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

With the new debating format Ant has made.
is it possible for us to utilize Tulak Hord in a debate if not gauge his power and where it stands against the many of the era's Best?

Where does his skill measure?

How powerful is he in the force?

And who can or cant he defeat?

Since I'm not utilizing Ant's system I don't care.

As far as I'm concerned youth Tulak has always been usable for debate.

Youth Tulak?

Pretty sure he meant "your."

I dont recall giving him a power or skill that I can draw on.
But for now I think his skills are at Dooku - Mace tier.
Force powers should be at Exar kuns/Vaders (Suit)

With how legendary he is, I guess its best to place him there imho.

I was wondering about something. Should Tulak be above Naga Sadow? Ik most would say yes but Sadow being a product of the "Golden age" should have more going for him.

Ragnos and Kun are pretty much factually confirmed to be more powerful than their predecessors, including Hord.

Hord's skills haven't justified being on Mace/Dooku's level, tbh.

Tulak overall is (probably solidly) above Dooku.

Based on what? I'm curious.

Based on how he's infinitely superior to the likes of Meetra, Traya, and anyone of the era in terms of lightsaber combat, and more specifically, being a greater swordsman than Sadow, Pall, Ragnos, etc. There's also the fact that all of his implied feats are pretty monstrous, (the Endar Spire feat, his Jedi army solo'ing feat, etc) along with the fact that he consumed the energies of those he killed. He just comes off as somebody far more powerful than the likes of, say, Nyriss, who I think isn't that far off from Dooku.

Not sure I really take things like KotoR II's claim of that anymore. The Ancients are suggested to be a lot more powerful there then they are anywhere else.

The Endar Spire feat is an unknown and doesn't justify being solidly above Dooku. He didn't solo a Jedi army.

Originally posted by The Merchant
I was wondering about something. Should Tulak be above Naga Sadow? Ik most would say yes but Sadow being a product of the "Golden age" should have more going for him. What the hell kind of logic is that? The "Golden Age" was an era of peace that the Sith contently spent on the worlds they already owned (instead of going out and conquering).

They never even went beyond Sith space (which is actually what Ludo and Naga were arguing about), but, apparently, "HEZ FROM TEH GOLDIN AEG ERA, SO HE MUSST B TEH BEST!"

Endar spire - absurdly vague
Army solo'ing - vague and similar to feats by Meetra
Absorbing Jedi energy - no way to tell where this puts him
Being better than Meetra and Traya - who cares?

We know that he's below Ragnos and Kun, who are below Vitiate, who is below Plagueis. Other than that it's tough to say.

The Golden Age was an era for the Sith Empire where since they were unified had the time and resources to study and advance their Dark Side knowledge, which is why even modern Sith tend to look at that era to further their techniques. Sadow and Kressh being contenders for Dark Lords of that era should speak well of their power and knowledge, heck Kressh made a gauntlet that can protect one from turbolaser strikes for his son. His own stuff should be much more potent.