Originally posted by tommy vercetti
the fact that he was buried in the valley of the darl lords shows that he was in the same league as the rest of them
There were many Dark Lord tombs. That doesn't mean every Dark Lord was great. I mean, King Tut's tomb is huge, but he was a miniscule and minor character in Egyption history. So what? He was a Dark Lord, or a predecessor to that, that doesn't mean he was great.
Ajunta's blade may well be extremely powerful, but the fact that he couldn't control it speaks as much about Ajunta as his weapon. For example, Ragnos' scepter could drain the force out of individuals, places, even planets -- it could empower users to use the force, and it could even revive individuals (or at least presumably). That seems pretty powerful. We have very little evidence, outside of Ajunta being unable to control his own weapon, as to just how powerful the blade is.
Thats absolute bullshit...
The size of the tomb means nothing egyptian kings made huge tombs often for nothing impressive. That of Pall was huge and probably for a reason but we know so little about him, its just to hard to make a real guess on how powerful he is or what he did. He made a blade yeah okay, the blade was powerful okay I can believe that, he believes the blade destroyed him could be true or he could just be insane and he was eventually destroyed by Revan. Which doesn't mean a lot either seeing as he was dead for thousands upon thousands of years.
There are just to many unknowns to even make a guess at how powerful he was.
Originally posted by tommy vercetti
it was one of the 5 biggest tombs which shows he was in the same league as tulak hord, marko ragnos, ludo kressh and naga sadow. therefor the sword must have been powerful to overcome someone as powerful or close to as powerful as these.
Like I said, King Tut has one of the largest tombs, but he was a miniscule character in Egyptian history. There are a lot of reasons to give someone a large tomb, it doesn't mean that he was great in battle.
Hell, he was 20000 years before Ragnos, over that span, the Sith Empire could have greatly advanced. That is just plain logical fallacy. The size of the tomb doesn't necessarily correlate into the power of the man, it's a false conclusion.
I'm NOT saying he is the most powerful, so don't flame me -- but I do believe Darth Sidious is the greatest Sith Lord ever. He was a damn coward, yes. But he had no equal in terms of manipulation. His tactics reflected his nature -- but they worked better than anyone elses. He is also the only KNOWN (though it has been hinted by Sidious himself that it may be otherwise) Sith Lord to conquer the galaxy. And even if he didn't conquer it ALL -- it was far greater than what the others have done.
1. He did conquer the galaxy. He is, in fact, the only one to ever do it.
2. He engineered the destruction of the Jedi Order.
He had his flaws -- hence his inevitable defeat. But all Sith Lords fail in the end. Sidious is no exception. But what he did was great, and to deny the impact it had would be lying.
It has been hinted that he is one of the greatest - if not THE. The Star Wars site refers to him as the puppet-master who saw the end of the Republic. That is indeed a feat no one else accomplished.
Sourcebooks and various EU/websites credit him with this. It is just testimony to see that those who despise Sidious cannot deny his effective skill.
So. Sidious to me, is the greatest Sith Lord.
Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
That may mean that Ajunta is weak. If he cant control a sword then he must suck.😉
Yeah, that's what I thought until I played KOTOR. It seemed to me to indicate that Pall's sword he recovered drove him mad after he left the known regions of the galaxy in the future to maintain the dark threat mentioned. This might be wrong, but I just remember some situation from KOTOR that implied it.
Well...I voted Ragnos...
Still...I don't understand the discussion about Ajunta Pall here. Pall was on the first group of Dark Jedi that arrived on Korriban so basically he was a Dark Jedi that studied Sith Alchemy and created that sword that he can't control. That doesn't make him greater than Ragnos who was the greatest Sith at the high point of the Sith Empire.
And who voted for Tulak Hord ? I know that he is said to be the best Sith lightsaber duellist but people should think of the following points.
a) Sith
b) lightsaber duellist
c) information from KotoR II times
And that basically means that we don't know anything about his force powers. Every Jedi could be better than him. It gives no information about people like Ragnos, Sadow, Kressh, Pall since they didn't use lightsabers so they might be able to kill Hord in melee combat. And it doesn't say anything about the people past KotoR times.
So that only tells us that Tulak was the greatest Sith lightsaber fighter in the era from 5,000 to 3,951 BBY but the best Sith Lord ever ? I doubt it.
Originally posted by Fishy
The discussion about Pall exists because his ghost was around 16.000 years after his dead and he was still okay, when the force ghosts of the other great one's weakened pretty fast. So Pall would have to be really powerful to still have that much power after 16.000 years...
Palls spirit was bound to his sword that's why he asked Revan to take it out of the tomb - that sword kept his ghost there not his former power. And it must be 21,000 years (25,000 - 3,961 BBY) that he were around as a spirit.
Originally posted by Nai Fohl
Well...I voted Ragnos...Still...I don't understand the discussion about Ajunta Pall here. Pall was on the first group of Dark Jedi that arrived on Korriban so basically he was a Dark Jedi that studied Sith Alchemy and created that sword that he can't control. That doesn't make him greater than Ragnos who was the greatest Sith at the high point of the Sith Empire.
And who voted for Tulak Hord ? I know that he is said to be the best Sith lightsaber duellist but people should think of the following points.
a) Sith
b) lightsaber duellist
c) information from KotoR II timesAnd that basically means that we don't know anything about his force powers. Every Jedi could be better than him. It gives no information about people like Ragnos, Sadow, Kressh, Pall since they didn't use lightsabers so they might be able to kill Hord in melee combat. And it doesn't say anything about the people past KotoR times.
So that only tells us that Tulak was the greatest Sith lightsaber fighter in the era from 5,000 to 3,951 BBY but the best Sith Lord ever ? I doubt it.
Well, ot be good wit ha ligtsaber, you have to be able to control the force pretty well, and I'm sure that Tulak would not be a pushover in force terms.
Originally posted by Hornyman
Well, ot be good wit ha ligtsaber, you have to be able to control the force pretty well, and I'm sure that Tulak would not be a pushover in force terms.
Ulic Quel-Droma could fight a Jedi into a standstill without having any force powers..so that doesn't count much.
Fishy: Of course Pall is good at least in Sith Alchemy - he had to be to create his blade - but that neither says something about his force abilities nor about his skill as a swordfighter. At least you should be powerful enough to handle something you have built yourself.