Sidious - The Debate

This is all due to the immense hype of Kreia's little quote. It has spawned a disease. Look. I want to bring this up about Kreia's quote, okay?

1. Kreia is a dubious source. The woman's been described as Palpatine's other half. She's a damn good manipulator, tactition, and a liar.

2. Kreia, despite immense wisdom and power in the Force, is not all-knowing. No one is always right in the Star Wars universe. Yoda and Sidious and all the others have been wrong during many occasions.

3. Kreia is an Expanded Universe figure commenting on issues that tie into movies. People have thrown the fact up that "Sidious isn't most powerful because Lucas hasn't said so." Fine then. Lucas hasn't agreed with this quote, thus it must be wrong. Point moot.

4. Kreia is speaking of Ancient Sith from beyond KOTOR times. That means people then may not be as powerful as those of ancient times. That means the "Ancient Sith own all" rule isn't necessarily privy to Revan.

5. There are always exceptions to the rule.

I really wish people would listen to that fact, but some stick to their Sithly Idols.

Originally posted by Escape81
Okay -

I disagree with Lightsnake in the sense that I do believe Palpatine's power did expand amazingly during the OT and Dark Empire times. I do not believe he had the DE Force powers in the time of the PT. It would not make sense. I agree with Nai there. It is more logical to deduce that Palpatine, having gleaned the archives of the Jedi and raided tombs on Korriban for Sith artifacts, that he achieved his potential in DE times, also having five years non-stop to train them.

However -

Kevin J. Anderson created Exar Kun, Marka Ragnos, and the other Ancient Sith. Nai, to refute his claims of power is ridiculous. He created the characters. He knows their power better than you, or any of us. If he says that his Sith were on a lower tier than Emperor Palpatine, you haven't the basis to dispute this. One could easily accuse you of a bias against Palpatine by making a foolhardy claim, just as you've accused Lightsnake of fanboyism.

Simply put, DE Sidious had the power to teleport beings across the galaxy. He had the power to annihilate mass fleets of ships. And it took the combined Force Attunement of Anakin Solo, Leia, and Luke to take him down. And then, even on his deathbed he still devestated the security forces of Onderon. Exar Kun is mighty powerful, and I do not believe he was much weaker than DE Sidious, but I believe he is, considering the proof Lightsnake has provided.

Also, when Sidious was dying, he went to Korriban. The spirits of long dead Sith Lords initially refused his request for the secrets to immortality, but then they agreed that he had become "the strongest of them", and told him to go possess Anakin Solo.

There you have it. Why dispute it?

And Glentract -

Sidious intended to be separated from his body when he attacked Onderon. Why didn't he take an army with him, otherwise? Apparently, the process required him to be rendered as a spirit. He did not however, expect Brand to interfere.

Did the ancient say that Sidious was stronger than any of them ever was or did they simply ment that he was now the strongest sith?

Originally posted by Escape81
However -

Kevin J. Anderson created Exar Kun, Marka Ragnos, and the other Ancient Sith. Nai, to refute his claims of power is ridiculous. He created the characters. He knows their power better than you, or any of us. If he says that his Sith were on a lower tier than Emperor Palpatine, you haven't the basis to dispute this. One could easily accuse you of a bias against Palpatine by making a foolhardy claim, just as you've accused Lightsnake of fanboyism.

No, Escape. You're simply not getting the point. You and Lightsnake wanted to have a Literary Analysis and now you get it.

The Ancient Sith are Anderson's creation and he has the final word when it comes to their power. I agree so far. The problem is neither the Sidious we have seen in the movies nor the Sidious we've seen in the DE comics is one of Anderson's creations.
Therefore he can't know about the full extend of Sidious powers and if he doesn't know about that he can't give an accurate comment on the power of his creations compared to the power of Sidious because Sidious is non of his creations.
The only thing Anderson would be able to tell us is which of his own creations (meaning the Ancient Sith Lords) is the most powerful and nothing else. Every statement that is connected to other people's work (such as comparing the power of his Ancient Sith to the power of Sidious) is beyond the primacy of his own creations and therefore worthless.

If you have a comment from Lucas himself saying that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord ever it's also useless. The EU happens in a "parallel dimension" or "another universe" then Lucas own work (the films) meaning if Lucas says that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord this is only true for his universe (the films) but not for the EU.

And the only other person who can give some comment on the issue would be Tom Veitch but again - his primacy is limited to his own creations which would be DE Sidious and again he doesn't have the right to compare the power of DE Sidious to the power of the creations of other people (Anderson's ancient Sith Lords). Even if the Ancient Sith Lords (created by Anderson) say that DE Sidious is the most powerful that hasn't to be the truth.

So any comment you can give here from the responsible authors talking about the power of their creations compared to the power of persons other people created is simply useless because the knowledge of the authors is limited to their creations.

And even if you don't want to accept that - which would defy the idea of Literary analysis - people like Revan, Desann, Kreia, Malak, Nihilus, Sion and so on could still be more powerful than Sidious.

Simply put, DE Sidious had the power to teleport beings across the galaxy. He had the power to annihilate mass fleets of ships. And it took the combined Force Attunement of Anakin Solo, Leia, and Luke to take him down. And then, even on his deathbed he still devestated the security forces of Onderon. Exar Kun is mighty powerful, and I do not believe he was much weaker than DE Sidious, but I believe he is, considering the proof Lightsnake has provided.

The "proof" Lightsnake has provided is worthless as I've explained above. Period. And using the only other valid method of analysation (suspension of disbelief) there are still people that could be more powerful than DE Sidious.

Also, when Sidious was dying, he went to Korriban. The spirits of long dead Sith Lords initially refused his request for the secrets to immortality, but then they agreed that he had become "the strongest of them", and told him to go possess Anakin Solo.

There you have it. Why dispute it?

Again. This is useless. The spirit of Ancient Sith Lords on Korriban ? Which Ancient Sith Lords exactly ? At least we know that those couldn't have been Kun, Ragnos, Sadow, Kressh, Revan, Kreia, Nihilus, Sion, Nadd and so on - all people were not present any longer at this time or they weren't burried on Korriban. Meaning all this proves is that DE Sidious is more powerful than a bunch of random Ancient Sith Lords. Really impressive.

Borbarad- re the parallel universe thing.

This is true, which is why Boba Fett is alive in the EU but dead in the films.

BUT- it so happens the EU accepts everything in the films and that GL says as canon as well. GL permitted Fett's ressurrection for the EU alone (in one of his few EU interventions). So unless he has made a specific exception like that, if it is so in the films, it is so in the EU as well.

If you think an author's quote contradicts his own work... well, yes, that might be annoying, but it might also only be an issue of interpretation. And yes, anything can be argued in the EU on the idea that the presented material is in error. The vs. area is just a mass of opinion anyway.

You say you haven't seen any source saying that no Sith Lord can be more powerful than Sidious. Well... I agree, and that is why I was asking for exactly that in the form of those quotes. I am sorry, Borbarad, but those quotes WOULD be definitive. If Anderson says that the Sith Lords in his work aren't as powerful as the Emperor, then that is that; if GL says that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord ever, then that holds true for the EU as well, parallel or otherwise, because the EU accepts such things.

But it must be said, these quotes from Lucas and Anderson have not appeared, and at this point I think it is impossible for anyone to definitvely state that it is clear within the EU about who is more powerful; it seems arguments can be made for both and without some sort of definitve source to clarify the issue, no-one can 'win' this argument.

And ubermench, cut out the trolling or you will be banned.

This is all due to the immense hype of Kreia's little quote. It has spawned a disease. Look. I want to bring this up about Kreia's quote, okay?

1. Kreia is a dubious source. The woman's been described as Palpatine's other half. She's a damn good manipulator, tactition, and a liar.

If we are going to ignore everything Kreia says, then we must also ignore everything Palpatine says, he was a damn good manipulator, tactitican and he was a liar...

2. Kreia, despite immense wisdom and power in the Force, is not all-knowing. No one is always right in the Star Wars universe. Yoda and Sidious and all the others have been wrong during many occasions.

No, she isn't all knowing. But she's displayed a measure of foresight and knowledge that outstrips Yoda's and Sidious'. She is accurately able to predict the death of Jango Fett at the hands of Mace Windu. That is damn better than Palpatine.

3. Kreia is an Expanded Universe figure commenting on issues that tie into movies. People have thrown the fact up that "Sidious isn't most powerful because Lucas hasn't said so." Fine then. Lucas hasn't agreed with this quote, thus it must be wrong. Point moot.

No, Sidious has been declared to be the most powerful Sith of his time by Lucas. The Database also describes him as being "the most powerful practioner of the Sith in modern times."

Which quote takes precedence?

4. Kreia is speaking of Ancient Sith from beyond KOTOR times. That means people then may not be as powerful as those of ancient times. That means the "Ancient Sith own all" rule isn't necessarily privy to Revan.

What is your point?

5. There are always exceptions to the rule.

Yes, but is Sidious one of them?

Originally posted by Ushgarak
This is true, which is why Boba Fett is alive in the EU but dead in the films.

BUT- it so happens the EU accepts everything in the films and that GL says as canon as well. GL permitted Fett's ressurrection for the EU alone (in one of his few EU interventions). So unless he has made a specific exception like that, if it is so in the films, it is so in the EU as well.

No Ush. That's simply wrong. The EU made Luke join the Dark Side and serve the Emperor and this is totally against his character as it's developed in the films. Different universe, different rules. The EU contradicts the movies and Lucas statements in certain ocassions and so you can't say that it takes everything Lucas says as "canon".

If you think an author's quote contradicts his own work... well, yes, that might be annoying, but it might also only be an issue of interpretation. And yes, anything can be argued in the EU on the idea that the presented material is in error. The vs. area is just a mass of opinion anyway.

The point is that an author - if you want to keep the analyses literary - only can give comment according to his own work. Anderson can't compare the power of his Sith Lords to the power of Sidious because Sidious is none of his creations. Same goes for Veitch (DE Sidious). The only person who would be able to say "DE Sidious is more powerful than the Ancient Sith Lords" would be Lucas and he has to give that statement exactly like that. "Sidious is the most powerful ever" doesn't count when he isn't clearly talking about the entire EU.

You say you haven't seen any source saying that no Sith Lord can be more powerful than Sidious. Well... I agree, and that is why I was asking for exactly that in the form of those quotes. I am sorry, Borbarad, but those quotes WOULD be definitive. If Anderson says that the Sith Lords in his work aren't as powerful as the Emperor, then that is that; if GL says that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord ever, then that holds true for the EU as well, parallel or otherwise, because the EU accepts such things.

I'm sorry Ush - the quotes won't be definite since the authority of one author is limited to his own work and doesn't include anything else. Anderson can only give comments on his characters and he can only compare the power of his characters to each other not to the characters created by other people since he doesn't no the definite amount of power the creations of other people have.

That's like J.K. Rowling saying that Harry Potter is more powerful than Gandalf. She has the primacy over Harry Potter and nobody will argue that but she doesn't now about the extend of Gandalf's power - because Gandalf doesn't belong to her creations. And therefore she can't compare Harry's power to the power of Gandalf. So that wouldn't be a definitive statement although coming from the inventor of Harry Potter. Period.

Technically even Lucas can't give a definite statement on the topic who's the most powerful Sith Lord because he didn't create them all.
It only the canon policy that enables him to give a statement on the issue if he ever wants to but a "Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord ever" from somebody at TFN isn't a statement from Lucas.

Ragnos was one of those ancient Sith on Korriban, Borba. Y'know, the ones that ruled in the ANCIENT EMPIRE. Who the frack else is buried on Korriban.

And suddenly a quote from the databank means strongest of the modern and of all time are mutually exclusive?

And KJA has authority to say how strong HIS characters are. If he wants them weaker or stronger than someone, since he created them with Lucas he's full within his rights.

JK Rowling and Tolkien work OUT of the same franchise. KJA works inside the same franchise and writes in the same setting. Full blown red herring at work. I'd think acknowledgement by the Ancients as strongest 'ever' would have some merit and this is NOT a literary debate, this straight up, cold hard Star Wars facts. Provide them

I hate to repeat myself but with sci-fi like SW with so many factors to power, it can seem as much as you like that the ancients are the most superior but if the intention of the writers and even Lucas was that Sidious was still the strongest ever then we can only leave it at that..

Who are you to judge them anyway? As if you fully grasp what power is in their fiction. The point is that there are too many factors and just because you didn't see amazing superhero powers used in the movies doesn't mean anything as Sidious did it too in his own little comics.
And these bad comparisons to try to go against Lucas and the writers don't convince anyone either.

Of course some of you also have a theory that Sidious went uber from the movie to the Dark Empire comics although Sidious was already a fully developed sith lord and tutor at the beginning of the PT. Just because he doesn't show us that he can eat food in the movies but he suddenly does do it in the comics doesn't make it a fact that he had quickly learned it after being reborn.
And the earlier comparison from movie Luke to literature Luke doesn't mean anything to this discussion either because Luke did have stuff to learn whereas Sidious had reached the level of 'master' already for so many years just like Yoda.

Of course there are a lot of crappy ways to discuss and go against gidelines of the creators and even basic logic but just because you want it so desperately doesn't make it a fact.

Ever considered that the makers of those ancient sith lord comics were fans of the movies and respected the way Lucas had intended Sidious to be? There are a thousand ways of interpretation in these subjects but I for one place the idea's of the creators above a random Joe.

Borbarad, you appear to be talking nonsense.

First of all, no, I am afraid it is you who is wrobg. The movies and GL's words have absolute primacy in the EU, and anything in the EU that contradicts them is simply wrong. This is a fact we can easily see from Lucasfilm's own words, as well as the words as others on the matter. Film canon comes absolutely first, for the EU as well. Much EU stuff has had to be actively removed as contradictory. Anything that is contradictory is not just parallel- it is WRONG.

The parallel nature works the other way, mostly- anything that happens in the EU does not happen in GL's film universe. But everything in the film universe does happen and IS so in the EU one.

Even if you do not agree (more fool you) that is the policy of this board, and therefore of this thread- so I am afraid you will have to respect that.

Secondly, your following example is nonsensical. Potter compared to Gandalf? They are not from the same darn franchise! That is a completely different area, obviously! Any child could tell the lack of logical consistency in your words. Of course Rowling can't say that- it is in a completely different setting that she has no input into.

The process is very simple. Kevin Anderson works inside a Universe with set boundaries. If he wants to make a planet smaller than Coruscant, he cam make a planet and say it is smaller than Coruscant. He would only be wrong if GL then comes along and say he got the size of Coruscant wrong (or said that no planets were smaller than Coruscant). Unlikely, but it demonstrates the point.

Or if he wants to make a character taller than Han Solo, he can make a character taller than Han Solo. What he can't do is set how tall Han Solo is- GL did that.

And so by the same logic... OBVIOUSLY if he wants to make characters weaker than Sidious, he can make characters weaker than Sidious! He cannot change how powerful Sidious is, but he CAN make characters rated relative to him. That's so blindingly obvious that I am at a complete loss to see how anyone could not see that.

He is not changing anything- he is sijply stating where his creations lie in an already determined set of variables.

My word, I do not believe we have had to have this childish argument.

And of course GL can make such commentary- he has total, final line authority over everything if he wishes.

So IF the author/GL says these things, they are so. Anderson can speak about the relative power of his own creations, and GL can speak about absolutely anything he damn well likes. That will be the end of it, as far as this thread is concerned.

But I still happily concur that such quotes have not yet actually been presneted. We'll need TFN's source- TFN itself isn't good enough.

Since when has TFN been the be all and end all of Star Wars???

Funny how people keep saying 'TFN' yet, never a word on KJA.

That quote had the hardest impact on me. Lightsnake, try not to be so 'pompous' in your debates. It's already receiving critics. Just fight like your opposition.

I'm being courteous to people who have done back. Not people like Venificious, Ban or Traya who so lovingly suggested suicide.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
I'm being courteous to people who have done back. Not people like Venificious, Ban or Traya who so lovingly suggested suicide.

Say what?

Originally posted by Lightsnake
I'm being courteous to people who have done back. Not people like Venificious, Ban or Traya who so lovingly suggested suicide.

I apologised, get over it.

If you don't except it, then fine. Tell me.

"I suggest much stupidity in you, Lightsnake. You have a blaster and the ability to commit suicide, but you don't use them."

Yeah, that cuts a little deep. Try saying that to random people, Traya, see how well it's received.

Originally posted by Darth Traya
I apologised, get over it.

If you don't except it, then fine. Tell me.

A word on this. The suggestion of suicide is worse than a set of insults, Traya. I recall this statement now, and you've suggested it to more people than just Lightsnake. This is likely to piss you off and rally the people at Dark Tower Forums, but if I see it, you'll be reported. And if (not saying they will) my old friends at Dark Tower Forums get angry because of this or whatever, they can simply rot in hell.

Suggesting suicide is sick.

Escape, is telling someone to rot in hell is anybetter?

Lightsnake,

Mass of stellar core = 1,193,352,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Speed thrown = > 950 khp
950,000 meters per hour / 3600(needs to be converted into seconds) = ~ 263

1,193,352,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 * 263 = 3,138,515,760,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg m/s. That is a lot. That is about an equivalent amount in watts. Sadow put at least that much energy into the star.

Energy of star = ~386,000,000,000,000,000,000

It was stated that 40 star destroyers could overtake Coruscant even with it's defense fleet. ISD put about a third of their energy into sheilds.

386,000,000,000,000,000,000 / 3 = ~128,700,000,000,000,000,000

128,700,000,000,000,000,000 * 40 = 5,148,000,000,000,000,000,000

Power of Coruscant Defenses is less then 5,148,000,000,000,000,000,000.

Even if we assume best case for the Coruscant Defenase Fleet, it is far less then Sadow's feat.

3,138,515,760,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 / 5,148,000,000,000,000,000,000 = 609,657,296

Sadow's feat required 609,657,296 times more energy then Sidious' greatest feat.

A laser squares the effect of unfocused light.

If this energy is like light energy, Sadow has the ability to focus 24,691 times more energy then Sidious. Case closed.

Yes, I'd love to see how you calculated this? any official statements or is it all made up? Any consideration to how all Sadow does is trigger a weapon on his ship? Everything points to that. The comic, the quote in the Chronology, the pictures in the comic, the dialogue....