Where is it noted that Ajunta Pall is >> Karness Murr?

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



Ziggystardust
Quote?

Azronger
It isn't outright stated, but rather it is implied, given that no Sith would willingly serve an equal or an inferior:

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11117/111178634/4750704-ajunta+pall+became+the+ruler.png

NewGuy01
Issue is, that was a temporary arrangement that came about when all involved parties were pre-prime. Karness Muur and Sorzus Syn in particular hadn't even been exposed Sith Sorcery or Alchemy--their specialities--at that point. If we're following the logic that "they're inferior because they willingly served", it ought to be telling that they all ended up turning on each other at one point or another.

ares834

Azronger
Based on what did all other Sith increase their powers, but Pall did not?

ares834
I don't know. Luckily none of us said that. smile

Azronger
I understood your post wrong. I thought you were only referring to Muur and Syn.

NewGuy01
Were they, now? Ah, well, I'll take your word for it.

ChaosTheory123
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Issue is, that was a temporary arrangement that came about when all involved parties were pre-prime. Karness Muur and Sorzus Syn in particular hadn't even been exposed Sith Sorcery or Alchemy--their specialities--at that point. If we're following the logic that "they're inferior because they willingly served", it ought to be telling that they all ended up turning on each other at one point or another.

IIRC, the entire point of the Hundred Year Darkness was specifically because they were all delving into Alchemy and Sorcery :hmm


Been a while since I read sources espousing on them though

SunRazer
He was obviously supreme at the time of arriving on Korriban. Whether that remained the case later is unknown. I doubt there was a significant difference, though, given that even Pall couldn't rise above the Sith infighting and died in said infighting.

NewGuy01
Originally posted by ChaosTheory123
IIRC, the entire point of the Hundred Year Darkness was specifically because they were all delving into Alchemy and Sorcery :hmm

Emphasis: "Sith."

ChaosTheory123
Why assume more about a scenario than the information given?

He was superior at their arrival, why assume the status quo changed without narrative noting it? :hmm

You guys seem to be delving into powerscaling more than I remember, so "feats" isn't exactly the answer to that question *shrugs*

ChaosTheory123
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Emphasis: "Sith."

Missed that *shrugs*

Like I said before though, I don't remember enough about the Hundred Year Darkness atm to really comment on if Leviathan were a thing during it

Pretty sure they were mentioned to be part of the battle on Corbos though, but faulty memory

SunRazer
Leviathans were used on Corbos, IIRC. I mean, the Exiles were exiled for delving into Alchemy, as you said.

red8
Ajuntu looks badass in that one popular background picture of all of them.

Therefore Ajunta >>>>>>>>> Murr

UCanShootMyNova
Originally posted by ChaosTheory123
He was superior at their arrival, why assume the status quo changed without narrative noting it?

Well like Nova mentioned Pall apparently died during the infighting and couldn't regain control of them.

ChaosTheory123
That doesn't suggest he was weaker

That suggests the gap wasn't major and everything else in between

Again, why should I pretend the status quo actually changed?

UCanShootMyNova
Pretend?

I mean, you're right in that it doesn't suggest either or but going by how Pall is viewed by other characters in the mythos and how Muur was it seems to indicate Muur surpassed him.

ChaosTheory123
Yep

There's barely any material on Pall in his respect thread as is, and nothing within it actually paints Muur as having surpassed Pall

Nor does Muur have a direct, even indirect, comparison to Pall outside where he's become Pall's shadow hand

You're free to keep your opinion, but its a stretch of the imagination to claim its concrete

I'll stick with the stated and unambiguous until that's actually contradicted *shrugs*

UCanShootMyNova
I'm referring to how they compare in regards to how other characters in the mythos view them and what third person sources have said about them. Not that they were compared to each other specifically.

The concrete source only takes into account their first arrival and doesn't have any bearing on any disparity decades later. What does is that Pall wasn't able to retain control over any of them.

I mean, I honestly don't have a source in this race and until recently was touting Pall > Muur but the evidence presented doesn't suggest that's the case honestly. At the very least you'd admit it's ambiguous.

ChaosTheory123
Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
At the very least you'd admit it's ambiguous.

Not really

You're making all the assumptions about how the first group of Sith tore themselves apart where nothing you're assuming needs to occur for Pall to retain his minor superiority

its straight forward he was Dark Lord of the Sith and they his Shadow Hand

Its ambiguous how his reign ended, who or what it took to end it, and just how large a gap in power existed between the Exiles in the first place

I can go on and on really

I'll take the 1 known variable over assuming anything about the others when making a decision *shrugs*

UCanShootMyNova
We know that that his reign ended in civil war which means his Shadow Hands became his former Shadow Hands and his current rivals. I guess I just don't assume a variable remained the same after the fact.

ChaosTheory123
You're assuming it ended by 1v1 combat

You're assuming 1v1 combat can't go either way when a gap is small enough

You're assuming there was any combat at all

You're assuming he didn't go the way of Tulak Hord or Kallig a la assassination

I can go on *shrugs*

UCanShootMyNova
I'm not assuming any of that as I haven't postulate any of the former Shadow Hands rose above him.

I'm just not retaining the stance that he's > then all of them simply because a quote prior to their growth set them below.

Please don't make false assumptions friend.

ChaosTheory123
Wait

Who was arguing he was superior to them all combined at any point in time?

I'm now genuinely confused

UCanShootMyNova
No one.

When I say "stance that he's > then all of them" I'm referring to his superiority to each of them individually.

ChaosTheory123
Ah

That's better then

In that case

You're again assuming too much about their growth without a retracting statement regarding how they compared to Pall after it occurred

Barring being told explicitly one of the Exiles rose above him, why should I assume the former status quo changed with growth?

Your stance lacks a foundation, its born of assumption *shrugs*

I don't discount it being possible, as information is limited, but the information we possess fails to support it

NewGuy01
The only reason to assume he was the strongest among them in the first place is because they willingly gave him the leadership role. However, after they turned on each other and split into rival factions, that reason ceased to exist. There's no reason to assume that he was necessarily stronger or weaker than the others by the end, based on that alone. Rather, to take either side would be "assuming too much."

The reason I tend to favor Karness Muur over Ajutna Pall--exposure aside--is simply because he and his accomplishments far better withstood the test of time. The likelihood is, though, that those two and the others were relative peers at their peaks.

UCanShootMyNova
Originally posted by ChaosTheory123
Ah

That's better then

In that case

You're again assuming too much about their growth without a retracting statement regarding how they compared to Pall after it occurred

Barring being told explicitly one of the Exiles rose above him, why should I assume the former status quo changed with growth?

Your stance lacks a foundation, its born of assumption *shrugs*

I don't discount it being possible, as information is limited, but the information we possess fails to support it

My stance isn't that any of them were above him. Just that Pall wasn't above them either as there's nothing to prove he retained superiority over them during the time of the civil war. I'm not going to hold the same position on any perceived disparity between them without confirmation during the time period we're discussing. A quote decades beforehand just doesn't cut it.

UCanShootMyNova
Originally posted by NewGuy01
The only reason to assume he was the strongest among them in the first place is because they willingly gave him the leadership role. However, after they turned on each other and split into rival factions, that reason ceased to exist. There's no reason to assume that he was necessarily stronger or weaker than the others by the end, based on that alone. Rather, to take either side would be "assuming too much."

The reason I tend to favor Karness Muur over Ajutna Pall--exposure aside--is simply because he and his accomplishments far better withstood the test of time. The likelihood is, though, that those two and the others were relative peers at their peaks.

thumb up

ChaosTheory123
Originally posted by NewGuy01
The only reason to assume he was the strongest among them in the first place is because they willingly gave him the leadership role.

The whole "dark lord of the sith" thing is kind of a big deal, or so I've been led to believe *shrugs*



That itself is a fair stance



Accomplishment and impact on history aren't what I'd consider indicators of power *shrugs*

You can be an all powerful idiot, do nothing notable, and still retain your place as the best

Regardless, I wouldn't have suggested any major gap between any of the exiles regardless *shrugs*

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