Is Plagueis overrated?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



darthbane77
Imo he is, but I wanna know what others think as well.

The Ellimist
No, the recent push to place him over Vitiate is well deserved.

Ursumeles
No, lol.
Things like Revan/Caedus/Kun > Plaggy are legit cancer.

Azronger
If you think he is, then make your case as to why he is.

darthbane77
Originally posted by Azronger
If you think he is, then make your case as to why he is. I'm just asking who does and doesn't agree, I'm not interested in debating it at the moment.

darthbane77
Originally posted by Ursumeles
No, lol.
Things like Revan/Caedus/Kun > Plaggy are legit cancer. I disagree, but to each his own.

Ursumeles
Say me how the guy who is close to RotS Sidious is inferior to the guy, who get ragdolled by an non-gesturing Luke.

cs_zoltan
The guy who made Revan vs Sidious thread and declared Revan the winner doesn't get to say Plagueis is overrated.

darthbane77
Originally posted by cs_zoltan
The guy who made Revan vs Sidious thread and declared Revan the winner doesn't get to say Plagueis is overrated. That was a long time ago, I don't hold that opinion anymore. Nice attempt at an insult though.

darthbane77
Originally posted by Ursumeles
Say me how the guy who is close to RotS Sidious is inferior to the guy, who get ragdolled by an non-gesturing Luke. Because Plagueis isn't close to ROTS Sidous? He's maybe a little more powerful than TPM Sidious. maybe equal to AOTC Sidious.

darthbane77
My reason for thinking Plagueis is kind of overrated is that people place him above people like Caedus, Revan (among others) when there really isn't much proof. Yes Plagueis has some very impressive combat feats and Force power, but for the most part it's all speculative. He has no feats or displays of power that warrant the incredibly high placement he receives. That's not to say he isn't among the best, because we know based on accolades that he is, there just isn't enough on him to warrant placement above somebody like Caedus.

cs_zoltan
Caedus is debunked.

darthbane77
Originally posted by cs_zoltan
Caedus is debunked. How exactly? This should be good.

Fated Xtasy
Yes he is

Emperordmb
Nah he isn't lol

darthbane77
Woo, somebody that agrees with me. Haha

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by The Ellimist
No, the recent push to place him over Vitiate is well deserved.
Good luck with that.

Beniboybling
Dry those tears.

The Ellimist
It already succeeded lmao

Fated Xtasy
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Nah he isn't lol

He isn't that impressive tbh

Azronger
Originally posted by darthbane77
My reason for thinking Plagueis is kind of overrated is that people place him above people like Caedus, Revan (among others) when there really isn't much proof. Yes Plagueis has some very impressive combat feats and Force power, but for the most part it's all speculative. He has no feats or displays of power that warrant the incredibly high placement he receives. That's not to say he isn't among the best, because we know based on accolades that he is, there just isn't enough on him to warrant placement above somebody like Caedus.

A feats-only approach will get you nowhere.

darthbane77
Originally posted by Azronger
A feats-only approach will get you nowhere. I don't go solely by feats, but nor can I hold Plagueis incredibly high solely on accolades when he has a lack of feats. None of his feats and very few of his accolades justify any placement close to where most of KMC holds him, in my opinion.

MythLord
Hego's accolades and holistic portrayal has him being legitimately close to RotS Sheev in terms of hierarchy... That's pretty up there(above both Jacen and Revan).

darthbane77
Originally posted by MythLord
Hego's accolades and holistic portrayal has him being legitimately close to RotS Sheev in terms of hierarchy... That's pretty up there(above both Jacen and Revan). I think he's closer to AOTC Sidious than he is to ROTS Sidious. I guess that's just up to individual interpretation (how impressive we think feats and accolades are compared to those of others.)

Azronger
What the hell does a lack of feats have to do with accolades? If it's stated he's the most powerful Sith Lord to have ever lived, then he is. Saying he isn't because of lack of feats is an argument from ignorance.

Why it's still being debated is because not everyone thinks publishers' blurbs are canon.

Azronger
Originally posted by MythLord
Hego's accolades and holistic portrayal has him being legitimately close to RotS Sheev in terms of hierarchy... That's pretty up there(above both Jacen and Revan).

What "holistic portrayal" has him close to RotS Sidious?

Ziggystardust
Being his master would count. ^

darthbane77
Originally posted by Azronger
What the hell does a lack of feats have to do with accolades? If it's stated he's the most powerful Sith Lord to have ever lived, then he is. Saying he isn't because of lack of feats is an argument from ignorance.

Why it's still being debated is because not everyone thinks publishers' blurbs are canon. That's what I think actually. I don't think publisher blurbs should be considered.

MythLord
Originally posted by Azronger
What "holistic portrayal" has him close to RotS Sidious?

Hego rivals TPM Sheev, and while I do note Palpatine's power growth would've been noticeable, I don't think it would've blown Plagueis out of the water... not yet, anyways.

So he should still be close enough to give him grief.

The Ellimist
Even if you just dismiss the blurb for no reason, we still know that Palpatine is wary of confronting him head on, that he overcame a lack of natural aptitude in sorcery through sheer power, and that he can unbalance the force itself by meditating.

darthbane77
Originally posted by Ziggystardust
Being his master would count. ^ That's like saying Ben Kenobi rivals GM Luke because Ben was his master: it makes no sense whatsoever.

UCanShootMyNova
Nope. I think he's rated where he should be.

darthbane77
Originally posted by The Ellimist
Even if you just dismiss the blurb for no reason, we still know that Palpatine is wary of confronting him head on, that he overcame a lack of natural aptitude in sorcery through sheer power, and that he can unbalance the force itself by meditating. As of TPM anyway, ROTS Sidious wouldn't have been AS cautious about facing Plagueis as TPM Sidious would have been. I'm not dismissing it for no reason, I'm dismissing it because he has nothing in the way of feats or other accolades to support that he's the most poweful Sith to have exited to that point. Vitiate has more impressive feats and more displayed power than Plagueis does.

darthbane77
Originally posted by MythLord
Hego rivals TPM Sheev, and while I do note Palpatine's power growth would've been noticeable, I don't think it would've blown Plagueis out of the water... not yet, anyways.

So he should still be close enough to give him grief. Close enough to give him grief for sure, but that doesn't make him equal to ROTS Sidious. Yoda isn't equal to ROTS Sidious and he gave Sidious grief.

Azronger
Originally posted by Ziggystardust
Being his master would count. ^

Not really.

Azronger
Originally posted by MythLord
Hego rivals TPM Sheev, and while I do note Palpatine's power growth would've been noticeable, I don't think it would've blown Plagueis out of the water... not yet, anyways.

So he should still be close enough to give him grief.

Not if you go by my scaling wink

The Ellimist
Originally posted by darthbane77
As of TPM anyway, ROTS Sidious wouldn't have been AS cautious about facing Plagueis as TPM Sidious would have been. I'm not dismissing it for no reason, I'm dismissing it because he has nothing in the way of feats or other accolades to support that he's the most poweful Sith to have exited to that point. Vitiate has more impressive feats and more displayed power than Plagueis does.

Let's look at his supporting feats and accolades, then:

1. TPM Palpatine's wariness of facing him.
2. Causing Naboo's longest winter just by arriving.
3. Unbalancing the Force itself through sheer meditation.
4. Overcoming a lack of natural sorcery aptitude through sheer power.
5. Scaling from Bane's feats over thirty generations.

This is enough evidence for the blurb statement to make sense - and that's the only burden we have, since these statements are true unless contradicted.

darthbane77
Originally posted by The Ellimist
Let's look at his supporting feats and accolades, then:

1. TPM Palpatine's wariness of facing him.
2. Causing Naboo's longest winter just by arriving.
3. Unbalancing the Force itself through sheer meditation.
4. Overcoming a lack of natural sorcery aptitude through sheer power.
5. Scaling from Bane's feats over thirty generations.

This is enough evidence for the blurb statement to make sense - and that's the only burden we have, since these statements are true unless contradicted. That isn't at all enough to prove that Plagueis is more powerful than somebody like Vitiate. Does it place him on the same level? Sure it does, but it doesn't prove he's superior in any way at all.

Beniboybling
Holding Plagueis to the same standard as Vitiate regarding feats is pretty retarded tbh. Vitiate ruled openly over a Sith Empire, projecting his authority through grand displays of power. Plagueis on the other hand was a member of a clandestine order who made every effort not to display their powers openly, the fact that Plagueis hasn't drained a planet or dominated powerful Jedi doesn't preclude him being more powerful at all.

The Ellimist
Originally posted by darthbane77
That isn't at all enough to prove that Plagueis is more powerful than somebody like Vitiate. Does it place him on the same level? Sure it does, but it doesn't prove he's superior in any way at all.

It doesn't have to because there's already a statement saying that he is. I was humoring your request for supporting evidence - but that doesn't mean I have the burden to prove it when it's clearly articulated that published material is true until contradicted.

Petrus
I think the best way to measure Plagueis's power in relation to other powerful characters in the mythos is by determining how much did Sheev grow in power between TPM and ROTS.

Geistalt
Originally posted by The Ellimist
No, the recent push to place him over Vitiate is well deserved. I don't know about that (since Palpatine's power presumably increased from TPM to RotS, especially after inheriting Plagueis' knowledge and artifacts), but he is on the same tier that everyone generally appears to agree Caedus and Revan are on.

DarthAnt66
His feats are blatantly inferior to Vitiate - he's only better as per the blurb.

Kurk
No not really except for sabers on occasion

darthbane77
Originally posted by The Ellimist
It doesn't have to because there's already a statement saying that he is. I was humoring your request for supporting evidence - but that doesn't mean I have the burden to prove it when it's clearly articulated that published material is true until contradicted. Back cover blurbs<The shit I took today. The blurbs on back covers are meant only to hype the reader up. I could agree to Plagueis being the most powerful Sith of the Banite line up to that point; but not the Sith overall.

darthbane77
Originally posted by DarthAnt66
His feats are blatantly inferior to Vitiate - he's only better as per the blurb. **** your blurb, lol.

Deronn_solo
Depends. On one hand I'm still skeptical on the canocity of novel blurbs, and Plagueis feats is clearly below the likes of Vitiate. On another hand, one must take into the account that Luceno isn't one to really write ridiculous destructive showings of Force power, and he has only one novel to work with.

His unbalancing of the Force, and basically holding the power over life and death is pretty freaking impressive, if hard to quantify combat wise. Regardless, it still shows and high degree of both raw power and mastery that indicates him to be quite the powerhouse.

MythLord
Originally posted by Azronger
Not if you go by my scaling wink

Which is why I don't. smile

The Ellimist
Originally posted by darthbane77
Back cover blurbs<The shit I took today. The blurbs on back covers are meant only to hype the reader up. I could agree to Plagueis being the most powerful Sith of the Banite line up to that point; but not the Sith overall.

This seems to be entirely a matter of your personal preference/opinion. Nowhere in EU policy were publisher's statements discounted; that blurb was still approved of and officially rolled to production by Lucasarts.

Anyway, holistically speaking the novel gives the impression that Plagueis and Sidious were charting into new territories of power - Plagueis knew about Vitiate, and he considered himself to have surpassed everyone before him.

DarthAnt66
It's possible the blurb labels Darth Plagueis as the most powerful due to his mastery over midichlorian manipulation, not because his command of the Force is greater, tbh.

After all, I recall another blurb of the book saying something along the lines of "Darth Plagueis has mastered the ultimate power - the power over life and death," or something like that.

Nephthys
Who cares about a blurb. Its a meaningless piece of evidence.

Ziggystardust
I don't disagree with the idea of Plagueis being the 2nd most powerful sith, but on the subject of summaries / publisher endnotes, I think i should chime in regarding the burden of proof. You make the statement - you bring evidence to for the claim. The burden of proof is on the person who claims not the person who denies. This is a general rule for philosophical debates as well as the legal system.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Nowhere in EU policy were publisher's statements discounted;

Where are they counted?



They are?

Beniboybling
Plagueis states in the novel that if there was any more powerful Sith who preceded him, he knew not of them (fyi, he knew of Vitiate), it's simply a matter of believing him, and the blurb supports his assertion.

Ziggystardust
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Plagueis states there is nothing he can accomplish that any previous Sith has before him. In which case the blurb supports his claim.

I already told you I don't have a problem with the premise in general, but this doesn't get to the bones of the issue - whether the publisher summariy is canon or not. If not, then it's not a case of the blurb supporting Plagueis' in-universe comment , but rather just re-iterating it in the marketing material.

Beniboybling
That was a general remark, not aimed at you.

As for your question though, we know that Darth Plagueis is canon, SW novels in general, are canon. It's this distinction between the inside and outside of the novel that 1. has not anywhere been made 2. needs to be proven, I feel.

EDIT: And if we want the official line from Lucasfilm:And Elm is correct, publisher's summaries aren't precluded here at all, provided they are published by a Lucas company, which they have been.

Nephthys
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Plagueis states in the novel that if there was any more powerful Sith who preceded him, he knew not of them (fyi, he knew of Vitiate), it's simply a matter of believing him, and the blurb supports his assertion.

IIRC Plagueis also disbelieved what he knew about previous beings, believing them to be exaggerated. So his opinion isn't exactly an informed one. His perspective is biased and he's ignorant of the true abilities of his predecessors.

Beniboybling
You remembered wrong, he doesn't say that anywhere. In fact, he appears to take them fairly seriously.

Ziggystardust
Originally posted by Beniboybling
That was a general remark, not aimed at you.

As for your question though, we know that Darth Plagueis is canon, SW novels in general, are canon. It's this distinction between the inside and outside of the novel that

It's very simple. The notes of the publisher aren't meant to be part of the story - i.e. adding to the continuity in any measure and is simply just a interpretation of the events for the purposes of selling and aren't always checked over by the author. And this is the case for pretty much every book that was ever written. You can see several different publisher blurbs from various companies that have published harry potter, not one of them introduce anything new to the continuity. So we're left with Plagueis' opinion on the matter.

Beniboybling
Now your just making assertions lol. The fact that Harry Potter blurbs don't add new shit to continuity doesn't preclude the Darth Plagueis summary being factual, in fact, nothing you've raised precludes its accuracy at all. erm

Ziggystardust
No Beni, I'm giving you a general differentiation between the what's inside the novel written by the author and what's outside the novel written by the publisher. That is what you asked for, after all. As again, the burden of proof is on the claimant - and the statement you gave me does't clear up the issue.

Beniboybling
Originally posted by Ziggystardust
No Beni, I'm giving you a general differentiation between the what's inside the novel written by the author and what's outside the novel written by the publisher. That is what you asked for, after all. As again, the burden of proof is on the claimant - and the statement you gave me does't clear up the issue. I didn't, I know the difference between a blurb and the novel proper, but in terms of what is canon and what is not, no such distinction has been made. On the other hand yes, publisher's summaries qualify for what is considered canon per the statement provided.

Which means the burden of proof is now on you to demonstrate it's exempt regardless. So far you've only offered me assertions.

Nephthys
Del Rey published Plagueis. It isn't a Lucas company.

DarthAnt66
Originally posted by DarthAnt66
It's possible the blurb labels Darth Plagueis as the most powerful due to his mastery over midichlorian manipulation, not because his command of the Force is greater, tbh.

After all, I recall another blurb of the book saying something along the lines of "Darth Plagueis has mastered the ultimate power - the power over life and death," or something like that.

Beniboybling
Originally posted by Nephthys
Del Rey published Plagueis. It isn't a Lucas company. So the novel isn't canon at all then? laughing out loud

Del Rey publish under the LucasBooks imprint, which is stickered on the back and the inside, they count.

The Ellimist
Originally posted by DarthAnt66


It's possible if you take every straw humans have ever manufactured and make a house out of them.

UCanShootMyNova
thumb up

Nephthys
Originally posted by Beniboybling
So the novel isn't canon at all then? laughing out loud

Del Rey publish under the LucasBooks imprint, which is stickered on the back and the inside, they count.

Funny. The point is that the blurb is produced by Del Ray alone without the creative oversight of any Lucas affiliated influence and is therefore not included in that quote you posted.

Beniboybling
And now you're just back to making assertions.

Nephthys
Actually I'm basing this off of what an actual SW author said about the blurbs of his actual SW books that he'd actually written.

About how they're bs and shouldn't be taken seriously.

Ziggystardust
The main point here is that those who are skeptical about how seriously we should take Publisher summaries have plenty of reasons to be. Those in favour, seem to just think that they shouldn't be scrutinised and that they're cannon, just because.

Beniboybling
Originally posted by Nephthys
Actually I'm basing this off of what an actual SW author said about the blurbs of his actual SW books that he'd actually written.

About how they're bs and shouldn't be taken seriously. Oh please, the fact they didn't ask Drew about it means jack shit. He is not a Lucas company and the less advice they go to him for the better.Originally posted by Ziggystardust
The main point here is that those who are skeptical about how seriously we should take Publisher summaries have plenty of reasons to be. Those in favour, seem to just think that they shouldn't be scrutinised and that they're cannon, just because. It's the difference between conceding to the facts and clinging to personal judgement. And if you've nothing but personal conclusions or rather 'gut feelings' to add, this discussion isn't going to go anywhere.

Ziggystardust
Who said anything about gut feelings? LMAO. There is an amount of reasonable scepticism here that's being applied based on the difference between what's inside the novel and what the external notes of the publisher are. Are they canon, and why should they be taken seriously? You can't seem to provide an answer to either. So why should we take them seriously, just because?

Beniboybling
I've provided you with a clear answer and all you've mustered in response is "am still skceptial!" in which case yeah, I couldn't care less.

The Ellimist
Originally posted by Ziggystardust
It's very simple. The notes of the publisher aren't meant to be part of the story - i.e. adding to the continuity in any measure and is simply just a interpretation of the events for the purposes of selling and aren't always checked over by the author. And this is the case for pretty much every book that was ever written. You can see several different publisher blurbs from various companies that have published harry potter, not one of them introduce anything new to the continuity. So we're left with Plagueis' opinion on the matter.

Alright, let's cycle through your complaints, which seem to align closely with Neph's:

1. "They aren't a part of the story" - since when does information have to be narrative to constitute a part of the official literature? What about sourcebooks, guides, visual dictionaries, etc.? None of these add new stories to the universe, but they're still accepted as parts of the continuity. This is, as we'll see to be a pattern, a made-up rule.

2. "just an interpretation of events" - so are sourcebooks, guides, visual dictionaries, and even novelizations and other adaptations. There is, once again, no actual policy suggesting that interpretative sources don't count. And if there's a reason to discount them, nobody has actually made it - they just restate their reservations as justification for themselves, .i.e. here.

3. "they're made to sell" - rather horribly naive given that this applies to basically everything, and still another arbitrary rule. Are you prepared to vet every source available to us by guessing which author is in it for the art, and which is in it for the money? Where's your line going to be? You don't even know that the publisher doesn't care about the story, and is using the blurb to add excitement or wonder to it - it's another arbitrary claim, and even if it were true, irrelevant to the question of whether it counts as evidence.

4. "not checked over by the author" - the author is perfectly capable of checking or objecting to the blurb. But even if they were not, there's no rule suggesting that authors have exclusive monopolies over their creation. They already have editors, the publishers already influence which books they create, and others can put their characters into sourcebooks and add new information on that. What matter is whether Lucasarts/films approves of the material, not whether any individual author does. This complaint is, yet again, another arbitrary rule.

Nobody here is suggesting that publisher's blurbs are sacrosanct; like all other aspects of the literature, they must be taken into account with the surrounding evidence. But here, you offer no "surrounding evidence" to force discrediting or reinterpreting the blurb; you just offer your gut hidden behind a bunch of circular criteria for canon that you made up.

Now, if you want to explain why something being on the outside of the story rather than the inside is grounds to dismiss it, you're welcome to present your case. But your whole post here has been a thinly veiled exercise in circular argumentation - "this arbitrary rule of mine is right because of these five other arbitrary rules of mine that justify each other!"

Beniboybling
thumb up

aalyasecura95
people dont trust blurbs because they say pretty dubious shit most of the time. not to mention that the very definition of a blurb is "to make people want to buy or see it". it's primary objective is not to inform with 100% facts but rather to promote and blurbs should be taken with a grain of salt if the claims in them are not repeated elsewhere.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/blurb


sw blurbs also have the reputation of being sketchy as hell

http://static7.comicvine.com/uploads/original/4/48954/3451164-doe+back+cover.jpg

what makes this doe blurb any different from the plagueis blurb tbh? it's the exact same message (except broader, as it is saying bane>all previous darksiders).


point is that neither karpyshyn/luceno (/faceless publisher) have the authority or depth of knowledge to make those statements as if they were facts. it's not as if they actually researched all prior sith to see if their statements would make sense and obviously they will sideline some (/most?) facts in order to make their blurb more eye-catching because the sole and main purpose of a blurb is to get people reading the book. that sometimes involves making exaggerated claims that are not supported anywhere else except perhaps vaguely in the novel. i highly doubt that blurbs are subject to the same amount of scrutiny as factbooks/novels themselves so to put them on the same level in terms of reliability is totally unjustified imo. just because blurbs haven't been disregarded officially in canon doesnt mean they auto are gospel. in fact it would probably be better to assume things are non-canon until proven canon instead of the reverse.

mostly i just wish that the arguments put forward by plagueis fans were strong enough that they didnt need sketchy asf blurbs to prove their point. like the idea that plagueis is most powerful sith up to his time is not impossible to swallow but if you're using grade-F sources to prove your point then no-one will be able to agree on that standing apart from the fanboys. referring to the blurb is just a way to shut down discussion and silence those who question the supremacy of hego. like not only are the canonicty of the blurbs suspect from the get go but the claims the blurbs make obviously dont perfectly stack up to scrutiny and are never repeated anywhere. if a shifty claim like that is only made in a blurb and no where else then you should think again as to whether that was a genuine factual statement on the blurb or a contrived/vague statements which had a different purpose entirely.

so to answer your question: yes plagueis is definitely overrated. many of the banite sith would die slow and painful deaths to receive the amount of respect that plagueis does. especially bane because he has a similar accolade to plagueis on the doe blurb yet is not given the same respect due to double standards from plagueis fanboys. not saying i agree with the bane statement but if you are going to accept the plagueis blurb then you must accept other blurbs.

but really the "most powerful jedi/sith" quotes are not the be all and end all in the first place and are usually very vague and definitely up to debate (i believe leland chee disputed the sidious quotes before and said canon doesnt deal in absolutes or something or the sort). weight the blurb into your rankings if you want but keep in mind that you are therefore legitimizing other blurbs which make all kind of nonsense claims and that blurbs have never been confirmed as canon and are not to be interpreted as a 100% reliable source of information by definition. if you want that then go to sourcebooks (which dont repeat the claim of the blurbs but do give us other info like banite scaling which can help fill in gaps in our knowledge regarding plagueis' power). people kind of need to stop this preconception that the likes of plagueis are untouchable when they clearly and obviously are not. i'm not suggesting a feats-only approach but we need to take an unbiased look into the accomplishments of plagueis if we want to say if that hype is warranted (while factoring in reasonable inference and banite scaling) . i would say that he is very high-tier but i wouldn't put him above vitiate and maybe not even nihilus. can anyone really imagine him lifting fleets from gravity wells? not really tbh. although obviously any gap between them will be minute and imo they are in the same tier.



thought i'd also add this

purpose of blurbs: just to promote and maximize profit and inform only with the info needed to get people to buy the book.

purpose of novels: to tell a story, to inform and also to make a profit

purpose of factbooks: to inform with verified facts and also to make a profit



there's obviously a difference between the blurbs and the other source material. they are all meant to make money but the blurb's only purpose is to make money and promote whereas the other two have other priorities. the most obvious to tell a story and give facts.

The Ellimist
Many of your concerns are addressed in my previous post; I'll deal with the new ones:

The Bane blurb - yeah, Bane was the dark side's most powerful master alive at that point, not including entities like The Son. The blurb is only problematic if it extends to all of time, and there's no reason to think that it does. Moreover, even if it were a flawed statement, were that enough to discredit all blurbs, then I could discredit all novelizations by pointing out that the RotJ novelization claims Ben Owens is Kenobi's brother.

Your claim about a lack of authority is inaccurate, and your claim about a lack of research is both unsupported and equally applicable to every content creator.

"Less scrutiny" - this would be a point if you had strong evidence going against the blurb. But seeing as how the surrounding evidence is very easy to fit into the blurb (.i.e. Plagueis claiming exactly what it says, unbalancing the Force itself, scaling from Sidious, etc.), the burden of proof shifts to the side seeking to toss out an official statement, even if the statement unto itself isn't gospel.

What it does is grant a preference to the interpretation of other evidence that better fits with the blurb. So for instance, when Plagueis researches the ancient sith and concludes that he is more powerful than them, the interpretation that he's being reasonable better fits the blurb than the null hypothesis. Likewise, when Plagueis and Sidious unbalance the Force itself, the interpretation that this is as incredible a showing as it sounds beats the claim that it's deceptively overrated. The same applies to backwards scaling from RotS Sidious. Saying that the blurb isn't gospel is not grounds to automatically dismiss it and the surrounding context.

darthbane77
Originally posted by aalyasecura95
people dont trust blurbs because they say pretty dubious shit most of the time. not to mention that the very definition of a blurb is "to make people want to buy or see it". it's primary objective is not to inform with 100% facts but rather to promote and blurbs should be taken with a grain of salt if the claims in them are not repeated elsewhere.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/blurb


sw blurbs also have the reputation of being sketchy as hell

http://static7.comicvine.com/uploads/original/4/48954/3451164-doe+back+cover.jpg

what makes this doe blurb any different from the plagueis blurb tbh? it's the exact same message (except broader, as it is saying bane>all previous darksiders).


point is that neither karpyshyn/luceno (/faceless publisher) have the authority or depth of knowledge to make those statements as if they were facts. it's not as if they actually researched all prior sith to see if their statements would make sense and obviously they will sideline some (/most?) facts in order to make their blurb more eye-catching because the sole and main purpose of a blurb is to get people reading the book. that sometimes involves making exaggerated claims that are not supported anywhere else except perhaps vaguely in the novel. i highly doubt that blurbs are subject to the same amount of scrutiny as factbooks/novels themselves so to put them on the same level in terms of reliability is totally unjustified imo. just because blurbs haven't been disregarded officially in canon doesnt mean they auto are gospel. in fact it would probably be better to assume things are non-canon until proven canon instead of the reverse.

mostly i just wish that the arguments put forward by plagueis fans were strong enough that they didnt need sketchy asf blurbs to prove their point. like the idea that plagueis is most powerful sith up to his time is not impossible to swallow but if you're using grade-F sources to prove your point then no-one will be able to agree on that standing apart from the fanboys. referring to the blurb is just a way to shut down discussion and silence those who question the supremacy of hego. like not only are the canonicty of the blurbs suspect from the get go but the claims the blurbs make obviously dont perfectly stack up to scrutiny and are never repeated anywhere. if a shifty claim like that is only made in a blurb and no where else then you should think again as to whether that was a genuine factual statement on the blurb or a contrived/vague statements which had a different purpose entirely.

so to answer your question: yes plagueis is definitely overrated. many of the banite sith would die slow and painful deaths to receive the amount of respect that plagueis does. especially bane because he has a similar accolade to plagueis on the doe blurb yet is not given the same respect due to double standards from plagueis fanboys. not saying i agree with the bane statement but if you are going to accept the plagueis blurb then you must accept other blurbs.

but really the "most powerful jedi/sith" quotes are not the be all and end all in the first place and are usually very vague and definitely up to debate (i believe leland chee disputed the sidious quotes before and said canon doesnt deal in absolutes or something or the sort). weight the blurb into your rankings if you want but keep in mind that you are therefore legitimizing other blurbs which make all kind of nonsense claims and that blurbs have never been confirmed as canon and are not to be interpreted as a 100% reliable source of information by definition. if you want that then go to sourcebooks (which dont repeat the claim of the blurbs but do give us other info like banite scaling which can help fill in gaps in our knowledge regarding plagueis' power). people kind of need to stop this preconception that the likes of plagueis are untouchable when they clearly and obviously are not. i'm not suggesting a feats-only approach but we need to take an unbiased look into the accomplishments of plagueis if we want to say if that hype is warranted (while factoring in reasonable inference and banite scaling) . i would say that he is very high-tier but i wouldn't put him above vitiate and maybe not even nihilus. can anyone really imagine him lifting fleets from gravity wells? not really tbh. although obviously any gap between them will be minute and imo they are in the same tier.



thought i'd also add this

purpose of blurbs: just to promote and maximize profit and inform only with the info needed to get people to buy the book.

purpose of novels: to tell a story, to inform and also to make a profit

purpose of factbooks: to inform with verified facts and also to make a profit



there's obviously a difference between the blurbs and the other source material. they are all meant to make money but the blurb's only purpose is to make money and promote whereas the other two have other priorities. the most obvious to tell a story and give facts. thumb up

aalyasecura95
Originally posted by The Ellimist


The Bane blurb - yeah, Bane was the dark side's most powerful master alive at that point, not including entities like The Son. The blurb is only problematic if it extends to all of time, and there's no reason to think that it does. Moreover, even if it were a flawed statement, were that enough to discredit all blurbs, then I could discredit all novelizations by pointing out that the RotJ novelization claims Ben Owens is Kenobi's brother.
well it does seem to apply to all time prior due to the wording. "the dark side's most powerful master" (which in the context does seem to be referring to the time he lives and the time before him) sounds pretty clear cut to me. it's open to interpretation but these blurbs generally are (which is why they are unreliable)

i agree it doesn't discredit them all 100%, but it does bring their credibility into question severely. i mean at least the rotj mistakes were redacted, the blurbs have never been redacted and are very problematic with the emergence of all sort of new top tier contenders. novels are also different from blurbs and thats very important. the novel is far more reliable so its reasonable to give it more benefit of the doubt.





will respond to rest of your points later.


would also like to add that i dont flat out object to using the blurb but it shouldn't be a main part of an argument or something to mainly fall back on. it's something that should not be taken at face value and should be weighted against other things without exagerrating its importance and accepting it has a purely promotional purpose and vulnerable to being distorted (so its value is less than factbooks/novelization/contextual evidence/feats and accomplishments of prior sith).

SunRazer
Most anti-blurb people here are basically relying on emotion and personal feelings to discredit the novel blurb. Which doesn't work.

Deronn_solo
Nova is a monkey humper, so his opinion is invalid.

SunRazer
You think that somebody who beats Plagueis in the fight of their life can effortlessly ragdoll Tenebrous laughing

Deronn_solo
Wait, you think Tenebrous can give Yoda a solid match? laughing out loud

SunRazer
I didn't know that it was mathematically possible to miss the point of my above post like that...

Deronn_solo
It's pretty late so I apologize, lal.

SunRazer
That's why you need Tenebrous' brain smile

Beniboybling
Originally posted by SunRazer
Most anti-blurb people here are basically relying on emotion and personal feelings to discredit the novel blurb. Which doesn't work. Precisely, the only basis this skepticism gives is the same we apply to all secondary and tertiary sources. But it's not sufficient to invalidate the it as non-canon, and in this respect it simply echoes the source material.

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Plagueis states in the novel that if there was any more powerful Sith who preceded him, he knew not of them (fyi, he knew of Vitiate), it's simply a matter of believing him, and the blurb supports his assertion.
Darth Plagueis assumed that if a Sith Lord of equal power existed before him, he took his secrets to the grave.

He did not knew much about Vitiate by the way. He even dismissed the existence of Force ghosts.

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Beniboybling
That was a general remark, not aimed at you.

As for your question though, we know that Darth Plagueis is canon, SW novels in general, are canon. It's this distinction between the inside and outside of the novel that 1. has not anywhere been made 2. needs to be proven, I feel.

EDIT: And if we want the official line from Lucasfilm:And Elm is correct, publisher's summaries aren't precluded here at all, provided they are published by a Lucas company, which they have been.
Right.

Darth Bane is Dark Side's most powerful master! Accept it.

Why the double-standards?

Beniboybling
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Darth Plagueis assumed that if a Sith Lord of equal power existed before him, he took his secrets to the grave.Right.Proof? Not strictly true, but irrelevant regardless.Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Right.

Darth Bane is Dark Side's most powerful master! Accept it.

Why the double-standards? I dontz nows!!

On the other hand, what do you make of this?

http://static1.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11120/111205740/5207832-8214746295-Bane..PNG

Ursumeles
Originally posted by darthbane77
Because Plagueis isn't close to ROTS Sidous? He's maybe a little more powerful than TPM Sidious. maybe equal to AOTC Sidious.
Kek. Do you want to say that TPM Sidious and AotC Sids aren't close to RotS Sith.

Ursumeles
Originally posted by Fated Xtasy
He isn't that impressive tbh
I 'll give you Plaggy wanking on Saturday wink

Beniboybling
Originally posted by Fated Xtasy
He isn't that impressive tbh Missed this, no more dic pics for u.

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Proof?
Darth Plagueis knew that Vitiate managed to prolong his life for centuries (and was closer to The Ones in this respect then any other) but he did not knew about Vitiate's disembodied existence and exploits.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Not strictly true, but irrelevant regardless.
Recheck Book of Sith and refresh your memory.

It is relevant in the sense that Darth Plagueis was no historian and he had limited grasp of the ground realities of the galaxy at large. On top of all that, he thought that he was the best. He wasn't.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
On the other hand, what do you make of this?

http://static1.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11120/111205740/5207832-8214746295-Bane..PNG
Thanks for the share. eek!

You played into my hands with that. I will use that statement against you and Ellimist. evil face

Beniboybling
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Darth Plagueis knew that Vitiate managed to prolong his life for centuries (and was closer to The Ones in this respect then any other) but he did not knew about Vitiate's disembodied existence and exploits.False.Nowhere does he compare him to the Ones though, lmao.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Recheck Book of Sith and refresh your memory.I did, he acknowledges the existence of Sith spirits elsewhere, like above, evidently he merely maintained a position of reasonable suspicion.

Noting you've raised proves that.

The blurb confirms otherwise, shame.

By proclaiming Sidious + Plagueis >>>> Bane > Vitiate? OK.

The Ellimist
...how?

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Beniboybling
False.
And after that:

But those few had been so focused on worldly power that they had ended up trapping themselves between realms. That they had never provided the Order with guidance from beyond attested to the fact that their influence had been negligible, and had long since faded from the world.

In the same way that the pre-Bane Sith had been responsible for their own extinction, the great dark side Lords of the past had doomed themselves to the nether realm through their attempts to conquer death by feeding off the energies of others, rather than by tapping the deepest strata of the Force and learning to speak the language of the midi-chlorians.

Taken from Star Wars: Darth Plagueis

In one of his writings, he even denied the possibility of disembodied existence in the material realm.

Like I pointed out earlier, his knowledge of powers and exploits of Vitiate is very limited.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
By proclaiming Sidious + Plagueis >>>> Bane > Vitiate? OK.
roll eyes (sarcastic)

Beniboybling
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
And after that:

But those few had been so focused on worldly power that they had ended up trapping themselves between realms. That they had never provided the Order with guidance from beyond attested to the fact that their influence had been negligible, and had long since faded from the world.

In the same way that the pre-Bane Sith had been responsible for their own extinction, the great dark side Lords of the past had doomed themselves to the nether realm through their attempts to conquer death by feeding off the energies of others, rather than by tapping the deepest strata of the Force and learning to speak the language of the midi-chlorians.

Taken from Star Wars: Darth PlagueisYour point? Vitiate fizzled out and was forgotten, we know.

False again, in fact he does the opposite.

Yet to be proven, shame.

It was a pretty stupid thing to say on your part, yeah.

Azronger
The Bane quotes prove nothing, since there're statements after their release that state all his successors > Bane. However, Bane > Vitiate isn't contradicted anywhere. And neither is RotS Sidious > Plagueis > all.

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Your point? Vitiate fizzled out and was forgotten, we know.
My point is that Darth Plagueis was not a historian and his knowledge of various developments in the galaxy (and ground realities) was limited.

He believed that Sith spirits (if they even existed) were doomed to so-called Nether Realm and their influence had been negligible. Really?

Vitiate, in disembodied form, shocked the entire galaxy by devastating Ziost - an event in which both the Republic and Sith suffered heavy losses, but could do nothing about it. Ziost was not an ordinary world. He lost another Voice in Zakuul but continued to influence galactic events in non-corporeal form. My point is that his influence, in disembodied form, was far from being negligible.

Evidently, Darth Plagueis had little knowledge of Vitiate's exploits and powers or his assessment would have been different.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
False again, in fact he does the opposite.
Here:

More interesting are the tales of of Sith ghosts said to haunt everything from the tombs of Korriban to the relics inside Coruscant's Great Galactic Museum. Is it possible that these Masters of the dark side succeeded in preserving their awareness? If so, can they still be queried for their secrets? Unfortunately, I have been to Korriban and I am not convinced that these tales hold truth.

Taken from Book of Sith: Secrets from the Dark Side

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Yet to be proven, shame.
See above.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
It was a pretty stupid thing to say on your part, yeah.
Really?

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Azronger
The Bane quotes prove nothing, since there're statements after their release that state all his successors > Bane. However, Bane > Vitiate isn't contradicted anywhere. And neither is RotS Sidious > Plagueis > all.
http://40.media.tumblr.com/31950a8dde52ecd8682a85400b5b3aff/tumblr_inline_nsiqv6OvZw1rm8mui_400.png

UCanShootMyNova
Plagueis > Vitiate > Nihilus.

Valkorian > Vitiate.

Valkorian >> Vitiate.

Flyattractor
Ok. I could go back and read the past 5 pages but I don't feel like it. Somebody give me a re-cap. Has Plaggy actualy been in some ACTUAL Star Wars material (that actually matters) other then getting talked about during the crappy Water Ballet scene in the Preq?

UCanShootMyNova
Yes.

http://www.e-reading.club/bookreader.php/1007918/Luceno_-_Star_Wars__Darth_Plagueis.html

Flyattractor
....Is that the WHOLE friggin book?

Beniboybling
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
My point is that Darth Plagueis was not a historian and his knowledge of various developments in the galaxy (and ground realities) was limited.Plagueis (and his many predecessors) actually made it his business to be as educated on Sith lore as he could, that fact that Plagueis brings into reasonable doubt what he reads does not make him uninformed, but intelligent.

He said that those who survived coporeal death ultimately failed to return to the physical realm, not that it was impossible for them to do so. Which barring the events of KotFE, is true.

That happened post publication, in other words a retcon, so hardly proof of anything. On the other hand barring the actions of Valkorion (which Plagueis would have no way of verifying as Vitiate) in the grand schemes of things yeah, the course of galactic events chugged on.

Again, basing that off events published after the fact is stupid, but also wrong.

That doesn't prove your point, only that he doubted the presence of Sith spirits on Korriban, elsewhere he speculating on how the existence of Force spirits could be possible. Try reading the whole book. thumb up

Really. But please, enlighten us on your grand scheme to stick it to me and Elm, or is it all hush hush?

UCanShootMyNova
Originally posted by Flyattractor
....Is that the WHOLE friggin book?

Yep.

Unbowed
I'd say ROTS Sidious is not necessarily stronger than Plagueis, and if he is, it's not by a large amount. IIRC right after Plagueis emerges from his 20 year hermitage and meets with Sidious, Sidious is basically in awe of him and his strength in the Force.

I'd say at that point Plagueis is stronger than Sidious by a healthy margin. And yes, Sidious was empowered by Plagueis's death(just like Plagueis was after Tenebrous' death) but I see no evidence of the dramatic post-TPM improvement that Sidious fans claim.

If anything the bulk of that time would have been spent training Dooku and preparing for the Clone Wars.

As for Plagueis vs the ancient Sith, I remember at one point in the book Plagueis marvels at some of the feats the ancients had supposedly been capable of. And then he wonders, were they truly stronger than him, or had they benefited from a time when the Dark side was on the rise, or had they simply known techniques that have been lost since?

Take from that what you will.

Plagueis also considered himself a match for the Jedi Order's strongest, meaning Yoda, and I'd say his opinion on that should be taken into account.

The Ellimist
Plagueis initially doubted his power vs. the ancients, but had reversed his position by the end.

Azronger
Originally posted by Unbowed
I'd say ROTS Sidious is not necessarily stronger than Plagueis, and if he is, it's not by a large amount. IIRC right after Plagueis emerges from his 20 year hermitage and meets with Sidious, Sidious is basically in awe of him and his strength in the Force.

I'd say at that point Plagueis is stronger than Sidious by a healthy margin. And yes, Sidious was empowered by Plagueis's death(just like Plagueis was after Tenebrous' death) but I see no evidence of the dramatic post-TPM improvement that Sidious fans claim.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=15960229#post15960229

Trocity
Originally posted by Beniboybling
By proclaiming Sidious + Plagueis >>>> Bane > Vitiate? OK.

Wow, raped. laughing out loud

Nephthys
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
And after that:

But those few had been so focused on worldly power that they had ended up trapping themselves between realms. That they had never provided the Order with guidance from beyond attested to the fact that their influence had been negligible, and had long since faded from the world.

I guess Plagueis never heard of Ragnos, huh.

KuRuPT Thanosi
Are people really using a blurb, in a back of a book as proof that Plagueis is the most powerful Sith then and before him? I see times are tough these days for finding corroborating proof eh?

quanchi112
Kt has yet to back of any his claims at any time. Pay him no mind. He's an incompetent imbecile.

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Plagueis (and his many predecessors) actually made it his business to be as educated on Sith lore as he could, that fact that Plagueis brings into reasonable doubt what he reads does not make him uninformed, but intelligent.
Every Sith is interested in that. However, Darth Plagueis was not able to uncover many ancient sources of knowledge and explored other ways to achieve great power. His area of interest was Midichlorian Manipulation, not history and Sith Sorcery.

The ground realities

Vitiate was a shadowy figure. Much of the galaxy was unaware of his existence until the Great Galactic War. Republic Special Forces were able to retrieve some Imperial Records from the dreadnought of the Dread Masters, and Jedi Master Gnost-Dural was tasked to decode them with the assistance of SIS. However, findings were treated as classified information. They learned that Vitiate was an ancient Force-user and survivor of the Great Hyperspace War. They also learned about a place called Nathema. They were still clueless about the true extent of Vitiate's powers and/or abilities. They made a foolish attempt to arrest Vitiate (Top Secret Mission), and we know how it ended for them.

Vitiate's Sith followers did not knew much about his past either. Those who learned about Nathema and/or visited it, either ended-up dead or kept mum due to fear of execution.

More importantly, it was nearly impossible for even members of the Dark Council to determine the true extent of his abilities and powers. For example, devastation of Ziost surprised even the likes of Darth Marr:

"This is distressing. Vitiate may be more powerful than any of us assumed." (Darth Marr)

Only a privileged few had an idea but they were not interested in broadcasting their assessments across the galaxy. They disclosed as much as they felt necessary to influence the events, and only to those individuals who were part of the game and/or would not betray their trust.

Forgotten?

Since Vitiate was a shadowy figure and his records were not made public at any point in galactic history (or possibly even destroyed), very little could be learned about his exploits through personal efforts. In this context, Vitiate faded in history and was forgotten.

Now, coming towards the main point:-

My argument is that it was virtually impossible for Darth Plagueis to determine how powerful Vitiate was. Knowledge of Vitiate's longevity and/or his disembodied existence wouldn't be enough.

Even Palpatine learned much more about Darth Malgus than Vitiate. If you think otherwise then prove it.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
He said that those who survived coporeal death ultimately failed to return to the physical realm, not that it was impossible for them to do so. Which barring the events of KotFE, is true.
Does that makes any sense?

Sith Lords who managed to retain their identity after corporeal demise, lurked in the material realm as Force apparitions. However, some were more powerful and influential than others.

To refuse the inevitability of death, and hold on to one's hard-earned power forever, is a proposition many Sith have found impossible to resist. Over the years, Sith have employed cybernetics, dark sciences, and other unsavory techniques in pursuit of eternal life. And when life fails them, Sith persist through their sheer force of will. Holocrons bear their visage and teachings for eternity, while some Sith even break the restraints of death itself to wreak havoc as Force apparitions.

Taken from Star Wars: The Old Republic: Encyclopedia

Examples of Force apparitions that influenced galactic affairs:

Death is not the end. For Sith strong in the Dark Side, the demise of the physical body will not stop their relentless campaign for power. Such Sith return as intangible spirits, able to communicate with the living. Among the Sith, these spirits are viewed with caution as well as reverence: Sith entities tend to be powerful, raging at their own demise and seeking revenge, or able to cunningly manipulate the living. The spirits of powerful Sith Lords such as Marka Ragnos, Freedon Nadd, and Karness Muur influenced galactic events and inspired others to do evil long after their physical deaths. For this reason, the Dark Temple on Dromund Kaas, which houses the sacrophagi of the Sith Emperor's deceased enemies, is as much prison as tomb.

Taken from Star Wars: The Old Republic: Encyclopedia

The list is actually bigger than that. Additional examples include Exar Kun, Terrak Morrhage, Naga Sadow and XoXaan.

A large number of Force apparitions lurked in tombs and/or structures. And were not able to influence galactic affairs because of their limitations or other reasons. The Dark Temple, in particular, was designed to prevent Force apparitions from escaping its halls.

As I pointed out earlier, Darth Plagueis was not a historian and his assessments were not entirely accurate.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
That happened post publication, in other words a retcon, so hardly proof of anything. On the other hand barring the actions of Valkorion (which Plagueis would have no way of verifying as Vitiate) in the grand schemes of things yeah, the course of galactic events chugged on.
See? You are looking at this matter from real-world perspective.

My assessment of Vitiate's superiority over Darth Plagueis is based on real-world perspective of exploits of both. I will not take a marketing statement seriously without looking at other ground realities. Otherwise, Darth Bane > Vitiate and any other powerhouse who came before.

I expect the same from you.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Again, basing that off events published after the fact is stupid, but also wrong.
See above

Originally posted by Beniboybling
That doesn't prove your point, only that he doubted the presence of Sith spirits on Korriban, elsewhere he speculating on how the existence of Force spirits could be possible. Try reading the whole book. thumb up
I have read it. You need to read it however.

He did not deny the possibility of transferring consciousness from one body to another. However, this phenomenon clashed with his core beliefs.

"The act of transferring consciousness between bodies touches on a subject that still bothers me. The patterns that define each mind can be stored in the pneuma field, but these patterns degrade almost instantly if they are not anchored in a new biological form. The speed of this degradation is so rapid that it seems to render the argument for life after death moot."

Taken from Book of Sith: Secrets from the Dark Side

He asserted that disembodied existence would fade rapidly without access to a body. However, he did not rule out the possibility in its entirety:

"Ghost stories are so common that they are laughable, but pneuma leads me to believe such a thing is possible."

Taken from Book of Sith: Secrets from the Dark Side

He looked at this matter from scientific angle and his conclusion was that Transfer Essence was a possibility (but risky affair). However, he dismissed the possibility of existence of disembodied entities or beings because he had never met one.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Really. But please, enlighten us on your grand scheme to stick it to me and Elm, or is it all hush hush?
See above.

Emperordmb
****'S SAKE LEGEND!

GROUND REALITIES AGAIN?

Beni have have enough of ur shite

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Emperordmb
****'S SAKE LEGEND!

GROUND REALITIES AGAIN?

Beni have have enough of ur shite
Are you his agent or stooge or boyfriend?

I will address misconceptions of any member here. Always have.

Emperordmb
A concerned citizen of KMC who have gotten tired of hearing about ground realities. Beni likely have the same opinion as me.

And nah I'm not gay. I wouldn't want to promote gayism, since man have made rules to separate man from beast.

The Ellimist
laughing

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Emperordmb
A concerned citizen of KMC who have gotten tired of hearing about ground realities. Beni likely have the same opinion as me.

And nah I'm not gay. I wouldn't want to promote gayism, since man have made rules to separate man from beast.
It is a commonly used English phrase or expression.

You are tired of debates here then why bother to comment? Stop checking these boards and move-on.

ares834
Originally posted by Beniboybling
By proclaiming Sidious + Plagueis >>>> Bane > Vitiate? OK.

laughing out loud

The Ellimist
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
It is a commonly used English phrase or expression.


But it isn't...that's why it's so hilarious...

NewGuy01
But never stop, because it's your thing. thumb up

Who cares if English people don't actually talk like that?

Beniboybling
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
The ground realitiesLol.

Knowledge of the Nathema ritual was recorded by Revan in his holocron, which Bane transcribed into the Telos Holocron, which remained in the OotSL's possession until Sheev.

The devastation of Ziost was a high profile event, known to the galaxy at large. The Monoliths were probably pretty high profile as well.

Aside from those that were in fact high profile/documented into history.

On top of the aforementioned being for example the corruption of Kaas' atmosphere (widely rumoured to be Vitiate's doing); the Dark Temple nexus (common knowledge that Vitiate was responsible), the Lokess incident (a public lesson retold for centuries), the mental domination of Revan and Malak (deduced by Tol Braga) and probably more besides.

Plagueis may not have been in a position to gain total knowledge of Vitiate's power, but a good impression of his abilities, alongside knowledge of his best showings, is a likelihood, and still he was not impressed.

We are talking about Vitiate here, the antics of others aren't relevant to his knowledge of the Emperor's spiritual activities.

And this isn't a fact checking seminar, but an assessment of his knowledge of Vitiate.

Darth Bane > those before has reasserted by the Official Fact File. so I expect this dismissive logic to be applied to sourcebooks as well.

We're not discussing essence transfer.

A concession then, let's move on.

Wrong again. I get that English isn't your first language, but it becomes embarrassing when the evidence is right there in your own posts.

S_W_LeGenD

S_W_LeGenD
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Plagueis may not have been in a position to gain total knowledge of Vitiate's power, but a good impression of his abilities, alongside knowledge of his best showings, is a likelihood, and still he was not impressed.
laughing out loud

Joke of the century. Profile-worthy.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
We are talking about Vitiate here, the antics of others aren't relevant to his knowledge of the Emperor's spiritual activities.
We are discussing Darth Plagueis's knowledge of the past on top of that.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
And this isn't a fact checking seminar, but an assessment of his knowledge of Vitiate.
Duh

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Darth Bane > those before has reasserted by the Official Fact File. so I expect this dismissive logic to be applied to sourcebooks as well.
I am not dismissing it on the grounds of my personal bias. Vitiate has vastly superior profile and showings than Darth Bane. Sometimes, we need to look at stuff from real-world perspective.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
We're not discussing essence transfer.

A concession then, let's move on.
http://40.media.tumblr.com/31950a8dde52ecd8682a85400b5b3aff/tumblr_inline_nsiqv6OvZw1rm8mui_400.png

I shall give it another try with the hope that you might have the intellectual capability to understand it.

Darth Plagueis was fully aware of stories and legends of Force apparitions and vice versa. However, he had a scientific mindset and had his share of doubts. He did not dismiss the possibility of preservation of consciousness outside a physical body (hint: pneuma) but he was of the opinion that it would fade rapidly in such a state. However, he believed that consciousness of a living being could be imprinted in the mind of another body. The crux of his argument was that a Force apparition (like state) was short-lived, not long-lasting. Therefore, he was skeptical about existence of Force apparitions in the manner as described in stories and legends.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Wrong again. I get that English isn't your first language, but it becomes embarrassing when the evidence is right there in your own posts.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uDmln3KYjgM/Vetm-e9efVI/AAAAAAAAFvE/PRIkPu8F95M/s1600/irony-alert-ironic.jpg

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.