Palpatine: Most powerful Sith Lord in History

Being new to this forum but already knowing the hotly debated subject between the users here, who is the strongest Sith Lord. Well according to New Essential Chronology by Dan Wallace on page 84 the first paragraph the following is said:

"Obi Wan Kenobi and Yoda were the only Jedi left in a position to do something about the disaster. Yoda went after Palpatine in the empty Senate chamber, but could not defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history."

This book is not a RPG guide book. It is an official book for the purpose of charting the Star Wars universe thus far. It has LFL's official stamp and its pretty much law. It is also very new being issued out in late 2005.

Sidious didn't have the power to destroy a planet with nothing but his hands, now did he?

Feats Wars are teh greatest!

Heh, Styles from the GameSpot/GameFAQs forums? I remember seeing you at the KOTOR 2 forum.

Sidious didn't have the power to destroy a planet with nothing but his hands, now did he?

Feats Wars are teh greatest!

Did I say or post ANY thing about feats? Maybe you can't read. i just posted a direct quote from NEC stating Sidious as the most powerful Sith Lord in history.

I'm pretty and decently sure no Sith lord ever destroyed a planet single handedly...Bane deforested a world with the help of...twenty five or twenty six other Sith Lords, Naga Sadow's force powered technology did the star destroying...in fact, the only two Sith to ever really effect a world completely on their own were Nihilius and Sidious.

Yes I'm from the GF forums

Wow, a Sidious fanboy thread.

http://img384.imageshack.us/my.php?image=proof9gs.jpg

And an owned Ragnos fanboy thread. If you can actually refute this, you have to ignore the facts that Ragnos's power to destroy galaxies is never mentioned, while Palpatine's power is mentioned AND shown and that Leland Chee has used the Chronology in a few instances.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
http://img384.imageshack.us/my.php?image=proof9gs.jpg

And an owned Ragnos fanboy thread. If you can actually refute this, you have to ignore the facts that Ragnos's power to destroy galaxies is never mentioned, while Palpatine's power is mentioned AND shown and that Leland Chee has used the Chronology in a few instances.

First- no one ever said Ragnos could destroy "galaxies". Stop pulling statements out of your ass.

Second- compilation resource material can't make blanket statements on a character's level of power in comparison with all the others, for the same reason why the claim in any history book that "X is the greatest leader of all time" is reflective of the author's opinion and therefore NOT CANON. Don't be daft.

Third- Leland Chee did NOT make or have a hand in the Chronology. Point is moot.

Fourth- you got OWNED in the Sidious debate. Please do us a favor and go back to TFN forums.

Firstly: The chap with the Drow as an avatar did.

Secondly: Actually, it can. In fact, since earlier material and all evidence supports this compilation, dark Empire declares Sidious's power to be above anyone else and considering the author of DE Co-write TOTJ...so...how can TOTJ refute an earlier source? Never mind that it doesn't and you just think it does

thirdly: Leland Chee is the official word on continuity and clarified Revan's allignment. And gender

Fourth: Refute it. Try. Go on, fine me a quote on Ragnos's power.

http://www.tfaw.com/gn/profile.html?&SKU=46806

There you go, fanboy. Author's synapsis.

Fascinating. Now...how is an obviously hyperbole synopsis canon at all? Where is it in the story? I've never denied Ragnos was the strongest of the Ancient Sith, that's exactly what that quote means. It doesn't take into account- at all- of the five thousand subsequent years. It covers that specific time period and not a second after. And Once mroe: Dark Empire declared Palpatine on quite the plateau. As does the Chronology which has the LFL stamp on it and was used to clarify numerous things, like the start of the Sith Empire, do you deny it started in 7000 BBY? Do you deny Revan was a Light sider? Chronology declared both and Leland Chee confirmed it.

Honestly, you're working from assumption. I have actual feats of Palpatine, quotes on his power, and this quote stating he is the strongest Sith of all time and with only your opinion that it is wrong. When this guide is stamped by LFL, an essential guide, among other things

Seriously. Do you want to get pwned again?

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=386748&perpage=20&highlight=&pagenumber=1

Ah, memories. That's just one of many threads in which your ass was handed to you.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Fascinating. Now...how is an obviously hyperbole synopsis canon at all? Where is it in the story?

Uh, it's the author's synopsis. You DO know what those are, right? It's straight from the horse's mouth. He's the omniscient narrator, telling you that Ragnos is THE baddest of the bad. If you want to refute that, it's because you're a Sidious fanboy and Ragnos' very being challenges the things that make you cream your sheets.

I've never denied Ragnos was the strongest of the Ancient Sith, that's exactly what that quote means.

O rly? Last I checked, most powerful of the most powerful didn't have an invisible implied time period on it.

It doesn't take into account- at all- of the five thousand subsequent years. It covers that specific time period and not a second after.

It's called source material, asshat. And it's cowritten by someone who wrote DE, as you pointed out. So wouldn't that person have the authority to sign off on Ragnos being stronger than DE Sidious? Or would that totally ruin your stance?

And Once mroe: Dark Empire declared Palpatine on quite the plateau.

And this comes later and says otherwise. DE doesn't account for Ragnos since he wasn't created at that point. The very existance of Ragnos and him being the "most powerful of the most powerful" and being signed off on by a former DE comics author solidifies it, despite your love for Sidious being number one.

As does the Chronology which has the LFL stamp on it and was used to clarify numerous things, like the start of the Sith Empire, do you deny it started in 7000 BBY?

Are you really that dense? GAorSE has the same stamp on it. IKC scanned it for you last time you made that stupid claim.

Do you deny Revan was a Light sider? Chronology declared both and Leland Chee confirmed it

So? If a military historian confirms that a textbook or encyclopedia says something correct, does this validify everything in that source? No. Don't be stupid. Sidious is not god, and lying fanboys can't save him.

Read the quote, buddy boy. Your entire argument comes crashing down around your ears. See? Want me to spell it out? Page 84: Palpatine is declared the most Powerful Sith Lord in history. Dark Empire says the same. The co-author of TOTJ wrote...Dark Empire.

We enter one of the five stages, IKC: Denial

Read my post, fanboy. Your argument holds less water than Custer's body. Don't be daft. You'll only get destroyed again if you keep this up.

I look to your opinion...I look to the official source.

1. Ragnos's power is in reference to the official source. In an out of universe synopsis. Why is THAT accepted as gospel but a quote saying Palp> All Sith Lords ignored? Oh, right, your bias...

2. Oh, come on..."WAS the most powerful....now he is dead. And so and so come to take his place. Gav and Jori arrive, etc etc etc." This refers to the time period and nothing more.

3. Except Tom Veitch declared Palpatine the most Powerful Sith Lord of all time in his stuff. Ragnos is never, not once, mentioned as the strongest Sith ever.

4. Point being? Once again: This has LFL's official stamp on it, backing of Leland Chee...now, why can TOTJ suddenly override sources when TOTJ HAS been overriden! Come on, waiting for that quote! I want sometihng in DIRECT opposition to opposition 'of all time' from Dark Empire AND this Chronology!

5. Hmm...the only place it seems to be unofficial is in your deluded mind.

And last I checked, the Sith Order was broken, it was reformed by Bane. How do you know that "in History" is a blanket statement covering all eras, including eras where such statements would not be comparable?

I could just as easily point out that Sith Lord does not mean "Dark Lord of the Sith."

I could also easily point out that Marka Ragnos does not even have a biography in the NEC, it's kind of hard to compare and contrast with something that the book doesn't include, is it?

Originally posted by Lightsnake
I look to your opinion...I look to the official source.

Funny, I remember pointing out to you that RPG Sourcebooks aren't canon.

1. Ragnos's power is in reference to the official source. In an out of universe synopsis. Why is THAT accepted as gospel but a quote saying Palp> All Sith Lords ignored? Oh, right, your bias...

Uh, because Palps does NOT overpower the other Sith Lords. We've already shown this time and time again. But you're a fanboy, and accepting the hard cold truth would make you have to wake up and realize that Sidious is NOT number one. IKC posted the link; I suggest you reacquiant yourself with the argument that you LOST last time. Suddenly having one line from a compilation does nto "OMfg overryde!!11" your entire flawed argument.

2. Oh, come on..."WAS the most powerful....now he is dead. And so and so come to take his place. Gav and Jori arrive, etc etc etc." This refers to the time period and nothing more.

This isn't GAtoS synopsis according to Lightsnake the TOTJ hater; it's what it is. You are the kind of person who argued that the Golden Age wasn't really the golden age, so when it comes to your opinion and the official source... I take the official source, k thnx.

3. Except Tom Veitch declared Palpatine the most Powerful Sith Lord of all time in his stuff. Ragnos is never, not once, mentioned as the strongest Sith ever.

Except Tom went on to help make GAotS a couple of years after DE, so obviously in creating it and signing off on it and letting the official synosis state "Most powerful of the most powerful", this newer source trumps the older one. It's called retcon, and DE's claim that Sidious is "teh uber" is retconned by the presence of "godlike" ancient Sith. I realize you struggle with this, but eventually when you drop that fanboy facade, it'll hit you.

4. Point being? Once again: This has LFL's official stamp on it, backing of Leland Chee...now, why can TOTJ suddenly override sources when TOTJ HAS been overriden! Come on, waiting for that quote! I want sometihng in DIRECT opposition to opposition 'of all time' from Dark Empire AND this Chronology!

Are you that thick, Lightsnake? BOTH have LFL's official stamp on it. If they didn't, they couldn't be marketed without COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. Duh.

Second, Leland Chee has not signed off and verified all information, and in any case, a compilation cannot OVERRIDE THE SOURCE MATERIAL IT DRAWS ON. It's a reference material, not canon. Duh.

5. Hmm...the only place it seems to be unofficial is in your deluded mind.

Please. You are the very meaning of deluded.

Every DotS is a Sith Lord. This is a coverage of the entire history of Star Wars, what else would 'in history' mean? history is all eras.
And Dark Empire clearly says 'of all time.' Ragnos doesn't have the coverage Sidious does because his appearances are slimmer. Ragnos is well mentioned though, his century of iron handed rule for one. Ragnos is more famous for the power vacuum his death caused than anything he did while alive. Hell, Sadow isn't given a full biography. Ludo Kressh is skimmed over almost completely. Bane and Kaan are as well.