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

I propose a new argument for the Vitiatites seeking to overturn the blurb the Darth Plagueis novel has.

Sure, as of January 2012, Darth Plagueis is more powerful than Vitiate - that's indisputable.

However, newly established praise for Vitiate in SoR, RotE, KotFE and KOTET allows it to be overturned.

An example of this would be that Vitiate created his Uber Holocron from KOTET as the age of ten.

Of course, this line of thinking demands that you subscribe to the "older quotes have no authority on newer content" policy, but it should work.

Continuity doesn't work that way.

Vitiate surpassed these limitations long ago. Plagueis would get crushed by him.

That's right, muster whatever's left of you for a final gasp.

Originally posted by Azronger
Continuity doesn't work that way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kw-nCdwxAXY&t=0m06s

Originally posted by Nephthys
Vitiate surpassed these limitations long ago. Plagueis would get crushed by him.


Revan's probably above Plagueis too. mmm

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kw-nCdwxAXY&t=0m06s

Lol.

Concession accepted.

Revan and Plagueis are about equal probably. They're better in different area's. I'd probably go with Revan in a fight though, he's overall the greater combatant.

Whatever the case, Vitiate puts Plagueis to shame.

It was a nice attempt Ant.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Concession accepted.

What? You were the one whose only response was a YouTube clip to save face.

Fact is continuity still doesn't work that way, and you screaming "hurr durr denial!" proves nothing when you haven't even made a case.

Originally posted by Azronger
Continuity doesn't work that way. It's certainly a bizarre way of interpreting it, which I've seen nobody on these boards abide by.

Originally posted by Azronger
What? You were the one whose only response was a YouTube clip to save face.

Fact is continuity still doesn't work that way, and you screaming "hurr durr denial!" proves nothing when you haven't even made a case.
Screaming "continuity still doesn't work that way!" doesn't mean much to me either, champ.

The notion that a quote from, say, 1978 still holds authority on a subject during 2016 despite *new* material is found is not only laughable, but makes me inclined to believe you have to check out the following site: https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/down/conditioninfo/Pages/treatments.aspx

Your method of thinking is inherently limiting, not based on current lore, and frankly disturbing, if not outright offensive to mankind.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66

An example of this would be that Vitiate created his Uber Holocron from KOTET as the age of ten..

.....Seriously?

BW I figured would be above making absurd characters like this, guess not.

Originally posted by Zenwolf
.....Seriously?

BW I figured would be above making absurd characters like this, guess not.


Make way for the True Emperor.

Ant I don't see how you can find this anything great, this is just stupid..

Originally posted by Zenwolf
Ant I don't see how you can find this anything great, this is just stupid..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlT-sJLfCPU&t=2m22s

So Ant, should we start doing rematches of Luke vs Vader, Qui-Gon vs Maul, Dooku vs Yoda etc. etc. considering their new feats and accolades?

Yeah, this logic is retarded, and disturbing.

I accept Vitiate as my lord and Savior.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
So Ant, should we start doing rematches of Luke vs Vader, Qui-Gon vs Maul, Dooku vs Yoda etc. etc. considering their new feats and accolades?

Yeah, this logic is retarded, and disturbing.
Conversely, the notion that if character A is shown with the power of Y as of 2000, and then a quote from 2001 states that character B is greater than A, but then in 2012 character A shows the power of 5Y, limiting him to the former quote leads to a frankly outdated and inaccurate assessment of the current lore.

To fix both of our issues, a rule can be established that feats cannot overrule older feats (unless a retcon is established), but feats can overrule older accolades. That way, consistency can be met, but we're also as up-to-date with the current viewpoints and lore as possible.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Screaming "continuity still doesn't work that way!" doesn't mean much to me either, champ.

The notion that a quote from, say, 1978 still holds authority on a subject during 2016 despite *new* material is found is not only laughable, but makes me inclined to believe you have to check out the following site: https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/down/conditioninfo/Pages/treatments.aspx

Your method of thinking is inherently limiting, not based on current lore, and frankly disturbing, if not outright offensive to mankind.

But this is what actual canon policy says. Your proposal is entirely fan made; even then, we'd be more willing to entertain creating such house rules if you actually presented a rigorous epistemological case. Instead, you appeal to incredulity, gut intuition, and thinly veiled circular posts where you just rephrase your position and use it to justify itself.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
But this is what actual canon policy says..
Link to where "actual canon policy" says that?

Oh wait, it doesn't.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Link to where "actual canon policy" says that?

Oh wait, it doesn't.

EU policy said sources were true until contradicted. There was no expiration date. You just made that up.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
EU policy said sources were true until contradicted.
Like to where policy says that?

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Conversely, the notion that if character A is shown with the power of Y as of 2000, and then a quote from 2001 states that character B is greater than A, but then in 2012 character A shows the power of 5Y, limiting him to the former quote leads to a frankly outdated and inaccurate assessment of the current lore.

To fix both of our issues, a rule can be established that feats cannot overrule older feats (unless a retcon is established), but feats can overrule older accolades. That way, consistency can be met, but we're also as up-to-date with the current viewpoints and lore as possible. So essentially: actions speak louder than words.

Even if that logic were to be adopted though, this still wouldn't serve your argument. Simply because continuity does and always will remain, new content will always build itself up off of old material - and that's were your case collapses in on itself.

To take your example, even if we assume Character A > 2001 B does not mean Character A > 2012 B, the fact 2001 & 2012 B share identical attributes and experiences, means that it can easily be proven that the older version is capable of the newer version's feats.

A better example. Yes, 2016 Tenebrae built a super special holocron. But guess what? Plagueis > 2012 SWTOR Vitiate, who possesses all the knowledge and experience of 10 year old Tenebrae (which has not been altered in any form), and furthermore, consumed an entire planet + 8,000 Sith, then went on to explore the "most sinister, uncharted depths of the dark side."

Or in brief, 2012 SWTOR Vitiate could absolutely replicate that feat, and we've no reason to assume otherwise. And Plagueis is still better than him, as per the novel. An accolade that irrespective of this logic, still stands.

The same form of argument can be applied to all his SoR, RotE showings as well. Whereas your attempted stance only works if any of the aforementioned incarnations were given a new power boost or something, or pulled off a feat that a latter incarnation simply couldn't do, making that version inherently superior to the 2012 model. But you haven't, leaving you with nothing.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Screaming "continuity still doesn't work that way!" doesn't mean much to me either, champ.

The notion that a quote from, say, 1978 still holds authority on a subject during 2016 despite *new* material is found is not only laughable, but makes me inclined to believe you have to check out the following site: https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/down/conditioninfo/Pages/treatments.aspx

Your method of thinking is inherently limiting, not based on current lore, and frankly disturbing, if not outright offensive to mankind.

This is pathetic. You're praised as one of the top debaters here, yet the only things you can come up with are an ad hominem and an argument from personal incredulity.

I know you can do better, I've seen it. So why won't you?

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Conversely, the notion that if character A is shown with the power of Y as of 2000, and then a quote from 2001 states that character B is greater than A, but then in 2012 character A shows the power of 5Y, limiting him to the former quote leads to a frankly outdated and inaccurate assessment of the current lore.

To fix both of our issues, a rule can be established that feats cannot overrule older feats (unless a retcon is established), but feats can overrule older accolades. That way, consistency can be met, but we're also as up-to-date with the current viewpoints and lore as possible.

There's nothing proving B cannot have the power of 100Y, and simply saying he hasn't is an argument from ignorance. You've really become fond of fallacies, haven't you?

However, I agree that if, for example, A lifts a 100 kg rock with ease, and an accolade proclaiming B, who struggles with lifting a 50 kg rock as stronger than A, said accolade would be called into question.

Nothing Valkorion has done has been proven impossible for Plagueis to do, though. Plagueis doesn't have a single instance where his powers are pushed to their limit, or even close to it. The accolade stands.

@Azronger & Beniboybling: Feats are *always* derived from primary and secondary sources. Accolades comparing characters from different sources, however, makes them inherently secondary or tertiary sources. After all, secondary sources are works derived from what is established from previous works. And tertiary are encyclopedias, etc. In the case of the Darth Plagueis blurb, the quote declaring him the most powerful is derived from a comparison across all-existing sources. Thus, the distinction between already established power-levels through combat, and the power-levels established through broad accolades, is that the former is universally solidified in a primary source, whereas the latter is always from a secondary and tertiary source. Thus, the introduction of new primary material, such as all the post-launch SWTOR expansions, holds not only blatant higher authority to the quote, but is not restricted by the content or claims the quote places. I'll concede that by merit of the holocron he is not superior to Darth Plagueis, since that's a tertiary claim, but to repeat, the actions seen in a primary source isn't restricted by a secondary.

Now, this doesn't mean Vitiate is more powerful than Darth Plagueis, but rather he's not restricted to the quote, allowing for a new assessment to take place.


If I could have a dollar for every time someone has said something along those lines.

Insulting someone isn't indication of desperation. It's merely addressing their stupidity.

For example, if one would claim the world was flat, you'd first tell them they were stupid, then explain why they're wrong.

I would, at least.

I'm on my phone rn and don't wish to look up canon policy, but why are we so obsessed with this holocron feat anyway? There's no evidence that holocron creation requires that much raw power (even Bane can do it); it may be an impressive feat in arcane knowledge (not really combat applicable and might have just been taught to him) or incentive genius (surpassed by the likes of Anakin anyway), but it's not such overwhelming of a case as to contradict an explicit statement to Plagueis's benefit.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
I'm on my phone rn and don't wish to look up canon policy, but why are we so obsessed with this holocron feat anyway? There's no evidence that holocron creation requires that much raw power (even Bane can do it); it may be an impressive feat in arcane knowledge (not really combat applicable and might have just been taught to him) or incentive genius (surpassed by the likes of Anakin anyway), but it's not such overwhelming of a case as to contradict an explicit statement to Plagueis's benefit.

Refer to my post.

A simple argument in this matter involves the case of Darth Bane. This character has blurbs under his belt that imply that he was superior to all practitioners of the Dark Side that came before him. Objectively speaking, this is not true, but the blurbs are there.

However, we are looking at double-standards of Sheevites here. They want to take Darth Plagueis's blurb seriously but ignore Darth Bane's.

@Ant: Azronger was responding to a post where all you did was insult your detractors' intelligence and declare your opinions self evident.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
@Ant: Azronger was responding to a post where all you did was insult your detractors' intelligence and declare your opinions self evident.
Well, I just clarified my stance for him.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
a rule can be established

Ah, that's what you're gunning for.

That being said, I'm off for tonight. I'll respond tomorrow.

I advise discussing with each other via PMs and writing one post that reflects all your arguments, rather than multiple ones.

In the case of the latter, I'll just respond to whoever I feel like.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Ah, that's what you're gunning for.
You're late to the party. Refer here:

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
@Azronger & Beniboybling: Feats are *always* derived from primary and secondary sources. Accolades comparing characters from different sources, however, makes them inherently secondary or tertiary sources. After all, secondary sources are works derived from what is established from previous works. And tertiary are encyclopedias, etc. In the case of the Darth Plagueis blurb, the quote declaring him the most powerful is derived from a comparison across all-existing sources. Thus, the distinction between already established power-levels through combat, and the power-levels established through broad accolades, is that the former is universally solidified in a primary source, whereas the latter is always from a secondary and tertiary source. Thus, the introduction of new primary material, such as all the post-launch SWTOR expansions, holds not only blatant higher authority to the quote, but is not restricted by the content or claims the quote places. I'll concede that by merit of the holocron he is not superior to Darth Plagueis, since that's a tertiary claim, but to repeat, the actions seen in a primary source isn't restricted by a secondary.

Now, this doesn't mean Vitiate is more powerful than Darth Plagueis, but rather he's not restricted to the quote, allowing for a new assessment to take place.

What's the point of having sourcebooks if any new published material automatically invalidates them even if no direct contradiction exists?

To clarify and summarize the preexisting material. Some sourcebooks even create new content, in which those claims would be primary.

The entire argument strikes me as a strawman anyway, since these blurbs aren't claimed to be binding, but rather shift the burden to the opposing party to present countering evidence. And nobody has done that for Vitiate.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
A simple argument in this matter involves the case of Darth Bane. This character has blurbs under his belt that imply that he was superior to all practitioners of the Dark Side that came before him. Objectively speaking, this is not true, but the blurbs are there.

However, we are looking at double-standards of Sheevites here. They want to take Darth Plagueis's blurb seriously but ignore Darth Bane's.

What blurbs does Bane have? The only one I've seen doesn't say anything of the sort.

And yeah, Vitiate/Valkorion is obviously superior to Plagueis. However, Sidious remains the one True Emperor.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
To clarify and summarize the preexisting material. Some sourcebooks even create new content, in which those claims would be primary.

Clarify material with a lifespan of however long it takes for material on the same subject to come out? That's ridiculously short - you're proposing a method of continuity so fluid that we can never have an established universe that doesn't get reorganized every week.

And your distinction between primary and secondary would serve our point - if the purpose of the latter is to clarify the former, then the blurb clarifies that Plagueis's claim to being the most powerful ever was accurate. Done.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
You're late to the party. Refer here:

Not what I was referring to.

Also,

http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/this_partys_over_star_wars.gif

The overarching issue here is whether you want to break the fourth wall and take evidence into consideration with respect to the real life date and context of their publication. I think our models should try to minimize acknowledgment of the fictional nature of the universe; the logical conclusion if we follow out of universe meddling to its extreme is that to look at vs. debates we should just analyze what the writers would think would make the best story/most money.

Really, the fact is that again continuity does and always will exist, whatever fan rules we care to invent.

When BioWare decide to slot in some new continuity to the story of Vitiate, they do not do so with the mindset that "hurr durr we dontz have to pay attention to the stuff we wrote 4 years ago", rather the opposite, they ensure what they write is continuous with what they wrote four years ago. Ergo the nature of Vitiate remains unchanged, the capabilities of Vitiate remain unchanged, there is no need for a reassessment because Vitiate is unchanged, the lay of the land is unchanged.

This is what happens when old material is embellished on and added to, this is how continuity works.

Obviously there will be instances in which the lay of the land is changed, these are called retcons, and are easily identifiable as such. However in so far, Vitiate has not been retconned, therefore no "reassessment" of his character is needed.

So again, we can invent as many rules as we please in regards to how new content bears on old content and vice versa. But practically speaking its a fruitless endeavour relative to the unalterable mechanics of the universe, that continuity (by design) remains the same, as far as it does not become retroactive.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
whatever fan rules you care to invent.

And that's what this really comes down to Ant. You'll never be the authority on the validity of sources on this forum or any other.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Really, the fact is that again continuity does and always will exist, whatever fan rules we care to invent.

When BioWare decide to slot in some new continuity to the story of Vitiate, they do not do so with the mindset that "hurr durr we dontz have to pay attention to the stuff we wrote 4 years ago", rather the opposite, they ensure what they write is continuous with what they wrote four years ago. Ergo the nature of Vitiate remains unchanged, the capabilities of Vitiate remain unchanged, there is no need for a reassessment because Vitiate is unchanged, the lay of the land is unchanged.

This is what happens when old material is embellished on and added to, this is how continuity works.

Obviously there will be instances in which the lay of the land is changed, these are called retcons, and are easily identifiable as such. However in so far, Vitiate has not been retconned, therefore no "reassessment" of his character is needed.

So again, we can invent as many rules as we please in regards to how new content bears on old content and vice versa. But practically speaking its a fruitless endeavour relative to the unalterable mechanics of the universe, that continuity (by design) remains the same, as far as it does not become retroactive.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
A simple argument in this matter involves the case of Darth Bane. This character has blurbs under his belt that imply that he was superior to all practitioners of the Dark Side that came before him. Objectively speaking, this is not true, but the blurbs are there.

However, we are looking at double-standards of Sheevites here. They want to take Darth Plagueis's blurb seriously but ignore Darth Bane's.

What double standards? I'm willing to accept the quote.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
What's the point of having sourcebooks if any new published material automatically invalidates them even if no direct contradiction exists?

The purpose of a sourcebook is to supplement the primary sources and to embellish on details that weren't available in said sources.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Clarify material with a lifespan of however long it takes for material on the same subject to come out? That's ridiculously short - you're proposing a method of continuity so fluid that we can never have an established universe that doesn't get reorganized every week.

And your distinction between primary and secondary would serve our point - if the purpose of the latter is to clarify the former, then the blurb clarifies that Plagueis's claim to being the most powerful ever was accurate. Done.

This seems to be a pretty hysterical reaction. Its not nearly that dramatic, facts would only change if contradictory information was created. Which is the systems we use right now.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Obviously there will be instances in which the lay of the land is changed, these are called retcons, and are easily identifiable as such. However in so far, Vitiate has not been retconned, therefore no "reassessment" of his character is needed.

Uh, you sure about that? Because I'm pretty sure he was retconned into Valkorion fairly blatantly.

Yeah and what I've been asking is, what is that contradictory evidence? That he made a holocron?

I believe that Ant's argument is that the new information about Valkorion recontextualises his character and respective level of power. That Valkorion was apparently fantastically powerful even as a child, before a century of darkside exploration, before absorbing 8000 Sith Lords and all life on Nathema, before another millennia + of constant growth and deepening mastery, before draining Revan for 300 years, before absorbing Ziost...... indicates that he's blatantly superior to Plagueis by a nautical mile.

Personally I don't really see how Vitiate was ever intended to not be a being far beyond Plagueis' comparably feeble capabilities from day one, but there you go.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I believe that Ant's argument is that the new information about Valkorion recontextualises his character and respective level of power. That Valkorion was apparently fantastically powerful even as a child, before a century of darkside exploration, before absorbing 8000 Sith Lords and all life on Nathema, before another millennia + of constant growth and deepening mastery, before draining Revan for 300 years, before absorbing Ziost...... indicates that he's blatantly superior to Plagueis by a nautical mile.

Personally I don't really see how Vitiate was ever intended to not be a being far beyond Plagueis' comparably feeble capabilities from day one, but there you go.

Yet despite all that, Vitiate was one to hide away so that no one would be able to kill him? If he has all this ridiculous power, I don't see why anyone would be a threat.

Him being Valkorion doesn't recontextualize anything, since he's still officially referred to as Sith. The quote applies to him.

Well I mean Sidious died by being thrown over a railing. Revan fell over and got brain cancer. Nihilus just happened to have a Jedi-shaped kryptonite. The Outlander actually does kill him, several times. Valkorion isn't invincible and he knows it. A part of his character is that he's got godlike power but is terrified over losing it. He's kind of like a shittier Diavolo.

Originally posted by Nephthys
That Valkorion was apparently fantastically powerful even as a childHe already was lol. Nothing has changed.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Well I mean Sidious died by being thrown over a railing. Revan fell over and got brain cancer. Nihilus just happened to have a Jedi-shaped kryptonite. The Outlander actually does kill him, several times. Valkorion isn't invincible and he knows it. A part of his character is that he's got godlike power but is terrified over losing it. He's kind of like a shittier Diavolo.

Still think that's the dumbest thing ever.

But anyway...I get that, but at the same time with all these power increases and what not...I feel like that claim just doesn't make sense. Why should he fear anyone, if he has all this power? Going by all these quotes, no one should have come close to killing any of his bodies.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
He already was lol. Nothing has changed. I know, but nobody actually believed that for some reason.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Really, the fact is that again continuity does and always will exist, whatever fan rules we care to invent.

When BioWare decide to slot in some new continuity to the story of Vitiate, they do not do so with the mindset that "hurr durr we dontz have to pay attention to the stuff we wrote 4 years ago", rather the opposite, they ensure what they write is continuous with what they wrote four years ago. Ergo the nature of Vitiate remains unchanged, the capabilities of Vitiate remain unchanged, there is no need for a reassessment because Vitiate is unchanged, the lay of the land is unchanged.

This is what happens when old material is embellished on and added to, this is how continuity works.

Obviously there will be instances in which the lay of the land is changed, these are called retcons, and are easily identifiable as such. However in so far, Vitiate has not been retconned, therefore no "reassessment" of his character is needed.

So again, we can invent as many rules as we please in regards to how new content bears on old content and vice versa. But practically speaking its a fruitless endeavour relative to the unalterable mechanics of the universe, that continuity (by design) remains the same, as far as it does not become retroactive.
You didn't remotely respond to my post.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I know, but nobody actually believed that for some reason. And your tears are supposed to mean something to me?

Originally posted by Beniboybling
And your tears are supposed to mean something to me?

Was that sentence supposed to mean something to me?

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
You didn't remotely respond to my post. I could say the same.

But then I actually did just fine.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I believe that Ant's argument is that the new information about Valkorion recontextualises his character and respective level of power. That Valkorion was apparently fantastically powerful even as a child, before a century of darkside exploration, before absorbing 8000 Sith Lords and all life on Nathema, before another millennia + of constant growth and deepening mastery, before draining Revan for 300 years, before absorbing Ziost...... indicates that he's blatantly superior to Plagueis by a nautical mile.

Personally I don't really see how Vitiate was ever intended to not be a being far beyond Plagueis' comparably feeble capabilities from day one, but there you go.

He was a prodigy, yes. He was incredibly powerful, sure. Plagueis was also considered the most powerful to his time, the near culmination of Bane's line, and literally a cosmological threat to the Force itself. Sidious, a bit of power growth from being annointed by the dark side itself, was in awe of Plagueis.

It's generous to your side to say that who is "contextually" more powerful is a wash, in which case we look at the explicit confirmation of the blurb.

Plagueis isn't even stronger than Revan in feats or accolades, lol. Contextually Valkorion shits on his weirdly-shaped head.

So your a racist then. Knew it.

That Darth Plagueis has a weirdly-shaped head is an immutable fact that I am merely stating for the record.

Only to your human stardards you CIS white male scum.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Plagueis isn't even stronger than Revan in feats or accolades, lol. Contextually Valkorion shits on his weirdly-shaped head.

One of your more nuanced arguments tbh.

Sorry, I got distracted by all your troll threads.

I'm actually curious as to what effin blurb LeG is talking about tbh.

I can't compete with your trolling Neph. You quite literally don't have to try.

What can I say, I have a natural talent for ruffling peoples jimmies as we can see.

rustling* That misspelling of rustling really rustled my jimmies. I bet you didn't even try Neph.

Ant you're reaching LeG levels of swtor wankery.

Well, while I think my argument was convincing, I must admit Xtasy's rebuttal was too much for me to handle.

Originally posted by Nephthys
What can I say, I have a natural talent for ruffling peoples jimmies as we can see.

Mental retardation isn't the same as being 'ruffling' jimmies in your case.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Well, while I think my argument was convincing, I must admit Xtasy's rebuttal was too much for me to handle.



I disagree with you. But Valk's feats are real. Denying him a place above Plagueis would be the equivalent of covering my ears and yelling "lalalala"

That I think Plagueis is shit so I already had Valk above him lulz

Does Neph realize that low balling Plagueis means low balling Bane?

He is a whore for TOR characters, he's too busy gagging to see anything.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
He is a whore for TOR characters, he's too busy gagging to see anything.

Hot.

Love your sig and avi <3

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
rustling* That misspelling of rustling really rustled my jimmies. I bet you didn't even try Neph.

Ruffling is a word.

Originally posted by Fated Xtasy
Hot.

Love your sig and avi <3

Dayumn.

What is so appealing about Darth Vader ?

Originally posted by Nephthys
Ruffling is a word.

I am aware. You understand the phrase is "rustling" though correct?

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
To fix both of our issues, a rule can be established that feats cannot overrule older feats (unless a retcon is established), but feats can overrule older accolades. That way, consistency can be met, but we're also as up-to-date with the current viewpoints and lore as possible.
Ant, it's one thing arguing for a position, and if you want to argue for this one so be it. But acting like you can establish some objective rule everyone else must follow seems weirdly pretentious to be honest.

That's the second time now that someone referred to that post, which I erased in favor of a new, better argument.

Absolutely no one has mentioned that one though, making me inclined to believe their is no rebuttal.

Not that I can't establish objective rules anyone must follow anyway though.

After new evidence showing that Valkorion may have actually lost to the Outlander, and Beni's gif of Arcann getting kicked and beaten up by a random person with a blaster, should we recontexualize the two emperors closer to Sirak than to a superior like, say, Caedus?

Originally posted by Zenwolf
Still think that's the dumbest thing ever.

But anyway...I get that, but at the same time with all these power increases and what not...I feel like that claim just doesn't make sense. Why should he fear anyone, if he has all this power? Going by all these quotes, no one should have come close to killing any of his bodies.
Abeloth, in spite of incredible power at her disposal, lost many avatars in battles. Those losses eventually weakened her to the extent that she could not longer maintain her presence.

No matter how strong a character is, he is likely to experience setbacks in wars and/or confrontations.

Originally posted by Trocity
What blurbs does Bane have? The only one I've seen doesn't say anything of the sort.

And yeah, Vitiate/Valkorion is obviously superior to Plagueis. However, Sidious remains the one True Emperor.
Here:

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

---

Originally posted by Petrus
I'm actually curious as to what effin blurb LeG is talking about tbh.
See above

Thanks for conceding that Bane > Valkorion.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Thanks for conceding that Bane > Valkorion.
Sorry, no concession there.

Marketing blurbs should be taken with a grain of salt.

I heard that's not Legends canon though. But if it is well we have 5 Sith with quotes saying they surpassed those before them:

Palpatine
Plaguies
Bane
Valkorion
Exar Kun

Though I know no one will actually agree with this proposal, one can make somewhat of a chain using this. Only problem might be Kun/Valkorion, since Kun is said to be stronger than all Sith before him and technically post Nathema Vitiate is before Kun.

I could buy that Exar Kun > Vitiate right after Nathema.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Sorry, no concession there.

Marketing blurbs should be taken with a grain of salt.

Because you say so?

How does this holocron put him over Plagueis? Heck, I'd say Severing Sith Lords at such an age is more impressive than creating uber-Holocrons.

I thought it was common sense that Vitiate/Valkorion was above Plagueis; guess not. Revan is arguable I guess (but I maintain my Revan>Plagueis stance.)

Originally posted by The Merchant
I heard that's not Legends canon though. But if it is well we have 5 Sith with quotes saying they surpassed those before them:

Palpatine
Plaguies
Bane
Valkorion
Exar Kun

Though I know no one will actually agree with this proposal, one can make somewhat of a chain using this. Only problem might be Kun/Valkorion, since Kun is said to be stronger than all Sith before him and technically post Nathema Vitiate is before Kun.

Exar Kun could take novel Vitiate, yeah.

Originally posted by darthbane77
I thought it was common sense that Vitiate/Valkorion was above Plagueis; guess not. Revan is arguable I guess (but I maintain my Revan>Plagueis stance.)

It's not "common sense". It's just an opinion.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Here:



---


See above Oh you thought that was a blurb? Sorry no, that's from the Star Wars Fact File.

So this is the thread responsible for the recent memetic Holocron shenanigans. Good stuff.

Originally posted by SunRazer
How does this holocron put him over Plagueis? Heck, I'd say Severing Sith Lords at such an age is more impressive than creating uber-Holocrons.

Well, I mean, he was 10. That being said, source for Vitiate personally constructing the holocron/prison thing?

Originally posted by NewGuy01
Well, I mean, he was 10. That being said, source for Vitiate personally constructing the holocron/prison thing?

"All holocrons are based on a complex yet elegant technology: a lattice of organic crystals woven together at a microscopic level. The crystal lattice can store vast amounts of information, as well as replicate the appearance and personality of the holocron's creator as a gatekeeper who will guide students in their training.

In his youth, Valkorion--then known as Tenebrae--discovered a way to twist and pervert the lattice so it could capture the spirit of powerful Force users, locking them in a metaphysical cage. He used the weapon on Dramath, his tyrannical father, and trapped him inside the holocron for centuries.

But the same corrupted technology Valkorion used to vanquish his father could also be turned against him, permanently imprisoning his immortal spirit... or obliterating it from existence.

-Dramath's Holocron codex entry"

This is what people are freaking out about? It means kid Vitiate was a genius not that he was ridiculously powerful.

Nobody cares about it except ant.

Originally posted by Nephthys
"All holocrons are based on a complex yet elegant technology: a lattice of organic crystals woven together at a microscopic level. The crystal lattice can store vast amounts of information, as well as replicate the appearance and personality of the holocron's creator as a gatekeeper who will guide students in their training.

In his youth, Valkorion--then known as Tenebrae--discovered a way to twist and pervert the lattice so it could capture the spirit of powerful Force users, locking them in a metaphysical cage. He used the weapon on Dramath, his tyrannical father, and trapped him inside the holocron for centuries.

But the same corrupted technology Valkorion used to vanquish his father could also be turned against him, permanently imprisoning his immortal spirit... or obliterating it from existence.

-Dramath's Holocron codex entry"

Well, aside from the fact that Tenebrae did this at the ripe age of like, twelve, this actually makes perfect sense. Andeddu did the same thing. It certainly doesn't do jack to put him above Plagueis, though.

Yes, the thing about him being 12 at the time is the important fact.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66


Revan's probably above Plagueis too. mmm

As a wise SWTOR wanker said to me: "People are like 'Oh look at what he did at age twelve! Make a super-impressive holocron! Imagine what he could do as Valkorion'... Get imprisoned by that same thing he made as a twelve year old... with that in mind how can you scale him like that?"

Prepubescent Tenebrae > Valkorion.

12 years old is prepubescent?

It's close enough for Beni.

Vitiate was a late bloomer.

Originally posted by Nephthys
It's close enough for Beni. Quite, a twelve year old isn't legal. Sry DMB.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Quite, a twelve year old isn't legal. Sry DMB.
I'm not Aurbere LMFAO

Brutal.

It's a fair point though, if Valkorion is able to be imprisoned by something he constructed as a child, it's difficult to claim he improved significantly in that regard over the ensuing centuries.

Guys! GUYS! I WAS THE GUY IN DMB'S STORY ABOVE ^^^

It's true, tho.

Originally posted by Fated Xtasy
I disagree with you. But Valk's feats are real. Denying him a place above Plagueis would be the equivalent of covering my ears and yelling "lalalala"

That I think Plagueis is shit so I already had Valk above him lulz

Originally posted by The Ellimist
After new evidence showing that Valkorion may have actually lost to the Outlander, and Beni's gif of Arcann getting kicked and beaten up by a random person with a blaster, should we recontexualize the two emperors closer to Sirak than to a superior like, say, Caedus?

Originally posted by Azronger
It's not "common sense". It's just an opinion. One with loads more substantiation than saying Plagueis>Valkorion lol. Plagueis is overrated and back-cover blurbs aren't to be taken seriously. As a few others have already made clear.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Brutal.

It's a fair point though, if Valkorion is able to be imprisoned by something he constructed as a child, it's difficult to claim he improved significantly in that regard over the ensuing centuries.
Entities are not all-powerful. They are likely to have a weakness or two that can be exploited. The difficult part is to discover one.

For example, Sel-Makor was powerful enough to challenge a Voice of the Emperor at its turf but a sacrifice was enough to defeat it.

Similarly, a single dagger (with special but unknown properties) was enough to kill a Celestial being.

That's not the point at all.

By comparison, Palpatine was so powerful that the dark side literally hid itself within him.

That doesn't even mean anything.

It means he shed his limitations.

You can't force a meme.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/20/c9/2e/20c92e90842dd54ba71acc5d864a0f03.jpg

Originally posted by Beniboybling
So Ant, should we start doing rematches of Luke vs Vader, Qui-Gon vs Maul, Dooku vs Yoda etc. etc. considering their new feats and accolades?

Yeah, this logic is retarded, and disturbing.
If new information came out suggesting that Vader definitely threw the fight on purpose, Qui-Gon had a nasty head cold at the time while he was dueling Maul, Dooku had too much respect for his old master to finish him off, etc, then absolutely! There are plenty of ways new information could destroy our current notions of all of those encounters and I think the power creep Vitiate seems to be going through is a great example of new information forcing us to reevaluate the old. Come to think of it, this happens all the time in comics (i.e. Flash's draw with superman in a race later being explained as the Flash not taking the race seriously and that he's really much faster).

Originally posted by Dark-Kenshin
If new information came out suggesting that Vader definitely threw the fight on purpose, Qui-Gon had a nasty head cold at the time while he was dueling Maul, Dooku had too much respect for his old master to finish him off, etc, then absolutely! There are plenty of ways new information could destroy our current notions of all of those encounters and I think the power creep Vitiate seems to be going through is a great example of new information forcing us to reevaluate the old. Come to think of it, this happens all the time in comics (i.e. Flash's draw with superman in a race later being explained as the Flash not taking the race seriously and that he's really much faster).


You WTFpwned his argument.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Feats are *always* derived from primary and secondary sources. Accolades comparing characters from different sources, however, makes them inherently secondary or tertiary sources. After all, secondary sources are works derived from what is established from previous works. And tertiary are encyclopedias, etc. In the case of the Darth Plagueis blurb, the quote declaring him the most powerful is derived from a comparison across all-existing sources. Thus, the distinction between already established power-levels through combat, and the power-levels established through broad accolades, is that the former is universally solidified in a primary source, whereas the latter is always from a secondary and tertiary source. Thus, the introduction of new primary material, such as all the post-launch SWTOR expansions, holds not only blatant higher authority to the quote, but is not restricted by the content or claims the quote places. I'll concede that by merit of the holocron he is not superior to Darth Plagueis, since that's a tertiary claim, but to repeat, the actions seen in a primary source isn't restricted by a secondary.

Now, this doesn't mean Vitiate is more powerful than Darth Plagueis, but rather he's not restricted to the quote, allowing for a new assessment to take place.

Originally posted by Dark-Kenshin
If new information came out suggesting that Vader definitely threw the fight on purpose, Qui-Gon had a nasty head cold at the time while he was dueling Maul, Dooku had too much respect for his old master to finish him off, etc, then absolutely! There are plenty of ways new information could destroy our current notions of all of those encounters and I think the power creep Vitiate seems to be going through is a great example of new information forcing us to reevaluate the old. Come to think of it, this happens all the time in comics (i.e. Flash's draw with superman in a race later being explained as the Flash not taking the race seriously and that he's really much faster).

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD


You WTFpwned his argument.

Nope. What Dark-Kenshin described is a retcon, which is special in the sense that it overrides previous conceptions by reinterpreting older sources, not by pretending they don't exist. "Vader threw the fight" and that's why it looked like he was superior is not the same as "that source is old so we're going to pretend that it doesn't exist."

Here, Ant hasn't introduced any new interpretation of the Plagueis blurb; he's just posited that we should outright discard an explicit statement for an incredibly weak theory based on a rather unremarkable new feat.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66


The problem here is that your claim of a difference in authoritative power between "primary" and "secondary" sources is something you just made up. But even if we were to take it as a given, I still see no contradiction between the idea that Vitiate was a prodigy who could create holocrons as a child, and the fact that at his peak he's still weaker than the near-culmination of the Banite line, who could threaten the balance of the Force itself and manipulate the very midichlorians that control Force sensitivity. In the absence of the Plagueis blurb maybe you could argue either way; I would definitely favor the Plagueis side, but because there's that ambiguity, the blurb's explicit statement stands as the tipping point.

You get around this by just denying that you're defending the holocron putting Vitiate above Plagueis so irrefutably that it's grounds to ignore the blurb. But you clearly do hold that view, so where and when are you going to elaborate instead of just deflecting it?

If we're running off a blind dogma of primary > secondary > tertiary with no exceptions, then Ant needs to throw out a few of his arguments.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Nope. What Dark-Kenshin described is a retcon, which is special in the sense that it overrides previous conceptions by reinterpreting older sources, not by pretending they don't exist. "Vader threw the fight" and that's why it looked like he was superior is not the same as "that source is old so we're going to pretend that it doesn't exist."

Here, Ant hasn't introduced any new interpretation of the Plagueis blurb; he's just posited that we should outright discard an explicit statement for an incredibly weak theory based on a rather unremarkable new feat.
Darth Plagueis existed in an era that is beyond the scope of TOR. Therefore, TOR content developers are unlikely to consider Darth Plagueis for comparison.

The maximum we will get is statements like these:

The Sith Emperor has mastered the dark side's power to become the most dominating Force-user the galaxy has ever seen.

From (Star Wars: The Old Republic: Codex Entry titled "The Emperor's Fallen Jedi (Knight)."

-----

The Sith Emperor is the most powerful Force-user who has ever existed. Unless this implacable enemy can be defeated, the Jedi Order is doomed.

From (Star Wars: The Old Republic: Encyclopedia)

-----

Your stance is that we should treat any accolade as gospel unless directly contradicted in another source. This is not a sound stance for a cross-era comparison because TOR is not canon. TOR content developers and/or authors are unlikely to write about Sith Lords in their works who existed in the future. Older sources promoted Darth Bane as the most powerful Sith Lord in galactic history. However, Valkorion's showings outstrip that of Darth Bane by miles. Therefore, it is unwise to stick to an older source to determine where Darth Bane stands in the grand scheme of things. We are unlikely to get a book that covers entire galactic history and rank characters in terms of power.

Therefore, objectivity is the way forward. We should look at these matters on a case-by-case basis.

It's not as if TOR and Vitiate haven't had treatment from other sources that span all of history.

If we're running off authorial intent, then Sidious is still supreme, since he's been touted as such for decades by a variety of authors, in all manner of books and from all sorts of perspectives, in-universe and out-of-universe. There's literally no way around it.

As far as "objectivity" goes (which is an entirely fantastical concept, I hope you know), then Plagueis is remarkably close to the pinnacle of Sith power (Sidious), and he was so powerful that he could basically influence life and death on a physical scale and the very midi-chlorians of the Force itself.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Darth Plagueis existed in an era that is beyond the scope of TOR. Therefore, TOR content developers are unlikely to consider Darth Plagueis for comparison.


The point is that the Plagueis blurb does cover Vitiate.



Right, and "has ever seen" is the present perfect tense, .i.e. it would not cover any of the Banite sith.



Or if you could make a very strong theory from the surrounding evidence, yes.



Neither is the Plagueis novel. But we're assuming their existence in one EU continuity. That makes sense, since they're all labeled Legends, and reference one another (Plagueis mentions the Sith Emperor, Bane mentions Revan, etc.)



...but you haven't presented any reason to discard a direct statement in this particular "case by case basis". Just pointing out that you think other blurbs are wrong is not a reason to discard any you see on your whim; by that logic, I can discard all the novelizations by pointing out that the RotJ one claimed Ben Owens was Kenobi's brother.

So what is your case for tossing out the blurb? Why is it so obvious to you that, say, absorbing Ziost is more impressive than presenting a cosmological threat to the balance of the Force that you think we can literally pretend an official source doesn't exist?

Remember, your burden is especially large because you aren't even trying to reinterpret the blurb - you literally want to discard it.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
The point is that the Plagueis blurb does cover Vitiate.
So Del Rey gets to decide which character is more powerful than the other in Star Wars, on the back cover of a book?

Del Ray's stance on the matter is 'secondary' and should be perceived like that.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Right, and "has ever seen" is the present perfect tense, .i.e. it would not cover any of the Banite sith.
http://40.media.tumblr.com/31950a8dde52ecd8682a85400b5b3aff/tumblr_inline_nsiqv6OvZw1rm8mui_400.png

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Or if you could make a very strong theory from the surrounding evidence, yes.
See below.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Neither is the Plagueis novel. But we're assuming their existence in one EU continuity. That makes sense, since they're all labeled Legends, and reference one another (Plagueis mentions the Sith Emperor, Bane mentions Revan, etc.)
Right.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
...but you haven't presented any reason to discard a direct statement in this particular "case by case basis". Just pointing out that you think other blurbs are wrong is not a reason to discard any you see on your whim; by that logic, I can discard all the novelizations by pointing out that the RotJ one claimed Ben Owens was Kenobi's brother.

So what is your case for tossing out the blurb? Why is it so obvious to you that, say, absorbing Ziost is more impressive than presenting a cosmological threat to the balance of the Force that you think we can literally pretend an official source doesn't exist?
Now pay attention.

My argument rests upon the observation that an older source called The Official Star Wars Fact File promotes Darth Bane as the most powerful Sith Lord in galactic history. Should we continue to take this revelation at face value?
+
Star Wars is a continuously evolving and expanding lore. From time to time, new information emerges that may challenge credibility or truthfulness of information (published earlier) in certain aspects, directly and/or indirectly. Due to this factor, we witnessed release of 'revisions' of several sourcebooks.

Analogy:

- The Ultimate Visual Guide to Star Wars (2005)
- The Ultimate Visual Guide to Star Wars: Updated and Expanded (2012)

Now, that statement about Darth Bane covers the entire galactic history up to that point in time. And new content about characters - who existed earlier - is unlikely to challenge its credibility (explicitly) because Darth Bane would be beyond the scope of such works. Therefore, it is up to the readers to formulate an informed opinion about this matter.

In the case of Darth Plagueis, the accolade in question is from a 'secondary' source; not from the author of the book (James Luceno) or a component of the story of Darth Plagueis.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Remember, your burden is especially large because you aren't even trying to reinterpret the blurb - you literally want to discard it.
See above

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD


You WTFpwned his argument.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
My argument rests upon the observation that an older source called The Official Star Wars Fact File promotes Darth Bane as the most powerful Sith Lord in galactic history. Should we continue to take this revelation at face value? Older source? Than what exactly, given it was published in 2014?

And also, simply because Vitiate can consume a planet, that in itself does not prove Plagueis cannot do the same. If you really want to discard the accolade, then prove that Plagueis' limit (which he never showed in any source) is below Vitiate's. You must accomplish this without an argument from ignorance.

Unless the accolade is discarded absolutely (i.e. in the respect that it is proven non-canon) then the fact remains that Plagueis > Vanilla (2012) Vitiate, who himself > weakened Ziost Vitiate per the ground realities of the source material.

And that will remain true until somebody substantiates the idea that Vitiate has been retconned into being more powerful.

Vanilla is actually 2011. But you're right.

Originally posted by Nephthys
You can't force a meme.

The meme has been pretty damn funny, honestly.

Originally posted by Nephthys
You can't force a meme.

You're referring to back when I had limitations. I have since shed them.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
It means he shed his limitations.

Originally posted by Nephthys
You can't force a meme.

Turns out I did tbh.

up

Solid October 2016 post.

wat r ppls thoughts on drews comments that viti cant mind dominate without prep

This thread man

Redemption: https://www.suspectinsightforums.com/t4248-star-wars-vs-debating-in-2021-part-i-shedding-limitations

So this is where you've been hiding... >.>

join us