Technically, so did Palpatine. But I'm referring to beings like the Ones, obviously.
Although it seems that there's no need to actually exclude them from quotes.
I don't know what you're talking about. I'm applying the same standards to everything here.
Do you seriously think Sidious is more powerful than the Son? And yes, it is contradicted:
I don't care about in-universe chronology. That has nothing to do with my point. My point is that out-of-universe time matters when it comes to determining the validity of quotes. Sidious' last quote of being the most powerful dark sider ever comes from 2008. The Son has quotes from 2011+ contradicting this, meaning that they take precedence. That's what you call a retcon. Vitiate doesn't have one.
No, I'm referring to this:
And they don't need to cover Vitiate's history in the same source. They just need to refer to all of history, within which Vitiate would also be included.
Besides, as I said, Vitiate doesn't have any quotes to contradict Palpatine's older ones, so they all stand. Your example with the Son was dead wrong since he does have quotes to contradict Palpatine's. Vitiate doesn't. That's the difference.
Last edited by SunRazer on Oct 22nd, 2016 at 09:11 AM
The Ones are not excluded from such assessments unless specified otherwise.
That is the kind of logic that so-called Sheevites subscribe to in case of The Son. But not in case of Valkorion. Like you are doing here.
That statement is valid for Sith up to that point in time. However, Palpatine significantly grew in power afterwards, in Legends continuity. He became the most powerful expression of the Dark Side at some point during Dark Empire era; his powers were also above the norm at that point. The Son's quote doesn't contradicts this assessment since growth in power and superior feats are contributing factors towards Palpatine's supremacy at a later stage. The Son's quote explicitly retconned Palpatine's superiority over other practitioners of the Dark Side during PT era (only).
Now, the key term in the revelation in question is "expression of the Dark Side." The Son is an example of the expression of the Dark Side. Sith alignment is irrelevant in this case.
Duh
This revelation is pointing towards Palpatine's political standing in galactic history since it distinguished mastery of the Dark Side from the most powerful aspect. Highlighted for you:
With the galaxy now ripe for conquest, the Emperor has become the most powerful Sith Lord of all and a master of the Dark Side of the Force, ordering the extermination of the Jedi Order with the aid of his apprentice, the deadly Darth Vader.
Taken from Legends Epic Collection: The Empire Volume 1
You have yet to present a source that puts Palpatine above Vitiate in the ways of the Dark Side, in a firm manner. Good luck with that.
B/W Vitiate has accolades that promote him as the most powerful Force-user ever. The Ones are covered in that.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Oct 22nd, 2016 at 09:32 AM
I'm stating the general views of the forum, but they don't necessarily need to be. Very few quotes actually include them to begin with.
I don't know if you can read but I've applied this logic in a bipartisan and equal manner to all characters in question. Accusing people of ideological bias is the only thing you can go off, it seems. Try debating without that.
No, it outright states that his power is simply beyond the domain of Sith Lords - ergo, any Sith Lord, including DE Sidious. No Sith can match his power because of the source and nature of his powers.
Nowhere is it suggested that this quote is limited to the Son's time and prior. It's from the old Encyclopedia, which encompassed all of Legends. Palpatine, at any point in time, was not exempt from this.
I'm aware of that. And indeed, that would apply to the Son - if it wasn't contradicted.
Indeed, because Force power and Force mastery are not the same.
All of them still apply, since Vitiate doesn't have any quotes to the contrary. Therefore, as he is introduced into SW media, he's expected to follow the established rules of continuity, one of which is that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord ever. Until a quote retcons this, Vitiate remains factually inferior to Sidious.
Not only are they in-universe and chronologically limited to the TOR era and before (which means that you can easily apply your former argument of the Ones getting stronger, etc.), but no, they don't include the Ones.
Also, Leland Chee has confirmed that the Father is the most powerful Force user, and that happened after TOR as well.
Last edited by SunRazer on Oct 22nd, 2016 at 09:46 AM
Oh, and feats are in favor of the Ones as well. Affecting the balance of the Force with their mere alignment/existence (with, seemingly, events in galactic history mirroring events on Mortis) to unprecedented degrees, casually holding lightsaber blades and pushing them back into their hilts, repeatedly defeating an Abeloth that was far more powerful than the one portrayed in Fate of the Jedi, threatening to destroy the galaxy with their quabbling, being able to instantly shapeshift, killing life/setting in motion storms fatal to even powerful Jedi with the mere onset of their presence, etc.
Given that the above mostly happened in TCW, a medium where depictions of the Force are extremely subdued compared to most other Legends works, then yeah, it's obvious how powerful they are.
There's other ways of making comparisons as well. Sarasu Taalon, a mere Lord of the Sith, gained power beyond even Valkorion's in FotJ when he bathed in the Pool of Knowledge - the Ones gained power from such nexuses on top of their status as Celestials. FotJ makes it abundantly clear as well that the Ones are simply beyond any other depicted individual in history.
Last edited by SunRazer on Oct 22nd, 2016 at 10:04 AM
Palpatine's accolade from The Dark Empire Endnotes encompasses all practitioners of the Dark Side. Its scope is not limited to Sith alignment.
Spare me the excuses.
In short, we have a contradiction in this matter. However, there is some merit behind this contradiction; Palpatine, during Dark Empire era, has demonstrated powers that are beyond the norm and even The Son haven't.
It (directly or indirectly) encompasses all practitioners of the Dark Side in the mythos. You expect the author to make a list while making such a claim?
Your interpretation.
And this is the mentality I am talking about. Palpatine's accolades are valid for Valkorion but not for The Son.
You speak for BioWare now?
Valkorion is a being of unfathomable power. It is another way to assert that his powers are beyond the domain of other Force-users, Jedi or Sith.
It's reasonable to suggest that "greatest of all time" quotes don't refer to god-like entities in pocket universes. When a Christian says so and so is the best whatever ever, they usually implicitly exclude their omnipotent God from the superlative.
__________________ Join the new Star Wars vs. forum: Suspect Insight Forums (not url'd for spam prevention)
In other words, you can claim that other people are biased, etc, but you don't permit them to justify their actions? Or claim the same of you?
I'm glad you're not a judge. In part because of that and in part because you don't accept evidence right in front of your face.
Either you're playing dumb, or it's not an act.
The Son's quotes come from AFTER Palpatine's. Hence, they retcon Palpatine's quotes out of existence, and take precedence.
And Palpatine as of DE hasn't shown anything beyond the Son.
God above, you can't even accept an agreement from me?
So yours is right, just 'cuz, but mine is wrong since you don't want to accept it? Right.
Because the Son has quotes that retcon Palpatine's out of existence, whereas Valkorion does not. This is about as hard to understand as 1 + 1 = 2, but obviously this is evidence that you don't understand that either.
In the same way that you speak for all the authors of the Palpatine quotes when you dismiss them, yeah
About as unfathomable as your inability to follow the discussion.
Who's still greater than either Palpatine or Valkorion.
I am giving you a dose of your own medicine. Sheevites switch to real-world perspective to justify superiority of The Son over Palpatine in ways of the Force but forget to do that in case of Valkorion. Guys like you have no right to accuse others of bias.
Again, The Son's accolades do not retcon Palpatine's accolade from the Dark Empire Endnotes out of existence, only challenge it.
Let us reexamine the evidence:-
It quickly became clear to Luke that this decrepit and seemingly defenseless old man was masterfully adept in the ways of the Dark Side of the Force. Indeed, as Vader had warned, the Emperor had become the Dark Side's most powerful expression.
Taken from the Dark Empire Endnotes
1. The Son was stronger than Palpatine during The Clone Wars. Full stop.
But:
2. Palpatine was eager to improve his understanding of the ways of the Force. He somehow acquired access to new sources of knowledge, learned new powers from them and also discovered methods to increase his strength along the way.
3. He saw in Byss a suitable place for his Dark experiments and began to siphon energy of its populace to fuel his strength.
4. A time came when Darth Vader (who had met both The Son and Palpatine), felt that Palpatine has become the most powerful expression of the Dark Side. Luke Skywalker also felt the same during his second meeting with Palpatine.
Therefore, The Son's story only contributes to the existing story of Palpatine in Legends continuity, not retcon it out of existence.
Palpatine was more of an entity than a normal Sith Lord during his Dark Empire story arc. His powers were also off-the-charts during this era. The Son is stronger than Palpatine in canon (no ifs and buts in this case) but this situation changed at a later stage in Legends continuity. It is all logical.
You should take your own advice.
1. Valkorion is an entity
2. Valkorion is not a Sith
3. Valkorion is a being of unfathomable power (another way of asserting that his powers are beyond the domain of Jedi and/or Sith in general)
There is not a single bloody quote out there that covers Valkorion's story in full and declare Palpatine superior after that. Not a single.
My interpretation is as valid as yours in that case. Sorry to disappoint you.
(please log in to view the image)
No.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 07:02 AM
Nobody accused you of bias in this thread (though they didn't have to). You were the first one to attack other people's credibility off the bat. I did, however, say that the only thing you could do here was accuse others of ideological bias, and you've proven me right.
I've applied the same logic to both the Son and Valkorion. If they have a quote of supremacy that encompasses Palpatine and comes from after Palpatine's, then they supersede Palpatine. If not, then they're expected to obey one of the established rules of continuity - that Sidious is the most powerful. In the Son's case, such a quote exists - and I've provided it to you. In Valkorion's case, no such quote exists, so he's expected to obey such rules.
All you've been doing here is accusing others of bias and double standards without any basis, and you just keep repeating yourself. Try something new.
Yes, that comes from the 90's. The Son's quote comes from the 2010's. Hence, they take precedence. This isn't difficult to understand.
That was never suggested. The Son was more powerful than any Sith, full stop. And it comes from the Legends databank, which means it refers to all of history. DE Palpatine is included in that.
You're applying in-universe chronology, which I already said doesn't matter with regards to quotes that encompass all of Legends. As I said, a quote from the 10's > a quote from the 90's. It's that simple.
What's funny is that you're accusing me of double standards here, yet you're the one who doesn't apply this to Valkorion. Not only is Valkorion from before Palpatine's time, but he's also an expression of the dark side.
Vader never witnessed the full extent of the Son's powers, which were curbed on Mortis.
The quote I mentioned was from and included all of Legends. It's not from Canon.
Whether you choose to go with either accolades or feats, the Son > Palpatine > Valkorion.
Oh, I do.
So? I thought we just agreed that entities were counted.
Oh?
Even Vader had "immeasurable" power. Besides, the quote you're referring to is from Scourge's perspective. If we're including such quotes, then Vader has power beyond imagination.
You don't need to cover somebody's story in full. You only need to refer to all of history, within which Valkorion would also be covered.
Besides, you've just exposed another pitiful double standard. None of Palpatine's supremacy quotes come from sources that cover the Son's story in full, either.
I'm glad we cleared that up. Just then, you were acting as if your interpretation was superior to mine. So we're at an impasse.
Last edited by SunRazer on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 08:52 AM
An old source The Official Star Wars Fact File asserts that Darth Bane has surpassed all Sith in power and knowledge before him.
So according to your logic, Darth Bane > The Sith Emperor, Darth Nihilus, Exar Kun and any other super-strong ancient Sith. Coz they are expected to obey so-called rules of continuity.
You see the flaw in your logic now?
Per that logic, Valkorion's entry demands reevaluation of Palpatine's standing in the lore as well.
Otherwise, Darth Bane > Valkorion?
See above
Yes, you have double-standards. Your responses prove it.
Valkorion is supposed to be inferior to Palpatine due to rules of continuity. But The Son is supposed to be an exception. I suppose that Valkorion is supposed to be inferior to Darth Bane as well due to rules of continuity.
Shows your ignorance.
Over the millennia, Valkorion wore many faces and names: Lord Vitiate; Emperor of the Sith; Eternal Emperor of Zakuul. For centuries upon centuries, he shaped and manipulated galactic events, bending the arc of history to his will during his obsessive quest for immortality. A being of unfathomable power and insatiable appetite, he transcended death multiple times, shedding his physical shells as they were discovered, defeated, and destroyed... only to return in another form.
From a codex entry titled Fall of Valkorion (To be revealed in the upcoming content)
Now, that is a neutral assessment. Not an opinion of another character.
Really?
I WTFpwned your case, my friend.
Time to celebrate your defeat with Coca Cola and other delicious items.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 09:16 AM
You responded to about three things and conceded to the rest. I accept those concessions.
It's not an old source, and it refers to modern Sith history. People love to take it out of context.
How convincing. Your responses prove your stupidity and inability to follow basic conversations. I doubt you have the intelligence to even comprehend a double standard, given how many of them you blatantly make with each of your posts.
Fair enough. My point about Vader having immeasurable power still stands, though.
You didn't even try to rebut properly. I accept your concession.
Last edited by SunRazer on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 09:17 AM
I respond to only those points that matter in this discussion.
Really?
From The Official Star Wars Fact File
(please log in to view the image)
You have mental issues, my friend.
Is that an opinion of another character?
I did.
You conveniently overlooked the flaws that I pointed out in your arguments in this discussion with baseless assumptions and accusations. You are a moron.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 09:27 AM
Which would be all of them. The bulk of the part where I was debunking your fallacious double standards didn't get a response. That's a concession.
Actually, I looked at the quote again and some of the discussions here. You were right before - it is an old quote. Apparently it's from before Drew's Bane Trilogy was written, LMFAO.
And that retcons it indeed, since PoD Bane is established to have inferior knowledge to Darth Revan, which contradicts the "more knowledge and mastery than any Sith prior" bit. So in this case, the quote is indeed contradicted and retconned out of existence. And even if not, it's incorrect anyway (like Yoda being unable to beat Dooku in the Force), which is in fact, grounds to dismiss it.
Besides, if worst comes to worst, you can feasibly deny the quote on the basis that Bane doesn't approach Vitiate in power by all means veritable - which includes showings. In Sidious and the Son's case, showings actually support the hype. They do have showings surpassing Valkorion, and the Son Palpatine. Palpatine has the added benefit of being supported by a whole host of quotes from different times, sources and authors. You might be able to dismiss a single flimsy quote if it's unsubstantiated and illogical, but in Palpatine's case (or the Son's), that's not so. And that's supportable with evidence like feats and other quotes.
If it's coming from you, that means I'm normal.
No, it's not.
Your rebuttal was "I win". I think we all know who's the moron here.
I addressed those points, then you refused to address mine because I apparently overlooked it. You can't be much stupider than this. Seriously, with this level of intellectual capacity, you couldn't operate a tart shop.
Last edited by SunRazer on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 09:43 AM
Oct 22nd, 2016 09:03 AM
