I presented a logically sound assessment of how Palpatine would be superior to The Son as of Dark Empire. Your counterargument is plain rejection of assessment on the grounds that Palpatine's accolade is from a much older source, that predates introduction of The Son to the mythos. However, you are imposing rules of continuity over Valkorion. I countered this by citing the example of Darth Bane and you have yet to acknowledge it.
You do not have the right to accuse others of bias and double-standards. You need to get your head examined because you are behaving like a moron now.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 09:47 AM
Darth Bane Trilogy doesn't retcons that statement at all. Darth Bane grew in strength and advanced his knowledge further as time passed by and he gained access to additional sources of knowledge during his journey. He might be inferior to Darth Revan during the events of Path of Destruction but after that?
Recheck the statement that I highlighted earlier:
Darth Bane had gained more knowledge and mastery of Sith techniques and power than anyone who had come before him.
This revelation covers the entire story arc of Darth Bane. It isn't time specific.
---
As far as showings are concerned, Valkorion also has superior showings than both The Son and Palpatine in some areas.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 09:51 AM
Then there should be alarm bells going off in your head.
And no, emotional rants aren't meant to make your case credible at all. They're only justified when you make a point as well, not on their own.
God above, you still can't read. I get that English is not your first language, but seriously, post like a debater, not a troglodyte.
Let's make this simple:
1) When a quote is presented without grounds for dismissal, it is taken as fact.
2) Everything released in SW continuity from after such a quote is expected to obey it.
3) The only time something can disobey quotes is when it has a newer quote of its own that contradicts the older quote. This is what we call a retcon. The new quote is now the precedent.
4) The Son does have a newer quote that contradicts Palpatine's quote about being the dark side's most powerful expression (and yes, it refers to ALL of Legends, not just TCW, since it's from the Legends databank). Valkorion has NO quotes that contradict Palpatine's quotes of supremacy, whatsoever.
Everybody has not only the right, but the obligation to call you out for both bias and double-standards.
I feel like I'm doing charity work for the psychologists.
The quote refers to Path of Destruction. Do you want to know why? Because you cut out the pivotal context of the quote.
Guess what the last part refers to? That's right, destroying the old Sith Order and replacing it with the Rule of Two. And when did he do that? Path of Destruction, by which time he still couldn't properly comprehend information from Darth Revan's holocron. That's a blatant contradiction.
Yes, some areas. Pretty much areas where the Son or Palpatine haven't shown said powers at all. But in comparing raw power (the Son & Palpatine), or common areas (Palpatine, and in some ways, the Son), that's not so. If you want me to draw a comparison, I can.
Finally, we're making progress.
Last edited by SunRazer on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 09:58 AM
Accusations and insults will not get us anywhere. You are better than that.
My intention is to scrutinize traditional rankings of characters on the basis of new (and emerging) content, but the difference is that I extend my scrutiny to accolades of Darth Bane, Yoda, Darth Plagueis, Palpatine and Luke Skywalker vis-a-vis Valkorion. I am willing to do that for even Darth Nihilus (another highly underrated character). However, your scrutiny extends to accolades of Darth Bane only, which is problematic. Valkorion and Darth Nihilus have devastated entire worlds with their powers; quantifiable feats that remain unparalleled to this day, outside implied destructive potential and sheer hype of a few.
I am not attacking your effort to discredit Darth Bane's accolade on the grounds of newer information; I actually appreciate this because you are being objective about it. However, problem with Sheevites is that they do not extend the same principle to accolades of characters like Yoda, Darth Plagueis, Palpatine and Luke Skywalker vis-a-vis Valkorion. They even dismiss the 'possibility' of superiority of Valkorion over Palpatine in the ways of the Force. This is not fair, and fuels low-balling of a legitimate powerhouse in various threads in this forum, making it impractical for the fans of Valkorion to have a meaningful debate as a consequence. In this thread alone, you are pitting Palpatine (Episode I) against Valkorion and expecting a rational response in return. What were you thinking? What's next? Valkorion versus Darth Venamis?
The Son benefits from the fact that he was featured in canon content and his evaluation could directly influence Palpatine's position in the lore. However, Valkorion's situation is different.
BioWare is unlikely to consider Palpatine for comparison with Valkorion in their works because the two characters existed centuries apart in timeline, and Palpatine is irrelevant for their works anyways. However, nothing stops BioWare from introducing characters more powerful than Palpatine in their works, but they don't have to be explicit about it either. In short, you won't get a direct contradiction in the case vis-a-vis Palpatine. So, you will have to look at feats and other details to formulate an opinion in this regard.
The remarks of Christopher Cerasi continue to resonate with my core beliefs to this day:
"When it comes to absolute canon, the real story of Star Wars, you must turn to the films themselves—and only the films. Even novelizations are interpretations of the film, and while they are largely true to George Lucas' vision (he works quite closely with the novel authors), the method in which they are written does allow for some minor differences. The novelizations are written concurrently with the film's production, so variations in detail do creep in from time to time. Nonetheless, they should be regarded as very accurate depictions of the fictional Star Wars movies.
The further one branches away from the movies, the more interpretation and speculation come into play. LucasBooks works diligently to keep the continuing Star Wars expanded universe cohesive and uniform, but stylistically, there is always room for variation. Not all artists draw Luke Skywalker the same way. Not all writers define the character in the same fashion. The particular attributes of individual media also come into play. A comic book interpretation of an event will likely have less dialogue or different pacing than a novel version. A video game has to take an interactive approach that favors gameplay. So too must card and roleplaying games ascribe certain characteristics to characters and events in order to make them playable.
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.' "
Clear enough?
That accolade represents a brief summary of Darth Bane's story arc on the whole; it is based on the information accessible to the authors at the time.
Now, I did not assert that that accolade cannot be scrutinized on the basis of newer content; it should be. Otherwise, cross-era comparisons would be utterly pointless and debates lot less constructive and fun. We already have a number of trolls here, taking advantage of such accolades and making the debating environment lot less constructive with their misinformed one-liners and sheer ignorance.
You counterargument still have loopholes though. Darth Bane was not able to digest all contents of Darth Revan's holocron but that did not stop him from destroying a massive building in a show of strength a while later in order to kill an opponent. Darth Plagueis was also not well-versed in the matters of Sith Sorcery but you are willing to entertain the idea that he is above the likes of Valkorion and Darth Nihilus. So?
Better! Much better.
You show some flexibility and we will get somewhere.
You mention a Force power and I will expand on it.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Oct 23rd, 2016 at 02:42 PM
I forgot that you couldn't quote huge posts. This will be painful indeed.
I don't scrutinize Bane's accolade only. If I did, you'd hear me claiming that Dooku was too strong for Yoda to defeat in the Force, that Mace is better than Yoda, and that Vader's invincible. You've already heard me critical analysis of both the Son's and Palpatine's accolades.
Palpatine's exhibited the ability to devastate worlds as well, and the Son exhibited the capacity to ruin the galaxy with his squabbling with the Daughter.
I extend all of these principles to every character, bar none.
I don't dismiss the possibility of Valkorion's superiority at all. In fact, as soon as he gets an appropriate accolade that ranks him above Palpatine, I'm fully willing to concede to that. But that hasn't happened yet. There's no reason for him to not obey Sidious' accolades.
The problem here is that you have the same mindset that you just accused me of - you're dismissing the possibility of Palpatine's superiority. You're bound by such dogmas of Valkorion's superiority that find you inconceivable for TPM Sidious, who's obviously not very much on your radar, to possibly capable of beating Valkorion. And that's just a matter of your preconceived notions - not my fault.
TPM Sidious would curbstomp Venamis, so no.
Sorry, but the Son's accolade of superiority to all Sith comes from a source detailing all of Legends, not Canon. I've told you this at least half a dozen times now.
No, it's not. Posting a quote and not offering any explanation for its purpose here.
Besides, the EU hardly depicts Palpatine as the movies do. Particularly DE. Your point (or at least what I hope is your point) is invalid.
Now, I did not assert that that accolade cannot be scrutinized on the basis of newer content; it should be. Otherwise, cross-era comparisons would be utterly pointless and debates lot less constructive and fun. We already have a number of trolls here, taking advantage of such accolades and making the debating environment lot less constructive with their misinformed one-liners and sheer ignorance.
You mean a telekinetic wave he charged up during Kas'im's monologue on a nexus that dwarfed Korriban? Please. That's hardly overwhelming.
Power isn't the same as mastery.
Anyways, Plagueis had no gift for Sorcery but his power basically enabled him to learn it regardless. Which is pretty impressive. It's not as if Nihilus has exhibited any form of Sorcery himself.