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

DarthAnt66's thread over on Suspecting Insight pointed out that in Luceno's novel, Plagueis believes that the ancient sith were stronger than him or those of the Banite line. More specifically, he wonders whether they could pull off more advanced and taxing techniques because they were inherently more powerful, or because the dark side of the force was more prominent in their era.

This reminded me of Antoine Bandele's video about Sidious vs. Vitiate, because in that video, he provides a third difference between the ground realities that the ancient sith and the Banite with were working with. Antoine's primary reasoning for why Sidious was a more powerful force user than Vitiate was that Vitiate came from a time when the sith used rituals and talismans and other external sources to magnify the base power they naturally possessed, while Sidious and others of the Banite line had forgotten how to use advanced sorcery and instead focused on increasing their base, natural power.

Antoine concluded that it was better to increase your natural power, since it was "real" power.

Now while there's nothing to suggest (as far as I know) that boosting your power through abilities like Force Walk and rituals like the one on Nathema were somehow a less potent method of harnessing the force than honing your connection traditionally, it did get me to wonder: is one method inherently superior to the other in any other way?

At first, I thought that the ancient method would be less reliable since you'd have to consciously think about using Force Walk/Sorcery/Alchemy/Drain, or make sure that the talisman you're using was on you. And that you'd be dependent on external factors. Having inherent power means you have it at all times, and without having to think about it. Plus you wouldn't have to plan rituals like Valkorion's where you have to be a supergenius just to get all the pieces in place.

But then you could also argue that the side that the Force is tipped in favor of can be changed more easily through rituals, and therefore sorcery is better because it keeps you from needing to hone your connection as much. (But then that's assuming it takes sorcery/alchemy. I know Tenebrous' Twi Lek Master opened up a wrend in the Force, and since he would not have had knowledge of sorcery/alchemy, it's possible that one can make the Force express the Dark Side without use of it.)

What do you guys think? And does this affect whether the ancient sith were more powerful?

I've always thought the best way to Sith dominance is tipping the galactic balance towards the dark side. Regardless of how you do it, that seems to be the key.

A massive and powerful one-off ritual that does it for you would give a tremendous advantage.

Right, but let's say that all things being equal, one sith learns to embrace the dark side, and another chooses to artificially enhance their force reserves. Which is preferable?

its always better to grow naturally rather than with enhancements

Natural growth is more likely to stick. Artificial enhancements tend to fizzle out in the long run.

@Sheev: Any examples?


Another thought I had was that the enhancements may allow you to express or unleash more power in one instance, but don't necessarily give you more sustainable power. It would explain how the feats like Tulak Hord taking out an army and Nadd using the Corsair crystals to cause a supernova could be achieved, even though they were weaker than later sith (looking and Valk's and Sidious' Force Storm), who never demonstrated destruction on that level.