Palpatine: Most powerful Sith Lord in History

Originally posted by Janus Marius
1. I disagree. I've already gone over this many times, and you've skirted a lot of arguments by simply saying "Wrong" or "Incorrect" and then just rendering your opinion. I'm also curious how much knowledge you actually have of the subject material, and curious as to when a single line in a reference material overwrites the entire backdrop and synapsis of a series.

2. I find it pretty disappointing that on a forum, you would go so far as to "take a stance" on an issue and declare your own opinion to be absolute, rendering any kind of disagreement or observation otherwise as ... oh what were your words?

[b]Your interpretations on it be damned. As far as this site is concerned, Sidious WILL be the most powerful, and like the application of canon, no further argument on it will be allowed.

Geez, Ush... totalitarian much? So you speak for the entire site? And your decision is binding because of your interpretation of a single sentence? Because "most powerful" couldn't possibly be more political power than physical or force power, even though the justification that came in that supposed email from Dan Wallace cited achievements as key to his power, not force powers? I realize you have an undisguised disdain for most EU, but last I checked you didn't have the authority to tell people what they can think or not think here at KMC. Which brings me to three...

3. The only thing your post has convinced me off is your own narrowmindedness and ego. And when push comes to shove, I don't give a damn what you've decided; I don't agree and I plan to disagree until I'm convinced otherwise. I've never seen anything to give me faith in your absolute judgment because you've shown lots of ignorance on the side of EU and what I would certainly call an extreme movie bias. Elsewhere, I don't see you putting your foot down in the General Discussion forum when people don't agree with you on abortion or education. Since when do you get to render absolute decision for "Star Wars according to Ush/KMC"? There's no violation of forum policy for arguing vague lines and changes in SW canon- if anything it's implied in the idea of a forum to uh... discuss things. I realize you want to play Der Führer and swing your modly weight around, but I'm not impressed and I'm not cowed. So save your self-righteousness for the ones who care -- I don't. Mod's don't step in elsewhere and declare absolute judgment on any questions or issues, neither should you. [/B]

That was such a f*cking awesome post!

Pointless distraction. I will make this clear- if an official and canon source says that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord in history, only a total pedant and a person who has completely lost touch with rationality and sense will try and make out that this is the wrong kind of power. EVERY use of power in a Star Wars setting means force power, potency power... POWER. A small child can see this logic.

This continual attempt to evade the issue is pathetic.

Oh, and Sidious's physical power is as irrelevant as ever.

No, this is pointless distraction. It was never made clear, and it isn't clear. If it's clear to you, that's great, but to say your interpretation of a phrase makes you correct, then you are committing the same illogical rationalization that many people are.

Every use of power in a Star Wars setting means force power? So when they said that the Galatic Empire was the most "powerful" entity the galaxy has ever seen, it means that they have more force power than everyone else?

So when they say Sidious is the "strongest," we can read it literally? Such as Sidious could beat every sith in the history of the galaxy in an arm wrestling match? So then why are we reading it literally that Sidious could beat everyone in a one-on-one combat situation? So you're declaring that his physical power is irrelevant, but because "every" instance in the SW setting applies to force power (it doesn't, I'll assure you), that we can make the umbrella claim here.

The fact of the matter is that the line was never supported or clarified. Period.

Glad you think that a "small child can see this logic," but a small child is very often wrong.

No, it is just rubbish.

That comment of yours was also magnificently irrelevant.

Lie.

So wait, it's just rubbish, but the stuff in it wasn't exaggerated? Some of the most ridiculous, over the top feats are done in the books. The books and comics are BOTH C-Canon. So now who made you final arbiter over continuity?

Sigh... simply too silly... well, I shall repeat once more- that once your weapon has the abilty to penetrate anything, like a lightsabre does, you don't NEED weight, NOR do you need to block. You just evade your opponent's clumsy weapon and stab him.

You have to establish the premise that the ancient Sith wielded these weapons clumsily. That canon evidence does not exist, I assure you. The fact that the comics make every attempt to make these weapons look fast, the fact that comics show low-level Sith blocking and countering Jedi attacks with their... -gasp- lightsabers, the fact that Sith Swords are never shown to be slower than lightsabers, especially when powered, the fact that the storyline in Jedi Academy mentions the Sith Sword of Ragnos as the fastest weapon in the game.

I have yet to see one convincing argument that a sith sword is too clumsy to stand against a lightsaber.

You talk about physically real? In actual REAL LIFE, not your silly fantasy world, as soon as weight was not needed in weaoons- i.e. people stopped wearing armour- EVERYONE switched to rapiers and such. Bastard swords went out of existance as the useless relics they were.

But I am not surprised that you want to avoid that piece of reality as well.

And even then, there were key figures that used notoriously heavy rapiers. I'm glad that you can take your weapons history from Three Musketeers movies, but the fact of the matter is that you've yet to establish anything about the Sith Swords being defunct in blocking and or too slow and unwieldly to be ineffective. Evidence suggests otherwise, and the only EU means of comparison (the JK:A game) shows that sith swords are not only faster, but stronger, than Jedi Lightsabers.

Now, let me make something clear to people. I don't care what your opinion of posters are. I certainly don't give a damn about power ratings in a silly continuity like this EU one. But I DO care about fair arguing and logical points being made inside my Star Wars area.

If Lightsnake successfully makes his case- that a comment saying Sidious is the most powerful has come from an official and canon source... then that is the end of the argument.

The issue being debated here is if Lightsnake as successfully made his case.

Your interpretations on it be damned. As far as this site is concerned, Sidious WILL be the most powerful, and like the application of canon, no further argument on it will be allowed.

So be aware- you had better be damn sure when opposing Lightsnake, because you might be very much on the losing side here.

I'm glad that you can play your favorites. Your interpretation is no more valid or important than anyone else's. Yet somehow, when someone comes up with a statement you agree with, it's automatically correct, and no interpretation can exist, even if the effect was never demonstrated onpanel or onpage to be absolute.

1. NO. We've seen Luke and Sidious create illusions of the same scale without the meditation sphere to amplify the ability. The force storm was a destructive force and described as the most powerful usage of dark force abilities of all time. Hell, the Force storm is the most powerful force technique known

And the Force Storm was not exclusive knowledge just to Sidious, so that point is inconclusive. Luke and Sidious create illusions on the same scale? Really? Where? Luke was tired after just one ship. Also, where was it said that Sadow needed the sphere? Where was it mentioned how much the sphere helped the illusions? We see Gav making puppet illusions after training just a little bit from Naga Sadow.

Luke being tired after one ship was one example of Try Denning screwing up. In DE, he creates a fleet of them, and in the Dark Fleet Crisis. It's a continuity error, apparently.

And didn't Gav have Naga's Sith amulets?

And I fail to see how the JA game showed that at all...considering the guy wielding the sword and the one wielding the saber. And I'd call destructive power far more effective than illusions. Palpatine was described as, by Dooku in the films as 'so powerful, not even Master Yoda could detect him." That Cho'tek, I think. I never said Sadow needed the sphere, but that it helped to amplify the illusions.

I asked Dan for clarification of what type of power he meant, he clarified on the issue.

Yeah, but where does Dan's authority come from? And you never did prove that that email was official.

For the final time, Styles posted the original one, not me. And I'll be glad to ask Dan to come here.

And once more: Dan's authority comes from LFL. They sort of gave him the authority to write a book on it and until it is retconned, it stands. In fact, Dan retconned the statement, under orders from LFL about the Sith Empire's age when he wrote it as the established 25,000 in the Character Guide.

He wrote a book for the LFL company, where do you think his authority comes from? Where does KJA's come from? Or Tom Veitch? Or Tim Zahn?

To quote him: He put it in the book because of lack of sources contradicting him

Once again Janus I'll say Go to the Star Wars blog page, find Dan Wallace, at the top there will be an icon saying Email this blogger, click it, ask him a question, ask him if a user named AcStyles e mailed him, his answer WILL be yes, post what I posted as his email, ask him if this is his writting, his answer WILL be yes.

I too can confirm this.

Actually, nevermind. I found something. This is on the 2000 edition.

http://www.starwars.com/eu/lit/ref/f20000404/index.html

Firstly, Dan did not even cover KJA's work:

Q: How did you divide up the research and writing of the Chronology? The sheer amount of material out there is mind-boggling. Did you review it all?

KJA: That's why we needed two of us! It's difficult for one person to read all of the new Star Wars fiction as it comes out, much less put it in order and summarize it. So far, by my count, I have written 54 separate pieces in the Star Wars universe. Naturally, I concentrated on my own titles, while Dan worked on the others. He would send me his draft summaries, which I'd expand and edit, and I would send him mine.

DW: Between the two of us we've read just about every story that has ever been published in the Star Wars universe. Kevin initially concentrated on his own material but also covered many of the other comics and films. I worked on novels, miscellaneous projects, and historical research. But it was a satisfying collaborative effort since we sent all our material back and forth for revisions and feedback. The final book has both our fingerprints all over it.

And here's on the "completeness" of your work, along with the idea of it's consistancy issues:

Q: Getting back to something you touched on earlier, Dan. The Chronology attempts to impose an official ordering on what has been an often chaotic and contradictory agglomeration of narratives, time-lines, events, etc. How did you decide between competing versions of the "truth"?
DW: Often, what appear to be contradictions or dueling versions of the "truth" are perfectly understandable with a little explanation, and we've done that to a degree in the Chronology. But the Chronology isn't a clearinghouse for nitpicks such as the proper spelling of the name of a background alien in the cantina scene; it is, by its nature, a big-picture view of epic events starting 25,000 years in the past and leading up to Del Rey's New Jedi Order fiction series.

KJA: For the most part, the "chaotic" appearance comes about because so many of the titles, from different publishers, were not published in "chronological" order. If you get them all in a timeline, there aren't so many contradictions, and even those are often fixable with a little explanation. Keep in mind, though, that while the Chronology is complete (so far), it was never intended to be comprehensive down to the last detail. Some of the more peripheral works are barely touched on.

Granted, that's not on the new one, but these mistakes are:

CORRECTIONS:
- Several times in the New Jedi Order section, Anakin Solo's mission to Myrkr to destroy the voxyn cloning material is referred to as the "mission to Wayland." D'oh.

- Over on the TFN forums, it's pointed out that the NEC places the destruction of the Ubese homeworld (forcing the Ubese to wear breath masks like Leia in ROJ) at approx. 2000-1500 BBY -- however, the game Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords, set in 3951 BBY, features breathmasked Ubese. It's a discrepancy for now. (For the record, I placed the event where I did to correspond with WEG's Alien Anthology, and was unaware of KOTOR2's Ubese at the time.)

- The KOTOR2 section also describes the characters "Darth Kreia" and "Darth Traya," which is an error that I don't want to explain here (to avoid in-game spoilers). Between this and the Ubese, that's what I get for not playing KOTOR2 prior to writing this book.

- Two different timeframes are mentioned for the establishment of the Corellian Trade Spine hyperspace route: one that coincides with the establishment of the Rimma (circa 5500 BBY) and one that coincides with the Hydian (circa 3000 BBY). The first date is the correct one.

- Dorsk 81 is mistakenly mentioned as a Jedi casualty during the New Jedi Order... the correct name is Dorsk 82. (Dorsk 81 died much earlier during Darksaber.)

Yeah, so much for your absolute source, Lightsnake.

Actually that helped prove my point: Dan admitted there were errors made, but the plot errors, rather than anachronisms aren't mentioned. I could point out about five TOTJ screwups.

These are examples of errors that were found and dealt with, your point? Dan wallace himself admitted them. I don't see the Palpatine one or the Sith Empire there and the SW site said it'd bring in 'new material'

And moreover, you're using a KJA interview with KJA from...5 years ago on the first one as proof?

Well, apparently , thanks to Revolver, this is dubious. I'll wait to see what KJA says. Though, keep in mind, it's still in the source, even if it is his opinion. Arguing stops until I get KJA's word, agreed?

Opinion of someone other than the author doesn't do much; it's appeal to false authority. But RO's email does help sort things out. I might email Dan myself and see how he responds. I was very skeptical of anyone who's anyone taking a serious interested in our forum squabble.

But indeed, no more debating until KJA comes up with an answer.

Understandable, but Dan seems a nice guy who likes being involved with the fans. I sent the mail to KJA

He does, actually. I expected to have someone who's 100% narrow-minded, slinging around his title and smiting dreams at the drop of a hat. Also, I recall Chee saying before that (At least he) they give preference to movie characters over EU characters because of a larger fanbase. I'd hate to see a hasty judgment made just because Sidious is in 1,435 Star Wars pieces of work and Ragnos is a ghost in maybe three.

Honestly, KJA seems to fit the former description, he's actually like a jerk with the Dune stuff.

Here's a thing though...can we expect KJA to have authority over movie characters and Tom Veitch's stuff? Tom didn't work on the Ancient Sith empire, after all...and it does seem a bit unfair to take the guy who's only appeared as a ghost in about three sources and call him the strongest based on things clouded in mystery and the like.

In the meantime, Janus, truce? I'm honestly sorry over the slinged insults

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Honestly, KJA seems to fit the former description, he's actually like a jerk with the 'Doom' stuff.

Here's a thing though...can we expect KJA to have authority over movie characters and Tom Veitch's stuff? Tom didn't work on the Ancient Sith empire, after all...and it does seem a bit unfair to take the guy who's only appeared as a ghost in about three sources and call him the strongest based on things clouded in mystery and the like.

In the meantime, Janus, truce? I'm honestly sorry over the slinged insults

- I hope KJA's level-headed. He seemed okay in the interviews.

- Well, here's where I'm seeing it: Veitch worked on Dark Empire, correct? He also had some help in TOTJ. I saw somewhere the quote along the lines that those two individuals shaped the ancient Sith empire and legacy. Now, the claims made in Dark Empire don't fit in right in light of the ancient sith: individuals who lived literally centuries, practising the dark side, trying to off each other, and uncovering mysteries of the Force that dwarf some of the accomplishments of later jedi and sith. I mean, Exar Kun found Sadow's gauntlet and he was able to WTFpwn a giant Sith Wyrm, tear rocks up like it was his job and cow the mutated, force using massassi. Embracing the dark side clearly boosts the power of the Force user a LOT. All of the relatively young jedi who embraced the dark side later on (And perhaps found ancient sith lore and/or relics) went on to become rivals of their peers and jedi masters. Now, imagine an isolated empire of dark force users who live for centuries. It's ridiculous. And we see how in-depth their knowledge is; hell, Sadow's ship allows a relative weakling like Aleema to cause a chain reaction that destroys stars. And this is force-based amplification. Even if the ancient sith weren't much more powerful than say, Mace Windu in the force, they've obviously found ways to further amplify their powers beyond normal threshold.

- And yes, I think a truce is in order. There's no sense in squabbling about this anymore when we are finally getting somewhere with proof.

Amen and hallelujah

This is all very interesting, I gotta say. I'm eagerly awaiting responses from the officials 😛

It astounds me that DW has taken an interest in a forum debate, he seems pretty cool...

However, Janus, Veitch left TOTJ before the Ancient Sith comics were made to work on Empire's end and beleive me I could point out some big errors in TOTJ. The beginning even makes it clear these are stories being retold from the past and therefore, their accuracy is in question. (The start says 'history has forgotten the name of this planet, but not the jedi.)

Here's the thing though:The Sith Emprie stagnated. Naga said it himself: For centuries, even through ragnos's rule, they stagnated completely, doing nothing but wallowing amongst wealth. Palpatine achieved far more than they did and his displays of power at the very least, rivaled everything they accomplished and it's made clear, either by dilligent study or arcane methods-we know he was able to drain information from objects, like Quin Vos's species could- acquired all their knowledge as well when he was young, guided by the Dark Side itself.

And this empire of Dark Force users who live for centuries stagnated completely. Marka himself even said their golden age was all the wealth they achieved so his views differed heavily from Naga. And the...lack of backstabbing from everyone except Naga isn't too showing of their penchant for destruction, evil and treachery. Simus clearly felt for Naga, and Naga seemed to feel some regret over his death. Ludo was clearly devoted to Marka, too. And when Simus is killed, one Sith Lord says over his death, "They are monsters!"

Hell, the Sith villainize the murderers of Simus. Amplifications aside, we don't know how or when they made those things. The Dark Jedi on Corbos created leviathans and bio-weapons so for all we know those weapons are remnants of the Schism Jedi's work. The main problem with a lot there may not be "Boom Dark Side, insta power" but KJA's shoddy writing

Look at some of the things he's done:
Tried to pair up Mara and Lando, Luke and CALLISTA, Winter and Ackbar?!
"Shielding" Are metal plates on the ship?
Ok, KJA...how exactly does a FOUR SHIP ISD FLEET threaten the Galaxy?
Upon acquiring a massive fleet and SSD...Daala decides to attack Yavin.

Though, in the meantime, there is one thing to admit: Even if he doesn't have total authority, Dan Wallace wrote this bit in the source so for the time being it is official.

No word from Kevin yet...he's probably a busier author, would be my guess. Took me ages to get responses from some specific others.

Also, it is undeniable there's a massive bias towards movie characters in the EU

For now, Ragnos and Sidious are unknowns, until we get a reply.

For the sake of threads put them on par with each other, to quell much uneeded repeating of arguments.

Ok, folks, let's make a few points clear here.

1. Janus- you disagree? Fine. But I don't care if you do or not. I am here concerned with facts, not opinions, and if a canon source overrides your opinion, that is cold fact.

2. Yes, I take a stance. Like the mods take stances on EU being out of canon, and the TV thread going in the Episode III area... we do take stances. Sorry if you thought we were always going to be totally impartial refs. That's not our job; our job is to run this place in the best way we see fit- which actually works hell of a lot better. In this matter... this is absolutely the best way I see fit. Don't like it? You have perfect freedom to go to another SW forum more to your tastes. But around here, we do things the way the mods say, and the mod in this case is me.

Similar proclamations have had to be made on the nature of 'Balance' of the Force, the identity of the Chosen One and the nature of midichlorians. We get so damn sick of the repeated debates that we find what seems to be the definitve answer and then hammer it down as policy. Life moves on, unlike people stuck in these arguments.

Now it has been confirmed that the 'most powerful' statement most certainly did mean direct power, and not political or other such ideas- which was patently obvious to anyone with a brain- a lot of your argument here looks rather silly.

3. You can not give a damn about what I think if you want. But I am a mod, and I set policy here, and if you deliberately go against that then the problem is very much yours, not mine. I will remind you- we are the mods. We have a way we do things. We set rules. And you crying and whining- like so many disruptive posters have done so before- because I am not doing things the way you like does not impress me one tiny bit at all. Call me 'Der Führer ' all you like, for making a decision about policy on a darn Star Wars message board... the feebleness of that speaks for itself.

And the difference between this and the GDF is that the GDF is a very different place to this area. There is no rulebook that sets definitve facts for real life, it's all up for debate. A franchise is different- there can indeed be facts, and this area has long had a policy of removing debate about such facts once they are established. People do get damn sick of watching over-zealous fans debating the sae, already settled issues to detah over and over and over and over.

4. Illustrious- like I say, it was an act of desperation to say it was not clear. And now it has been spelled out, and as far as I am concerned the dissenters do not look very smart.

"Every use of power in a Star Wars setting means force power? So when they said that the Galatic Empire was the most "powerful" entity the galaxy has ever seen, it means that they have more force power than everyone else?"

This line of yours? Another example of your extreme pedanticism. Use the common sense that you were (hopefully) born with. This is not intelligent debate you are making here.

Meanwhile, the Clone Wars cartoon is 'c' canon also. You think all those superhuman feats are literal? If you cannot work out that style adjusts to the medium... well, that's just you closing your ears to truth. Books aren't exaggerated, so NJO has no excuse. But that is just one man, at least.

"You have to establish the premise that the ancient Sith wielded these weapons clumsily"

Lie. All I have to do is establish that a lightsabre is less clumsy. Bing! Argument won- they clearly are, so no matter how dextrously they wield a big, heavy weapon, they will wield a smaller, lighter one BETTER. Hence, the sabre is better. If you can't see that this is a convincing argument, I am afraid that simply makes you someone who has totally lost touch with sense and rationality.

"And even then, there were key figures that used notoriously heavy rapiers"

Heavier than bastard swords, were they? Used with anything remotely approaching the same style? I know my history perfectly well, thanks- clearly better than you.

"Your interpretation is no more valid or important than anyone else's"

Not as far as this site is concerned. As for your accusation of favourites- feel free to go back to the playground. I have no bias at all, and if the material were making the claim for Ragnos rather than Sidious, then I would support it that way around. Once more, I am interested in facts, not your competing fan/ego match in these threads, spun out of what you think passes for intelligent debate in the vs. area.

Don't test my patience here, folks. I am very serious. I am very tired of this argument, and I will be setting a policy to cover it if need be.

As it stands, the context of all the comments is now clear. But the idea that it has the ability to override all other continuity is not. Hence, there is no final decision here yet. But if that does become clear, and it is not in your favour, then none of your disdain for Lightsnake is going to be worth a damn- he will be right. If it turns out that there is no canon override here at all, then it is back to being 100% opinion again. I repeat- I have no bias, I am interested in the facts alone.

It's going to be either one way or the other, and I will make a ruling as appropriate.