including Anoon Bondara, who lost handily to Maul.Right, what's your point? Hes clearly skilled enough to kill Maul.Your still assuming this "special state" exists.Well that would be the case of all lightsaber fights, so it remains relative.Perhaps? It seems unreasonable Sidious would allow him to land a kick however Sidious needn't exert himself to beat him, and that's just your personal inference, not fact.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
mmm That's an interesting proposition. I think the only issue with it is, as you pointed out, Dooku's performance against Yoda. The AotC novelization does state that Yoda absorbs his second burst of lightning "far from easily", although tbh it might be the fact that Yoda hadn't really fought anyone of note for however many decades/centuries, lol.

It seems clear though, given Dark Rendevous's confirmation that Yoda doesn't want to kill Dooku, that Yoda is hardly going 100% in that fight.

So I could buy putting Bane on Dooku's level if it means making Sidious and Yoda gods, which would definitely help with anti-TOR wank. I don't think it's certain, though. I was in the process of typing up a few of Dooku and Qui Gon's feats that I could then cross-compare with Bane's to show superiority the other way, like Qui-Gon's Force speed and Dooku's illusions, and I have no idea how we parse whether Bane vaporizing people while Dooku doesn't with lightning beats Dooku being able to ragdoll Obi Wan while Bane can't ragdoll shadow assassins. At this point though, it becomes a mess.

F*ck, do I sh*t on Bane, or Valkorion? I have no idea. Well as I said there are conflicting sources in that regard, i.e:

On Geonosis, Yoda's easy parrying and, indeed, handling of the Sith lightning Dooku hurled at him had come as a surprise.

--Labyrinth of Evil

Regardless when you cross reference this with Yoda's "far from easily" turning away a bunch of rocks, it can easily be attributed to his age and lack of practice.

And of course Bane can ragdoll shadow assassins, he just can't straight up kill them with Force pushes, but most Force users can't do that.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Right, what's your point? Hes clearly skilled enough to kill Maul.

My point is that because he's an unknown, he's not a strong pivot for your argument that skill > Force power. And I'm inclined to say they're equally relevant - the circumstances can favor one or the other.



Well, seeing as it aligns with Filoni's take on the fight, I think it leans closer towards "fact" than "baseless assumption" as you're insinuating. A lot closer.



I know, I'm just correcting you.



It's unreasonable for the guy who likes to give people the illusion of them having a chance before utterly destroying them? Gillard more or less says the same when describing Sidious' skill and fighting style in The Making of Revenge of the Sith. This is Sidious we're talking about. He's sadistic and likes to make people think that they're capable of winning before he ruins their day completely - and this isn't the first time he's done it to Maul either. In fact, that's precisely what happened the last time they fought.

Or you could say the kick was the reason Sidious began to put some more stick in. After all, the only portion of the saber duel that comes after the kick is the saber lock, where Sidious is clearly putting in effort.

However you want to slice it, Maul landing the kick has the same value as Savage landing his bullrush - nothing.



Not fact? It's certainly supported by the facts, and you'd have to be mind-numbingly stupid to think Maul could perform as well as he could by himself in that last portion when we have Filoni repeatedly hinting that Sidious was holding back against Maul and outright stating that Maul and Savage together couldn't even touch Sheev and Maul not being anywhere near Sheev.

Take the novelized version of the fight, and we get a good glimpse at how Maul would fare against Sidious when the latter was really going all-out. Maul gets disarmed - pretty much instantly. I mean, you can call it admirable, but then you get impressed very, very easily...

Originally posted by SunRazer
My point is that because he's an unknown, he's not a strong pivot for your argument that skill > Force power. And I'm inclined to say they're equally relevant - the circumstances can favor one or the other.Right, and I'm saying it's unreasonable to assume he rivals Maul in power.

Regardless, it's one of several examples. And I'm sure there are more besides that.Filoni states Maul was amped by his rage?Honestly I don't know if I even by it, when many confrontations in SW are time sensitive, and relative to their surroundings.Fair enough. However even Sidious holding back is a force to be reckoned with, and Maul was meeting him head on, there remains a massive disparity between that and say, contending with Pre Viszla. Which is the point I am trying to make.What facts?

What you've proposed is a non sequitur, Sidious hold back doesn't prove Maul was extraordinarily empowered by his rage.

@Beni: I still think it's a little difficult to buy that the gap between Dooku and Sidious can fit thirty successive, noticeable power creeps, especially given the Plagueis novel's implication that apprentices gained a power-up when they killed their masters. Like, yeah, sure, Yoda was clearly better than Dooku, but I never got the impression that he could've literally thrown him into orbit with a finger flick. I dunno, maybe it's just a subjective bias of mine. You point out that Sidious's feats outstrip his by orders of magnitude, yes, but that doesn't translate into being able to defeat him 1 vs. 1 by a proportional factor - if characters who were similar in power only had similar scaled feats, it would be impossible to distinguish them given the imprecision of feats calculations - and so it happens to be that Luke's feats noticeably outstrip Vader's, but he isn't literally millions of times more powerful.

BTW, your quote doesn't really contradict the AotC "far from easily" one; "easy" doesn't necessarily modify "handling".

And Bane apparently can't ragdoll shadow assassins, or at least the more powerful out of a group of eight, because he...well...doesn't. And we know from PoD that shadow assassins are "no match for Jedi", let alone Obi Wan. I could buy that his non-powerscaled feats are better than Qui Gon's, but this probably comes more from Jinn not using Force lightning or being the type to want to disintegrate people.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Right, and I'm saying it's unreasonable to assume he rivals Maul in power.

Fair enough.



I didn't say that. I meant Maul being enraged is the only way he can perform to that degree, based on Filoni's comparison of the two, which isn't kind to Maul.



That's just SW inconsistency. Maul's moved a lot faster than human perceptions before. In reality, the likes of Vizsla should be struggling to react to Maul at all.



The point was that Maul and Savage together couldn't even match a Sidious holding back. Take Sidious at full strength and effort, and how on earth is Maul supposed to "do admirably" by himself without being the beneficiary of an immense rage amp?



The fact that Maul is nowhere near Sidious?



It's not non sequitur at all - you're just failing to connect the dots. If Sidious, while holding back, is able to beat Savage and Maul together, what makes you think Maul on his own would be able to "do admirably" against Sidious, especially if the latter was going all-out? He'd require a substantial amp to do so. This is reinforced in the novel, where Sidious going all-out results in Maul being disarmed instantly. Not much of an admirable fight there.

The master supplanting the apprentice, doesn't mean that the apprentice kills through sheer power, it can be sneaky and deceptive

up

Nah, downscaling Bane is dumb, imo.

I have Bane at around Savage level. A bit below Maul and less skilled.

He's 268 435 456 x less powerful than Tenebrous.

When did Palpatine's lightning lit up a planet's surface? You are talking about Sidious contacting Dooku on Vjun via hologram? If so, then Sidious didn't light up the planet's surface, it was just a poetical depiction of Palpatine's character. Not to mention that his Force lightning(blasted Kadir and some stormtroopers: but it didn't ash or charred husk'd them)

He only achieved that feat on Kalakar Six(a dark side nexus) and on Byss when he disintegrated those stormtroopers)

He even blasted Windu with all of his power, and it couldn't ash or charred husk him.

Originally posted by ILS
Let's just rank him below Ezra and be done with it.

Still too good, let's put him below Imai Gun Dai and call it a day

Is Ima Gun Di really below Ezra?

Ezra has demonstrated vastly greater power, so yes, he is.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
I think that if you put him at Qui-Gon's level, you might get enough of a gap between Jinn and Sidious for thirty generations of power creeping.

Stupid stuff like this is why Banite scaling isn't taken seriously by everyone.

^ there's a big difference between Banite scaling and downscaling. The former is a fact in the lore, regurgitated multiple times. The latter is pure lowballing. Don't get them mixed up.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Stupid stuff like this is why Banite scaling isn't taken seriously by everyone.

Yeah, Bane is prob closer to Darth Revan.

If u don't take banite scaling seriously, that just comes down to stubbornness.

How can you take it seriously?

I don't suppose, Mace/Yoda/etc got their own banite scaling power ups as well.
Honestly if Sidious were as powerful, as the Banite scalers think, he would rag doll, Yoda and Mace together.

Do you believe in the Ban-ite scaling or not?

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
Do you believe in the Ban-ite scaling or not?

I believe they grew stronger, but not as ridiculously as some people think.
It took them nearly a millennium to finally pass Yoda in power, Yoda who had no RoT, power scaling/building behind him. And if you want to make age=more time for knowledge=higher power, as to why Yoda is so powerful in proportion to the vast majority of the Banite Sith, you would then have to apply Vitiate/Revan etc, to the same logic.

The whole thing is blown out of proportion.

Yoda is a statistical anomaly. No Jedi or Sith surpass him for close to one thousand years, and none had for 25,000 years prior.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Yoda is a statistical anomaly. No Jedi or Sith surpass him for close to one thousand years, and none had for 25,000 years prior.
I disagree.

IMO

Revan/Exar Kun came very close, and Valkorian surpassed him.

Mace was within his league as well tbh.

Your logic is off though: there is clear evidence that Yoda doesn't get surpassed until the end of the Banite line, while the whole point of Banite scaling in the context that you're responding to is to scale the Banite Sith against other characters, so you can't circularly declare that Revan and Vitiate must also be near Yoda. Banite Scaling helps Yoda too.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Your logic is off though: there is clear evidence that Yoda doesn't get surpassed until the end of the Banite line, while the whole point of Banite scaling in the context that you're responding to is to scale the Banite Sith against other characters, so you can't circularly declare that Revan and Vitiate must also be near Yoda. Banite Scaling helps Yoda too.

Sorry? there evidence suggesting otherwise as well.
Yoda/Mace they all come close to Sidious, without Benefiting from some RoT type power up. It suggests, the RoT power up, is not as large, as one would claim.
You guys exaggerate it to be dozens of times more powerful. Which is illogical, when Anakin technically was only twice the potential of Sidious, which is tiny to what the growth of the RoT is, it would suggest Sidious's potential successors, apprentice, would be Anakin level in growth. Which is retarded, within context of the SW universe.

Originally posted by Haschwalth
Sorry? there evidence suggesting otherwise as well.
Yoda/Mace they all come close to Sidious, without Benefiting from some RoT type power up. It suggests, the RoT power up, is not as large, as one would claim.

Or it suggests that Yoda and Mace were extremely powerful in their own rights, given they're stated to be the two most powerful Jedi in history to that point.



The numeral ratio is kind of irrelevant because we don't know what "twice as powerful" means or how Force power scales to measurable ability, etc. It could very well be that a 1% difference by this off-the-cusp scale Lucas gave in an interview means oneshot territory (or that Lucas wasn't using the numbers literally).

What matters more is the fact that the Banite Sith are on record having overthrown their masters consistently in direct combat, and that we already know that Tenebrous -> Plagueis -> Sidious alone is a massive power chain and this is only the last three Banite Sith. If the power growth across generations were tiny, then the apprentice would not have consistently won.



Well the Banite Line of succession ends with Sidious but if he had succeeded his apprentice would have been a full potential Anakin, sooo...

Originally posted by Haschwalth
Honestly if Sidious were as powerful, as the Banite scalers think, he would rag doll, Yoda and Mace together.
Citation needed.

He never claimed what he was saying was factual.

"substantiation needed" would have been more accurate but citation needed is more fun to say.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Or it suggests that Yoda and Mace were extremely powerful in their own rights, given they're stated to be the two most powerful Jedi in history to that point.

The numeral ratio is kind of irrelevant because we don't know what "twice as powerful" means or how Force power scales to measurable ability, etc. It could very well be that a 1% difference by this off-the-cusp scale Lucas gave in an interview means oneshot territory (or that Lucas wasn't using the numbers literally).

What matters more is the fact that the Banite Sith are on record having overthrown their masters consistently in direct combat, and that we already know that Tenebrous -> Plagueis -> Sidious alone is a massive power chain and this is only the last three Banite Sith. If the power growth across generations were tiny, then the apprentice would not have consistently won.

Well the Banite Line of succession ends with Sidious but if he had succeeded his apprentice would have been a full potential Anakin, sooo...
1.False
2.Not enough, information to suggest what sizable gap, between each master it's unquantifiable. Also taking into account, they trained for the sole purpose of overthrowing/outgrowing their master. The gap in strength shouldn't matter too much. All we know is that they did. It's not enough to suggest it's more than 1-2% increase.
3.well the force didn't create Anakin to be a Sith, he was created in response, Maul technically would of been the next in line, Anakin is a outlier.

Originally posted by Haschwalth
1.False

It's outright stated, lol. And you can't complain that the fact pile could be wrong because your whole point is that Banite scaling is implausible, not that it isn't independently verified to 100% certainty.



So you're telling me that the apprentice is only slightly more powerful than the master but just happens to win the fight consistently? The most parsimonious answer is that the apprentice is more powerful:

- sourcebooks say they get more powerful
- sources like Plagueis say they grow "powerful enough" to challenge their masters
- they challenge their masters and happen to win
- the data points we have suggest a growth, e.g. Sidious is far above Plagueis

You're contorting mental gymnastics if you don't acknowledge that the growth over the course of thirty generations would be immense.



Ok...? I don't see your point here.

Originally posted by The Ellimist

What matters more is the fact that the Banite Sith are on record having overthrown their masters consistently in direct combat

Hego kills nome



Sheev kills hego.

Originally posted by Haschwalth
Sorry? there evidence suggesting otherwise as well.

The burden of proof is on you to prove this reverse scaling you're attempting with Yoda means something.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
So you're telling me that the apprentice is only slightly more powerful than the master but just happens to win the fight consistently?

You mean the fight they spend their entire apprenticeship preparing for? No, they don't just 'happen' to win that fight you're right.

Hey, hey. Nowhere does it say that you have to face your master in combat to take their title. Malak did it by firing at Darth Revan's ship. It's more about seizing the chance to eliminate your master once you think you've learned what is needed rather than facing them in combat. Also, people tend to take the word 'power' as having just one meaning(Force strength) In the context of Rule of Two, the word 'power' is represented by 'knowledge'.
The idea that students get a power boost from their dead master is stupid. Why would this happen only to the Banite Sith? If this is to be taken as fact: then, this happens to every Sith Master-Apprentice relation.

Not to mention that a Sith Master doesn't choose their apprentice/s based on their Force strength alone. A master also takes in account their determination, their gift for certain esoteric aspects of the Force, their capacity to adapt on the battlefield, their skills in negotiation, the rate at which the apprentice can learn.
On top of that, when it comes about the Banite Sith, they were never trained/meant to be 'grunts'(to be powerful/more powerful in the Force to go on the battlefield to fight wars against the Republic and the Jedi, that was a concept met in the ancient Sith philosophy)
Darth Bane's order focused on cunning, manipulation, knowledge, secrecy, etc
Bane's order didn't take the galaxy due to Force strength, it took it based on secrecy, cunning, etc
Bane understood that the galaxy cannot be taken by 'Force', it can only be taken by cunning. That's why he didn't challenge the Brotherhood of Darkness in combat. He knew he'd die(even if he is 'teh' Sith'ari)