"The cartilage began to give. He pushed back with the Force, reinforcing his
larynx and trying to throw her off.
It was no good. Abeloth had a dozen times the Force strength Luke had..."
That's 12 times stronger in the Force than a Skywalker
Gid, don't be a poop. The context of a galaxy-level threat being established by archaeological evidence (and the Codex, which is maybe OOU?) is much different from the black-hole passage, which calls Kenobi a "sunny meadow" in the next paragraph.
Freedon Nadd knows the Force Storm? Anyways Abeloth was contained by the Maw which is dozens of blackholes. This says a lot about Abeloth's durability. Also according to the Father if the Son and Daughter fought they would have destroyed the entire Universe.
__________________ "Vader's pulse and breathing were machine-regulated, so they could not quicken; but something in his chest became more electric around his meetings with the Emperor; he could not say how. A feeling of fullness, of power, of dark and demon mastery -- of secret lusts, unrestrained passion, wild submission -- all these things were in Vader's heart as he neared his Emperor. These things and more."
Vitiate was taken down during his most vulnerable point. He still survived because he is immortal.
Not long ago, Vitiate easily overwhelmed a whole Jedi Strike Team (including HoT) in single combat. This encounter took place in a neutral setting and Vitiate wasn't vulnerable during this time.
So?
Point is that Vitiate's greatest talent is his Sith Sorcery skills; Sith Sorcery is a pathway to accomplish the impossible.
Most importantly, Abeloth is not invincible either; her bodies are vulnerable.
No proof of this.
Abeloth predates Vitiate, right? Well, a canon book asserts that Vitiate is the most powerful dark side master in history.
Vitiate once absorbed dark side power of (more then) planetary proportions (which vaporized all other life forms in its path and eat the Force itself around the planet). Do not underestimate his raw power either.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Jul 20th, 2013 at 10:40 AM
Don't be ridiculous. Abeloth and the Ones aren't part of Jedi/Sith/Light Side/Dark Side comparisons in books because they're considered Gods/Celestials and are therefore superior.
By archaeological evidence, you mean the vague and unsubstantiated claims from an ancient civilizations that have yet to be corroborated?
The Codex, as established, merely relays the legend. Nowhere does it establish the legend as truth.
The only difference is the present of the enduring double standard. Some people are only willing to consider such flowery language from questionable sources as literal reflections of reality when and only when it favors a beloved character from a select era.
Meanwhile, Dooku assesses three characters "through the eyes of the dark side" and his musings are tossed aside with yesterday's trash?
I don't think so. If we discount one such example, we should discount them all. Anything else is inherently dishonest.
Yes, Celestials were basically an ancient race of extremely powerful Force-users. Except I wouldn't use the term "race" as much as "entities" because they decided to have some human form for everyone's benefit.
And while Vitiate was a godlike avatar of the dark side, the Celestials WERE Gods.
This is a fundamental difference between the ways we enjoy fiction. I think that it has to do with suspension of disbelief. When watching Indiana Jones, I didn't think "oh man, all those stories about the Ark are going to be proven wrong if there are any Nazi faces left unmelted." Instead, I'm focused on what they say about the Ark: It is established as a potential army-killer. The fact that it kills only a few dozen people on screen does not mean that I am using a "no-limits" fallacy if I say that the Ark would singlehandedly turn the tide of Helm's Deep (for example).
The level of confirmation that you seem to ask for is simply not available in fiction media outside of RPG systems that offer a method of inter-era comparison. "Existential threat from a bygone age" is a common trope in fiction; invoking that trope is enough, for me, to give a ballpark estimate of the severity of the threat. No editor is going to allow page-space for a thorough Archaeological inquiry (Tim Zahn notwithstanding).
Another example: In Fable, Jack of Blades is established as an eldritch abomination from beyond the edge of the world. If his plan goes through, the implication is extinction. So he is a potential world-ender, despite the lack of specifics about his origins and the extent of his abilities.
I think I have actually used the black-hole quote, but only within the context of relative attitudes and demeanors. The important facet of this particular quote is the way that the descriptions all reference the characters' intrinsic properties. A basic block of Kenobi's personality is his tranquil Jedi demeanor. It is not all that much of a stretch to interpret that line, and the passage as a whole, as a characterization rather than a power-meter.
Meanwhile, the quotes against which you have fought so consistently (e.g. N.'s Ravager accolade, or this destroyer business) are almost always extreme accounts of physical actions. So while Sidious is described as a black hole of the Force, N. is described as accomplishing some magnificent application of Joules. That is less easily discarded as hyperbole, because it is a specific thing that actually happened.
(And tossing out 2/3 of the available information about non-movie eras just because we don't let you use 1/1000th of Sidious's accolades is mad churlish, broseph.)
Edit: [bait][SPOILER - highlight to read]: Palpatine's unrivaled dominance w/r/t political power is ambiguous in its application to combat in the same way that N.'s telekinetic power isn't.[/bait]
You are not helping. The natural conclusion of this has Gid accepting expert testimony on Force matters. Do you know how much that helps me for the next N. thread?
(SO much.)
Anyway, it is poor form to snipe from the sidelines when one of your targets is on ignore. What if you miss him and shoot me instead? You know I always play safe and I am not taking the risk of you shooting all over the place.
I'm sorry if I'm messing up some big plan but I don't care what he accepts or not.
His argument is too weak for me to miss. These aren't about 'vague and unsubstantiated claims', these are 'Rakata inscriptions' in the actual tomb. Does he think the Rakata decided to write fan fiction about it on the walls of its prison as they were building it?
__________________
Last edited by Nephthys on Jul 20th, 2013 at 04:12 PM
As painful as it is for me (and it is really painful, like taking a huge dump painful), I have to agree with DE here. Because they are Rakata inscriptions, they represent actual history of their civilization. Unless it says something like "legends say" or "it is said", I think it should be taken as fact because as DE says, the rakata aren't known for writing homosexual erotic fiction.
Thank you DS. This is evidence from the people who fought and imprisoned it. Their words should be accepted as basically being first hand testimonials as to its capabilities.
Jul 20th, 2013 01:48 AM
