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

A very interesting series of statements, his upcoming book could change the ground realities of the mythos tbh.

Yet he's clearly referring to Canon since he refers to Luke as of TFA and future movies. Soo....he's gonna be bringing back Kun and Ulic in the Canon? Sounds nice.

The opinion of an an author is non- canon and doesn't make a difference unless you're desperately grasping at straws like the blockhead that is the OP

He's clearly just referring to the fact that Luke is being replaced and rewritten for Disney Canon, so we will see how powerful Luke really is. We can't expect him to have the 'Legends Luke' or 'Canon Luke' mindset like we do.

Originally posted by carthage
The opinion of an an author is non- canon and doesn't make a difference unless you're desperately grasping at straws like the blockhead that is the OP
Feat Wars retards aren't relevant to the discussion.

Neither are blind morons that are seeking confirmation bias

Originally posted by AncientPower
He's clearly just referring to the fact that Luke is being replaced and rewritten for Disney Canon, so we will see how powerful Luke really is. We can't expect him to have the 'Legends Luke' or 'Canon Luke' mindset like we do.

There's a vastly clear difference though, but yeah.

Jesus Christ....

Lol

Knock off the insults. Thank you.

I wonder if the book he's writing is Star Wars or about Star Wars. He seems to be writing something commenting on his past work, rather than producing something new that would bring those characters into canon.

A mod? This is strange...

There would be no point though to publish something that isn't about the Current Canon. I doubt it would be approved since all Legends material has stopped altogether with the exception of TOR.

Edit: Oh just noticed the PS bit. Ok that seems kind of weird, considering it's been how long since the Canon revamp? Yet they are just now allowing this to get put out? Kinda bizarre.

If it's just Vietch talking about his past projects it wouldn't need to be approved (as least I wouldn't think so).

Sheevites just took a hit.

Ya I just noticed the PS bit, though he says book. But I mean...I guess, it's just weird that he's writing a Legends book, when the new Canon has been going on for...2 years now?..

Besides the fact that he's working on a new project, I don't see anything new here. Tom's thoughts on these matters are pretty well known.

If anything it provides a concrete confirmation of Kun and Qel-Droma relative to_their DE counter parts.

I never really understood how they were counterparts tbh.

Kun/Palpatine are the Dark Lords with Ulic/Luke as their prodigal apprentices, the apprentices are redeemed by a significant other in Nomi/Leia, thus betraying their Dark Lords and ending their reigns.

Fair enough.

Originally posted by NewGuy01
Besides the fact that he's working on a new project, I don't see anything new here. Tom's thoughts on these matters are pretty well known.

He doesn't "confirms" sh!t.
He outright contradict sources, that's all.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
He doesn't "confirms" sh!t.
He outright contradict sources, that's all.

Originally posted by REXXXX
Knock off the insults. Thank you.

I wonder if the book he's writing is Star Wars or about Star Wars. He seems to be writing something commenting on his past work, rather than producing something new that would bring those characters into canon. Welcome back, man!

Interested to see the thoughts of people who put a lot of stock in author statements about this.

It feels good to be somewhat vindicated in my placement of Kun on Sidious' tier.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Interested to see the thoughts of people who put a lot of stock in author statements about this.
They're legit hilarious when Author Statements have more weight for them then Objective, Out-Of Universe sources lmfao.

Yeah, you shouldn't feel good for that.
We have a as strong, if not stronger, evidence for Kressh > Nadd, Tulak > Nihilus etc. but you don't believe that, do you?

Legends is done, so I highly doubt this new book will be official.

Beyond that this is just Veitch's opinion, which is nice but doesn't hold water in any kind of formal debate.

What makes this even more curious though is that it directly contradicts Veitch's own work (much like with that Force storms comment), which twice describes Palpatine as the most powerful dark side entity ever, even by RotJ.

Which leaves me to believe it can safely be dismissed as unreliable.

@Urs - Kressh > Nadd? What's this based on?

Honestly it sounds like he's taking the piss...

It was obvious to me that from actual depiction - and not hyperbolic statements - Exar Kun is the strongest Dark sider of them all.

Virtually all the other contenders, Sidious, Krayt, Plagueis, Vitiate, Nihilus were taken out by either an elite individual or a small number of elites from their own era.
Even in the case of Abeloth, the bulk of her essence/power was defeated by Luke and Krayt together.

That's not the case with Kun. He was head and shoulders above the elites of his own era. It took the concerted efforts of thousands of Jedi using the greatest Light side power in the mythos to beat Kun. Then 4000 thousand years later his spirit casually wrecks post-DE Luke.

Kun is not even a character I particularly like. But it's undeniable that he's the strongest Sith ever.

That's cause Kun was doing some ritual that was similar to Vitiate's ritual on Nathema, which would have made him some spirit that can wander throughout the cosmos or something like that. If anything Ragnos>Nadd>Kun going by the comics themselves and disregarding encyclopedias. Ragnos is hyped being this amazing DLOTS who's mere amulets granted Kun and Ulic far more power than they could have ever gotten from what the Krath and Nadd's teachings can offer them. Nadd implied he was in awe of the prowess of the Ancient Sith, and was in belief that with his new body he'll be the head honcho of his relationship with Kun but ofc Kun destroyed him instead of granting him his wishes.

It "takes" thousands of Jedi to seal Kun (who had just drained the power of virtually the entire Massassi species) in the same way that it took every Jedi who ever existed to seal Palpatine forever.

Also, accolades declaring that you're the most powerful ever aren't hyperbole, lol. Not when there's over a dozen of them.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
We have a as strong, if not stronger, evidence for Kressh > Nadd, Tulak > Nihilus etc. but you don't believe that, do you?

First I've heard about it.

Originally posted by SunRazer
@Urs - Kressh > Nadd? What's this based on?
Wasn't the crew of the Exile far more influenced by Kressh's Grave then by Nadd's?

Weren't cultists siphoning the power from Nadd's tomb though?

Also Nadd's spirit was destroyed and stuff.

I call bullshit. One author statement isn't enough to overrule the many quotes establishing Sidious as the top dog as far as Sith are concerned, and his feats more than back that up. I could buy Kun maybe being on par with TPM or TCW Sidious, but not DE Sidious.

On top of that, Ulic has nothing his array of feats and accolades that even approaches Luke level shit. I think it's safe to say that Veitch is either pulling your chain, doesn't actually know shit about shit, or is a hardcore member of the KOTOR/TOR Era Brigade.

Originally posted by Unbowed
It was obvious to me that from actual depiction - and not hyperbolic statements - Exar Kun is the strongest Dark sider of them all.

Virtually all the other contenders, Sidious, Krayt, Plagueis, Vitiate, Nihilus were taken out by either an elite individual or a small number of elites from their own era.
Even in the case of Abeloth, the bulk of her essence/power was defeated by Luke and Krayt together.

That's not the case with Kun. He was head and shoulders above the elites of his own era. It took the concerted efforts of thousands of Jedi using the greatest Light side power in the mythos to beat Kun. Then 4000 thousand years later his spirit casually wrecks post-DE Luke.

Kun is not even a character I particularly like. But it's undeniable that he's the strongest Sith ever.

I want to add that reading TOTJ the characters Ommin and Waarb Null were obvious expys of Palpatine and Vader from ROTJ, pretty sure that's supposed to indicate that they're also supposed to be as powerful as said characters. Ommin even had the entire planet of Onderon under the power of the dark side with his sorcery along with his family, akin to DE Palpatine and his Dark side adepts control of Byss. And all of that was given to him by the power of Freedon Nadd's mere spirit, and just a fraction of that power.

One wonders how things would have been if they kept the idea that Naga Sadow was a mere Sith sorceror who was banished by the TRUE Dark Lords of the Sith and Nadd was someone who was too weak to take the mantle of Dark Lord from a Sadow who only became Dark Lord via proxy aka the destruction of the Sith species.

In fact if that were kept true then the Krath and Nadd's teachings were mere scraps of what the Ancient Sith had and considering Markas talismans granted Kun and Ulic far more power than the Krath's and Nadd's teachings like I said beforehand then the Ancient Sith's true intentions painted God like beings in Star Wars continuity. Sadly that only partially came into frutition.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Wasn't the crew of the Exile far more influenced by Kressh's Grave then by Nadd's?

True. But Nadd's Tomb was messed around with over the years (ie. Arca using Force Light in it), whereas Kressh's remained intact. Although I suppose you could say the Mandalorian Wars intensified the nexus on Dxun overall, which could include Nadd's Tomb, but that's unlikely.

True, but IIRC they could barely even enter Kressh's chamber, which was also much older.
Obviously Kressh > Nadd is Bullshit, but the case is as strong as Exar ~ Sidious lmfao.

They couldn't enter at all.

Originally posted by REXXXX
Knock off the insults. Thank you. A little late to the party there...

Author opinions mean jack shit. But if a book by Veitch gets approved into the Legends continuity, which declares Exar Kun = Palpatine, I guess we'll have to accept that.

Legends is done, so don't hold your breath.

They did release sourcebooks after the split.

I just find it completely bizarre after....what more than a decade after and a Canon overhaul this is just now coming out, I felt like this would have fit and made more sense years prior.

Originally posted by SunRazer
They did release sourcebooks after the split. Only those that were already under development. More likely this will be a self-published thing.

Someone also apparently got an email from Kevin J. Anderson stating that Exar Kun was superior to Palpatine.

Here's what the DE Endnotes said:

http://i.imgur.com/tiVcIgX.png

http://i.imgur.com/66VsP4I.png

http://i.imgur.com/fQWe2ks.png

Huh.

None of those actually indicate Sidious > Kun. They can all be interpreted as "at the time" instead of "of all time".

If we construct non-existent contexts yeah, on the other hand Sidious is the greatest known wielder of the dark side, Kun is a known wielder of the dark side, therefore Sidious is greater than Kun.

It is funny those who support Palpatine say ignore these statements but quickly start putting up their own sources to counter. Worried me thinks.

I'm intrigued quan, what statements have Palpatine supporters encouraged others to ignore?

Originally posted by Beniboybling
I'm intrigued quan, what statements have Palpatine supporters encouraged others to ignore? Originally posted by darthbane77
On top of that, Ulic has nothing his array of feats and accolades that even approaches Luke level shit. I think it's safe to say that Veitch is either pulling your chain, doesn't actually know shit about shit, or is a hardcore member of the KOTOR/TOR Era Brigade. Since you asked so nicely.

I see, but perhaps learn the difference between unlicensed opinions and canon source material.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
I see, but perhaps learn the difference between unlicensed opinions and canon source material. I do know the difference but I am consistent with how I view opinions. Most of the biased aren't which is my problem here.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
If we construct non-existent contexts yeah, on the other hand Sidious is the greatest known wielder of the dark side, Kun is a known wielder of the dark side, therefore Sidious is greater than Kun.

Kun wasn't known to still be alive, so he wouldn't be considered a wielder of the dark side. Can't do anything if you're dead.

Also, UOU I don't think Kun even existed at the time that was written.

Greatest living != greatest known

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Greatest living != greatest known http://new3.fjcdn.com/thumbnails/comments/6115100+_26f331e5fd2637c8e6657a1bc7318367.jpg

Greatest known != Greatest ever.

It means greatest known yeah, which Kun is.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Greatest known != Greatest ever.

= strawman

Like I said, Kun probably didn't exist at that point to begin with. And again, it gives no context for whether it's merely speaking of the present or of all time.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
= strawman

Um, how? Isn't that kind of the entire discussion though?

Kun predated the Emperor by thousands of years.

No, the conversation is whether Sheev is greater than Kun.

I meant that he literally hadn't been created yet.

Of which my point is relevant to.

Guess Kun literally couldn't have been made stronger than Palpatine then. mmm

And AP said ground realities, snigger.

Ulic still existed in the DE endnotes and he would have been considered envious of DE Palpatines power and Ulic knew of Kun who iirc didn't think much of his power.

Originally posted by The Merchant
Ulic knew of Kun who iirc didn't think much of his power.
Which one? Ulic didn't think much of Kun or Kun didn't think much of Ulic?

Ulic wasn't envious of Kuns power while the DE end notes say he would have been envious of DE Palpatine. At least nothing in the comics indicates to me that Ulic was envious of Kun.

I'd be surprised if he wasn't envious and resentful. He did submit to be his apprentice after all.

But he was all buddy buddy about it, grabbing Kuns hand in a manly hand shake and being like "yeah we're Sith now!" also judging by the DE end notes I got the impression that Kun and Ulic were originally meant to be one character but somewhere down the line they made Kun. Ofc "authors intent" doesn't matter much.

It's fairly hard to believe the amount of stupid going on in this thread.

Originally posted by AncientPower
If anything it provides a concrete confirmation of Kun and Qel-Droma relative to_their DE counter parts.

I'm very sorry, but it doesn't. Assuming this e-mail was really coming from Tom Veitch, he is just referring to the new Disney Canon. So that would put Kun on one level / maybe above ROTJ Sidious (not his DE incarnation) and Ulic above ROTJ Luke (not his EU/Legends self). Which isn't much of a suprise, since Veitch (and Anderson) specifically contacted Lucas in order to get a grasp on what Sith Lords and Jedi could possibly do in order to write their comics. So those characters were designed to be greater / more impressive than their movie counterparts.

Not that Veitch's opinion matters at all because, really, it doesn't.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
They're legit hilarious when Author Statements have more weight for them then Objective, Out-Of Universe sources lmfao.


Just as hilarious as people, who believe that any available source is "objective" or "out of universe".

Originally posted by Beniboybling
What makes this even more curious though is that it directly contradicts Veitch's own work (much like with that Force storms comment), which twice describes Palpatine as the most powerful dark side entity ever, even by RotJ.



Originally posted by Beniboybling
Here's what the DE Endnotes said:

http://i.imgur.com/tiVcIgX.png

http://i.imgur.com/66VsP4I.png

http://i.imgur.com/fQWe2ks.png

Huh.

This is great. You do realize, that, when the DE endnotes were written, Kun didn't exist, yet. Neither did much of the EU/Legends universe that was developed later. So those notes can basically just compare Sidious to the other Dark Side users known until that point in time, which is just a handful (most of them seen in the DE comics), with Vader still being the most powerful among them.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Kun predated the Emperor by thousands of years.

No, the conversation is whether Sheev is greater than Kun.

*facepalm*
Seriously, Tempest. Over the years, it should have sunk into your brain, that a source cannot take things into account, that do not exist (yet). The DE endnotes can't be used to put Sidious over Kun, because Kun wasn't even invented when they were written.

And in the context of this debate, it's especially stupid to try that stuff, provided that the DE endnotes are written by Veitch. So people here are literally trying to contradict Veitch's opinion from 2016 with Veitch's opinion from 1993, while failing to acknowledge the fact that the SW EU/Legends universe did develop quite a bit between those two statements.

Originally posted by The Merchant
Ulic still existed in the DE endnotes and he would have been considered envious of DE Palpatines power and Ulic knew of Kun who iirc didn't think much of his power.

Nope. You may want to check the publication history of the TOTJ comics. Veitch originally had Ulic in mind as some sort of new Vader: Somebody that would fall to the Dark Side, wage war and finally be redeemed. He would have been the real antagonist in the TOTJ era.

Then Anderson came along with Kun and put him above Ulic, essentially "stealing" Veitch's previously developed character. So Ulic in the DE endnotes didn't know Kun because Kun wasn't invented at that point in time. And the character is also not the same that we see in the comics later - at least in the "Dark Lords of the Sith" and "Sith War" comics.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/UYTNYcBfpX0/hqdefault.jpg

There's accolades of Sheev being the MVP Sith all the way to 2014, before SW only published Disney canon only works.
The entire franchise is simply pointing to Palpatine being the most powerful Sith Lord, and there's no going around that.

Nai if you can point to me where it was retconned I'm all ears, otherwise the endnotes remained in print (and where republished several times) into the production and after TotJ.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Nai if you can point to me where it was retconned I'm all ears, otherwise the endnotes remained in print (and where republished several times) into the production and after TotJ.

How can a single person be so dense?

The question is not about the quotes being contradicted / retconned. The question is what they could possible refer to, being written in 1993. Attempting to extend their meaning beyond that, is altering the original meaning of the quotes, which is just an obviously false interpretation, as they can't have the meaning you want them to have. I really don't get how people capable of reading can't have enough common sense to figure that out.

What you're attempting to do here, is essentially citing a 20 year old history book on how the world is, to make an argument, that the world can't have changed, because the history book describes it in another way. In fact, you're going even one step further:



You go by the idea that the history book does influence the future by what is written in it. Do you see how ridiculous that is?

And your "argument" that it is republished without changes is utterly stupid. Even the sources that have been completely retconned are still available in pretty new prints. As far as I remember, the latest edition of "Splinter of the Mind's Eye" was printed in 2015 for example. So by your logic, that an entirely valid piece of "Legendary Canon", yes?

Damn.

The first quote refers to practitioners of the dark side of the Force, the second quote refers to expressions of the dark side of the Force, and the final quote refers to wielders of the dark side of the Force. Kun is all three of these, and I'm sorry that upsets you.

On the other hand no, the fact that Kun hadn't not been created at this time is irrelevant, because from an in-universe perspective he did exist, he simply hadn't been written about yet. So still looking for that retcon.

I'm sure if Kun was meant to be more powerful than Sidious, it would be him, not Sidious, who is bursting at the seams with "most powerful Sith/Dark Sider in history" quotes. But he's nat.

Nai, it's okay to be second place. Or third. Or sixth.

I don't really get this obsession with trying to disregard Sidious as the most powerful people have. Like why is it such a big deal?

Because it's not their favourite Sith Lord.

Nai, you should try to understand that the world doesn't revolve around you, and that there are other completely valid perspectives regarding sourcebook quotes, besides your own. How about, instead of running around like a 4-year-old telling everyone they're wrong and you're right, simply agree to disagree?

Originally posted by ILS
I'm sure if Kun was meant to be more powerful than Sidious, it would be him, not Sidious, who is bursting at the seams with "most powerful Sith/Dark Sider in history" quotes. But he's nat.

Nai, it's okay to be second place. Or third. Or sixth. Same goes for AncientPower.

Originally posted by MythLord
Because it's not their favourite Sith Lord.

Lamest reason ever.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
The first quote refers to practitioners of the dark side of the Force, the second quote refers to expressions of the dark side of the Force, and the final quote refers to wielders of the dark side of the Force. Kun is all three of these, and I'm sorry that upsets you.

Kun is in none of these in 1993.



Apparently, the stupid has decided to stay stupid. Nothing to do about that.

But just for info:

a)
There wasn't even an "in-universe perspective" back in 1993, because there was no formal "expanded universe" that had been established back then. Essentially, you had very few writers making stories up, that were just in theory happening in the same continuity. The latter was just established when Lucas went on producing the PT to keep things in check and he even took things from the expanded universe (e.g. "Coruscant". That is pretty obvious, if you care for actually reading SW material published back in the day.

b)
The endnotes aren't part of the source, but an essay written by Tom Veitch on the development of the comic. How is that "in universe" anyway?

c)
Utilzing your twisted logic against you: The endnotes were no longer published with the source after the third print. So, apparently, they were edited out, which probably means, they aren't "canon" any longer. D'uh.

Beating idiot with his own twisted logic. Priceless.

Originally posted by ILS
I'm sure if Kun was meant to be more powerful than Sidious, it would be him, not Sidious, who is bursting at the seams with "most powerful Sith/Dark Sider in history" quotes. But he's nat.

Nai, it's okay to be second place. Or third. Or sixth.

I, seriously, don't give a crap about where Kun is placed in the (nonexistant) "hierarchy" of Sith Lords. I just don't like people performing logical stunts in order to sell their bullshit.

Originally posted by Azronger
Nai, you should try to understand that the world doesn't revolve around you, and that there are other completely valid perspectives regarding sourcebook quotes, besides your own. How about, instead of running around like a 4-year-old telling everyone they're wrong and you're right, simply agree to disagree?

There are instances in which one can agree to disagree.

The question, if a quote coming from 1993 can refer to things that didn't even exist back then is not one of those. And this isn't a different "completely valid perspective" but just utter bullshit. So I'm really sorry that I tell people that they are wrong, when they proclaim that the sky is green. And I'm really sorry if I hurt people's feeling by telling them, that they are stupid if they act stupid.

But given that you are the person, who thinks that Sidious can beat an infinite amount of Vaders in combat, I can understand why you are worried about my attitude.

Who cares? Sidious has post-Kun quotes claiming that he's the most powerful ever as well. Even if you can't find an agreeable way of settling the 1993 quotes, there's others that can be used.

Originally posted by Nai
Kun is in none of these in 1993.He was in 1994 and guess what? Sidious was and is all the aforementioned as well, this is known as continuity.

Cute. But yes, your condition appears to be incurable.

The DE Endnotes are written from an in-universe perspective yes, this should be obvious given the describe the characters and universe itself as if it were real. And in a living, breathing universe, beings do not pop out of wormholes and into existence the moment at which they are written. Rather the Sith Lords of ancient times already exist within the contexts of those quotes, we just don't know about them.

As for whether continuity had been yet established, irrelevant, fact is it exists, and both Dark Empire and Tales of the Jedi are part of it.

Regardless according to the Wookiee it was first outlined in 1994, that's practically simultaneous.

See above.

That doesn't probably mean anything. Naturally we know that the reality is that they were reiterated by multiple sources since.

I'm really starting to think your an obnoxious person. mmm

I'll leave Temp to mock you on that one.

Nope, its just called continuity, and it appears you are the only one whose upset about it.

To make it easier to understand, (fictional) continuity according to Wikipedia is: "consistency of the characteristics of people, plot, objects, and places seen by the reader or viewer over period of time."

Or in other words, if Darth Sidious is established as the "the Dark Side's most powerful expression" in 1993, he will remain so foreseeable future until otherwise retconned into something else, not cease to be the moment a new comic or novel is published, which for the record would render continuity redundant. Instead these characteristics are continuous, which yes means they carry into the future.

For the record, I wouldn't at all mind the establishment of Sheev as top dog, if it weren't for the PT Brigade attempting to Status Quo the entire era as some form of a matrix of circular wank. Worse is the Sheev wank itself, Vader can pose a threat to Sidious and he straight up loses to DE Luke, but apparently he can stomp the likes of Revan, Krayt, Kun, Plagueis and even Valkorion.

It isn't something that would ever be established in continuity but people like to willfully abandon common sense and jump on the wank train.

Originally posted by AncientPower
For the record, I wouldn't at all mind the establishment of Sheev as top dog, if it weren't for the PT Brigade attempting to Status Quo the entire era as some form of a matrix of circular wank. Kinda like you're attempting with the Ancients, huh.

But yeah, Sidious stomps Kun. Merry Christmas.

Very funny, even funnier is that the mere concept of the Banite Sith being challenged by anybody but Banite Sith and their descendants seems to infuriate you and your ilk.

But please continue with the pretense that you weren't whipped into the PT brigade as a defense mechanism against Ant.

Originally posted by AncientPower
Very funny, even funnier is that the mere concept of the Banite Sith being challenged by anybody but Banite Sith and their descendants seems to infuriate you and your ilk.Nah, me and my ilk are just woke to the truth.

http://imguol.com/c/entretenimento/5b/2016/10/14/nazare-tedesco-vila-de-senhora-do-destino-2004-vira-meme-mundial-1476485254931_300x200.jpg

You mistook 'truth' with head-canon.

If you actually went beyond Status Quos via novel blurbs, I wouldn't be at all bothered. That isn't what is happening though, there are no actual debates, just fallacious power scaling establishments that act in exactly the opposite interest of debate. Anybody who argues against it is immediately labelled 'retard' or is trolled with spite threads by the resident PT Brigade trolls.

You're a joke, now stop wasting my time with your compulsive replies to every sentence I post. I already own you, just like Carthage.

Originally posted by AncientPower
Worse is the Sheev wank itself, Vader can pose a threat to Sidious and he straight up loses to DE Luke, but apparently he can stomp the likes of Revan, Krayt, Kun, Plagueis and even Valkorion.

Wat
Who says this?
KEK, most PT-guys believe Plagueis > DE Luke/Vader, etc.
Also, who says that Sidious can stomp Plagueis or Valk?
But yeah, he can stomp Exar.

There's plenty of people who think DE Palps stomps Plagueis or at least defeats him easily.

Exar Kun isn't too far from Palpatine so it would make sense that they're viewed similarly.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
He was in 1994 and guess what? Sidious was and is all the aforementioned as well, this is known as continuity.


Do I really need to drop to your level of stupid, to explain to you why this is nonsense?

In the "Sith War" comic, Kun is cited as the "darkest power in the Galaxy". Using your logic, that Galaxy - because of "continuity" - included Vitiate, the Son and Abeloth. So Kun is "darker" than either of those? There is nothing to contradict that notion, right? No retcon.

So in your version of the continuity, Exar Kun is the "darkest power" in a Galaxy that hosts nigh godlike Dark Side entities such as the Son / Abeloth. One wonders what that makes Kun then.



Uh. What a comeback. "No you." Apparently, your level of creativity fits just nicely to your level of intelligence.



In a living, breathing universe, things get forgotten by sources operating within the universe. Is the author of the endnotes omniscient? Present proof that he is. Or does he just not know about Kun? Then how can make statements encompassing him? Seriously. No matter how you attempt to twist logic here, you always reach a dead end with your "view".



Yeah. We get it now. Stuff exists, despite it doesn't exists, so it can be referenced by a quote from 1993, which then defines the standards for future development of a "continuity" not even existing when the quote was written. Even though the quote was since deleted from the aforementioned "continuity". The word "desperate" doesn't even begin to describe what must be your state of mind when debating me.



Erm. What?
According to Wookiepedia, Leland Chee was the first person appointed to track continuity in the Star Wars (Expanded) Universe with the "Holocron Database" in the year 2000. In fact, when you go to the "Canon" page on Wookiepedia it lists two quotes by Lucas. One saying, that he can't keep continuity up for the EU, the second declaring the EU a seperate universe from his movie universe. Both quotes - and the Y2K appointment of Chee - directly contradict your fairytale of a "continuity" beeing established in the early-/mid-90s. In fact, all references to any kind of continuity / canon quoted on the page are released past the year 2000.



How quick you are to throw your own standards out of the window. So when the endnotes stay in the source, they must be important and correct and influencing future development in the "continuity". In the second you get to know that they are edited out, this fact is suddenly irrelevant. What is not irrelevant is the fact, that they don't "exist" any longer from the perspective of "canon". So you can cite the "multiple sources" in which they were reiterated instead.



Oh. Well. He tried oh so often and failed every single time, because - you know - I really don't care. This place is still just entertainment to me and you people are cheap providers of it. I really don't care about your opinions, or proving them wrong or changing them. Neither do I care about advancing my own here.



No shit, Sherlock. And since when does any of that apply to the Star Wars EU, especially the early works (up to the release of the PT)? Did you read them? The only thing "consistent" there, is a general storyline for the main characters (e.g. Han and Leia being married and having children). The rest is subject to heavy interpretations through the authors at work. You may just want to think about Luke's power-levels over the various issues of EU literature.



And here is the point, where you still don't get the fundamental working principles of the SW canon. The written sources aren't some kind of "holy scripture", that has to be taken literal, unless some direct contradiction / retcon arises. Those are pieces of literature that are subject to interpretation, especially when most of it stems from the point of view (and hence the minds of) in-universe characters.

Or, and I'm referring you to the Wookiepedia "Canon" Page again with that, as Christopher Cherasi ones put it:

"The analogy is that every piece of published Star Wars fiction is a window into the 'real' Star Wars universe. Some windows are a bit foggier than others. Some are decidedly abstract. But each contains a nugget of truth to them. Like the great Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi said, 'many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view."

Apparently, your "blind faith in the source material" point of view is rather ill-fitting when dealing with SW source-material, especially compared to my literary theorist / historian (or for general purpose: scientific) approach. But whatever makes you sleep better. As I said: I don't care, as long as you don't try to sell your bullshit as fact.

Originally posted by AncientPower
You mistook 'truth' with head-canon.

If you actually went beyond Status Quos via novel blurbs, I wouldn't be at all bothered. That isn't what is happening though, there are no actual debates, just fallacious power scaling establishments that act in exactly the opposite interest of debate. Anybody who argues against it is immediately labelled 'retard' or is trolled with spite threads by the resident PT Brigade trolls.Your total lack of self awareness continues to astound and fascinate AP, did this little gem really slip your mind so easily?

Originally posted by AncientPower
This is disgusting, team 2 wins in a very hard fight, and the idea that Krayt is even on Kun's level, let alone coming close to beating him, is just cancer.

Even if you argue Prime Krayt > Muur, there's no way that gap is anywhere near large enough to eclipse the fact that: Exar Kun >> Freedon Nadd > Marka Ragnos > Tulak Hord > Ajunta Pall > Karness Muur

But nah, fallacious powerscaling and hurr durr retard comments are your MO, resident PT wokers would be more than happy to trash you in a debate regarding Sheev & co. without blurbs at all, if you'd only make the thread.

But of course you already know that, lmfao.

And miss out on more of your cringe worthy responses? Never.

Originally posted by Nai
Do I really need to drop to your level of stupid, to explain to you why this is nonsense?

In the "Sith War" comic, Kun is cited as the "darkest power in the Galaxy". Using your logic, that Galaxy - because of "continuity" - included Vitiate, the Son and Abeloth. So Kun is "darker" than either of those? There is nothing to contradict that notion, right? No retcon.

So in your version of the continuity, Exar Kun is the "darkest power" in a Galaxy that hosts nigh godlike Dark Side entities such as the Son / Abeloth. One wonders what that makes Kun then.The One's were described as "more powerful with the Force than any Jedi have seen before" and capable of wielding the Force in ways beyond mortal ability upon introduction, so that's a yes to a retcon regarding them.

The case for Vitiate is a bit more ambiguous since he's been stated to be the most powerful Force user in history, but this is only certainty as of TOR, we don't know at what point he surpassed Kun. Otherwise yeah, welcome to 2012.



You really expected "your stoopid" to warranted anything more? How sad.

Evidently omniscient given he possesses intimate knowledge for example of Emperor Palpatine's efforts to clone himself for example:

http://i.imgur.com/n7vTiYR.png

http://i.imgur.com/doVKDj6.png

Moreover the narrations are written concurrent with the events of comics, or rather before the wider galaxy would be able to get hold of this information, if they ever did at all.

So no, that he would omit anyone of the foremost Sith Lords in history from his assessment is an idea that can be safely dismissed.

It amuses me how the basics of canon have left you so stunned. Yes dear. Star Wars content written in to continuity provides a framework for how future content will pan out.

You mean the Canon page on Wookieepedia that literally has this at the very top?

http://i.imgur.com/cO6Gagm.png

(Hint: the first issue of SW Insider was published in 1994.)

Yeah, I respectfully withdraw your rights to refer to me as stupid into the foreseeable future.

No darling because though they may no longer be in print the fact remains that as published Star Wars material they remain canon by definition i.e.:

"Lucasfilm canon" refers to anything produced by any of the Lucas companies, whether it be movies, books, games, or internet.

--Leland Chee, Keeper of the Holocron

I never claimed that the definition of canon is that which is in print, that is a false rule that you contrived from my point that being reprinted would lend credence to the idea that they are still valid, but it doesn't define their validity.

Or in other words you need something more concrete than the assumption that because the Endnotes are no longer in print, they are no longer canon.

Naturally, but your posting history suggests otherwise, as Temp has pointed out several times now.

Nice but rather besides the point, being that the aforementioned statements are both continous and applicable to Kun. Whether or not they are reliable or not is a seperate matter, but naturally applying the foggy window conceit as a carte blanche to dismiss evidence not to your liking as unreliable, is arbitrary nonsense. No, it only introduces a basis for these so called objective sources to be interrogated through logical and empirical means, but in so far your attempt to do so has been weak and ineffective.

Originally posted by Nai
Oh. Well. He tried oh so often and failed every single time, because - you know - I really don't care. This place is still just entertainment to me and you people are cheap providers of it. I really don't care about your opinions, or proving them wrong or changing them. Neither do I care about advancing my own here.

lol

Originally posted by Beniboybling
The One's were described as "more powerful with the Force than any Jedi have seen before" and capable of wielding the Force in ways beyond mortal ability upon introduction, so that's a yes to a retcon regarding them.


Oh. Really? Who described them as such, if I may ask?
But, well. So Kun is just a "darker power" than the Star Forge, the World Razer, Soa, Sel-Makor, ...



I'm intrigued. Does that version of "history" just count to the "time of the source" or is that a "general" statement like the one made in 1993. It's so confusing, when you don't know how literal you should take those texts.



Still not familiar with the concept of a truely omniscient narrator, right? He must know things that are unknown to the character within the story he tells in order to qualify, e.g. be capable of predicting future events. This is also known as "Little did he know"-writing. The quotes you listed don't qualify. Actually, they contradict that notion: "The Empire would survive." Uh-huh. Not even talking about the fact that Sidious' consciousness wan't transferred from Endor to Byss instantly as we know now.



Is that the same guy who says that Ulic would be jealous because of Sidious power, but somehow "omits" Kun from that judgement? Or is that merely a reason to suggest that Kun would not be jealous because of Sidious power, indicating, that he isn't really inferior to the movie era Sith?



It amuses me, how the basics of logic have left you to play alone in the void.
To me, it is logical, that any form of statement issued in 1993 cannot refer directly to events, characters and storylines that were not invented yet. Which would be, kind of, a prerequisite, if that statement wants to compare character X to everything that follows. Now, in this particular case, we have the statement in question edited out of the source in question for reprint and have the author of the statement contradicting his own statement. Still you want to place your bet on the statement.
You still don't see any flaw in terms of reasoning on your side of the fence?



I'm very sorry. I just viewed - and typed - on my tablet and literally didn't see that. Though I wonder how you managed to miss the "off-shoots, variants and tangents" part of the quote. So there is one coherent continuity that has "variants"?



I have understood now, that reviewing editing processes and using the results to interprete sources is not your strong suit. When something is taken out of a source, it is obviously no longer part of what the responsible company (or the editor) wants inside. When referring to SW canon, that means it is not canon any longer.

I may point to the infamous cantina shooting scene in "A New Hope" that Lucas altered for the Special Edition of the movie. So did Han Solo shoot first? According to you: He did and did not, because the part "removed" is still part of the canon - it merely depends on what version of the movie you watch. I could also ask wether or not Luke sees a younger / older version of Anakin as a force ghost at the end of RotJ, given that the latest edit has Hayden Christiansen appear there.

That is, by the way, the very definiont of "N-Canon" (as in "not canon" on the page you wanted to call me out for not reading it properly:

"Information cut from canon, deleted scenes, or from canceled Star Wars works falls into this category as well, unless another canonical work references it and it is declared canon."

Information is cut from canon source: N-Canon.



See above. it's not an assumption but the very definition of "N-Canon".



Naturally, my posting history supports what I have stated. Temp's pathetically biased interpretation of it, which I have thrown right into his face so often, that it has probably left an imprint, is a different matter. This is perhabs the reason for him dropping out of every debate concerning my posting history, after being confronted with some excerpts from it. Never gets old, though.



The statements can't be "continous" as they have been "discontinued" from the source-material and are, therefore, N-Canon, as demonstrated above. They can't likewise be "continues", because we know that this wasn't the intent of the author - and is, aside from that, logically impossible, at least in the way you want it.

Furthermore, I'm wondering why you attempt to defend the quotes, if their reliability might be debateable (if I get your statement correctly).

And finally: You got the meaning of the "foggy windows" quote just right. Yet I see only one person here performing any kind of "logical and empirical examination" of that quotes. So I think that "weak and ineffective" might still be better than "non-existant", which would describe your critical analysis of the source material in question. Not to mention that me being "weak and ineffective" is apparently still enough to own you. I'm very sorry.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
lol

Is it that time of the month again, dear? Poor thing.

That insult would be more effective if you had provoked a hostile response.

Originally posted by Nai
Oh. Really? Who described them as such, if I may ask?The in-episode narrator and the SW Databank.

Yeah, pretty lame.

Obviously the former, since anyone aware of Sheev's great power would never make such a claim.

How does this not qualify lmao? Only Palpatine could have known the above details, and certainly no historian, ergo. to be aware of these details the narrator must either 1. be Palpatine 2. be omniscient. (Hint: its 2.)

And where it says "The Empire would survive" its clearly only relaying Palpatine's own thoughts.

No, Kun was just retconned into continuity, Ulic is still a jealous wannabe though and Palpatine has still No #1.

Or maybe Veitch is just screwing with you? I have no reason to take statements made by the author decades after the fact as reliable or authoritative lmao. And in the absence of concrete evidence of a recton no, it should be assumed to remain valid.

On the other hand naw, assuming that characteristics ascribed to Palpatine in 1993 are no longer the case because *gasp* several thousands years ago, some dude used the dark side!!11 is the only flawed logic I see here.

Correct.

You'd love that wouldn't you? Funny how this what was originally intended as turning my "stoopid" logic against me is turning into your last defense.

That's not equivalent at all, nowhere was the content of Dark Empire rewritten, the comics were simply published with different supplementary material.

On the other hand if the back of the original ANH had a description different to the Special Edition, I wouldn't assume the later redundant unless something was overwritten or otherwise outright contradicted. This is common sense.

Correction, I did call you out because you didn't read it properly, good to see you are correcting that mistake.

On the other hand no, you're assuming that Dark Empire being republished without the Endnotes (or as I'm sure you'd prefer to word it, cut from the publication) means they have been cut from canon. Understand that these are not synonymous, and you've failed to provide proof they are.

So I assume this is lifeline you plan to cling to from this point onward? The irony deepens.

http://i.imgur.com/ggygKNe.gif

i believe u.

Empty wordplay lol. The Endnotes are published canon, and therefore part of continuity.

Nope, the only thing that's debatable is the reliability of Veitch's most recent claims. In fact, its not debatable, they aren't reliable at all. I'm merely pointing out the official, canon ruling.

OK darl, but my analysis is just fine. The statements are clear, the narrator is omniscient and the facts have not been retconned. Ergo, I've no more reason to doubt the accuracy of said window anymore than I can the fogginess of that particular pane that depicts Exar Kun freezing a senate of senators, or cutting through Mandalorian iron. You get me?

Nai is down right destroying Beni, tbh.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Nai is down right destroying Beni, tbh.



I haven't got a reply from you for ages, so I assume you want to start our CaV after you finish yours with Tempest?

I don't really check my inbox often on CV anymore, so you'll have to forgive me.

But yes, if you like. You can make your first post if you to though, and I'll get to it when I get to it.

Alright.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Nai is down right destroying Beni, tbh.

Cringe.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
The in-episode narrator and the SW Databank.


Quotes?



Sure.



Obviously, cherry picking never gets old.



You ask how this doesn't qualify and then give the answer yourself.
Since Sidious is a character within the narrative, a narrator doesn't need to be truely omniscient, to know his thoughts. He just needs to know that of Sidious - which would be a "third person limited" narrator (or "by-narrator" or "POV-narrator", depending on what concept of narratology you are following). This is, by the way, the most common form of narrator in contemporary fiction, so it's a save bet to assume that this one is too. Meaning, that the information contained within the paragraph is probably based on Sidious thoughts, rather than springing from the "mind" of an truely omniscient narrator. This is also backed by the fact, that an omniscient narrator would know the end of the story told within the comics, which doesn't end with a "winning" Emperor and an surviving Empire.

In short: Those words are not necessarily binding.

Furthermore have the endnotes been edited out of newer editions of the source, probably because they contradict established canon with about every sentence:


Sidious didn't need to send agents out into the Galaxy, because he had all knowledge he needed available even before the PT era.
All force technique he was employing (essence transfer) are asociated with Sith and not Jedi, making it rather unlikely that he got them from Jedi Masters, especially when they were already known to his Sith predecessors (Tenebrous).
He didn't "put the science of cloning together". That also was easily available to him already before the PT era.
Sidious didn't travel through the Galaxy in as a bodiless Dark Force but bonded with Jeng Droga.
The Empire didn't survive.


So, essentially, you want to place your trust in the part of a source that has been edited out, probably because being so outdated, that it now contradicts established canon with every sentence. I'd say, that, given this, the source is at least rather unrelieable.



Is that the same Kun which "The Official Star Wars Fact File" listed as "the most powerful and dangerous of the Sith Lords"? Funny enough, that in this instance, a rephrasing of the same sentence, leaving the "most powerful" out, is viewed by "Sheevists" as "retcon" of the former statement, where editing entire parts of a work out doesn't seem to concern you.



Urm. No. Since LFL canon policy defines, that stuff cut from a work does become N-Canon. And this is only logical, because people who do - as of now - familiarize themselves with the Star Wars (Legends) Canon, won't get the information any longer, which means that it is absent from the current version of Legend canon.




How is it "flawed" to consider the fact, that the statements were made, when most of the current Star Wars universe wasn't invented, they probably won't be written in the same way today, especially considering the fact that they were edited out of the source in question?

You see: When writing the statement, the author had clearly no concept of any Sith Lords next to Sidious, with the exception of Darth Vader. From there, it is a pretty clear cut to determine that Sidious is the most powerful Dark Side user in (then) known history. But when you add a rather large amount of stuff to the "known history" pile, such statement being made, based on the knowledge available before, is to be taken with a grain of salt. Especially considering, that it has been edited out since then.



Seeing that you don't have anything to say about that, I'll simply accept your concession and move on. Nice red herring, though.



They were published without the supplementary material, that you have been quoting. Which doesn't even consider the content of the comics themselves, given how Palpatine, as shown above, is depicted as "winner" with a surviving Empire, which doesn't even stay "true" until the end of the comic itself.



Nope. This isn't "common sense" but "fanboy logic".
When a work is altered (as in "edited", the newer edit becomes the new "canon". While further versions might be interesting in terms of literature analysis or from a historical perspective, they aren't a thing any longer in the realms of canon. Which is only logical - and here true common sense kicks in: When somebody refers to the "ANH description", to stay with your example, that would - after the publishing of the Special Edition - mean "the ANH Special Edition description" and not the 1977 counterpart.

And in this particular case, the editiing isn't a question of some convenience, but probably due to the fact, that the endnotes as they were did contradict newer established canon quite a lot.



You better understand that they are synonymous. The endnotes are not longer part of the canon source. That means they have been "cut" or "cancelled" or whatever. The fact remains that, whoever buys "Dark Empire" now, won't get the endnotes that you have been quoting. That makes them obsolete for the current version of the "canon". They are information that is not included any longer. You are free to search for instances in which the information contained within was transferred to other works (that are still canon), but the endnotes are out.



Irony? Indeed. That the guy that blatantly ignores the LFL canon policy, narrative modes, logic, common sense and editing history of the source in question, in order to defend a source that has been edited from canon and contradicts established canon on various instances, talks about me "clinging to a lifeline" is really ironic.



Oh. They are? Go buy a new copy of "Dark Empire". Show me the endnotes contained within. D'uh. Apparently, they are not recently published canon any longer.



Is that the same canon ruling that you keep ignoring in your pathetic attempt to end up being right? And. Yeah. Of course the relieability of cut content published in 1993 and contradicting established canon is not debateable. It is just an unrelieable source. Nothing to debate there. Correct.




What "analysis", pal? So far, you have been sticking with the "it was written down, so I need to believe it" approach, without conducting any form of analysis. When I did it for you, you just ignored every instance of (literary) science and logic applied to the quote, sticking with your initial stance, continuing to the last sentence there.

So, yes, I "get you": You're an ignoramus that is either unable or unwilling to apply literature analysis / critcial thinking to the Star Wars source material. Good to know. Have fun.

So what book is it?

Dark Tales of the Jedi Empire: Complete Super Package - Limited Deluxe Collector's Edition

Tom Veitch is trolling when saying he's making a book. Said book was supposed to release some time last year.

Originally posted by The Merchant
Tom Veitch is trolling when saying he's making a book. Said book was supposed to release some time last year.

Star Wars is not his life.