DE Sidious & Ludo Kressh vs. Marka Ragnos & Naga Sadow

Originally posted by Generic Hero
After you say he isn't, then he isn't anymore. You have the right to determine your character's strength...

And even in LotR, there isn't much to definatly put Sauron over Gandalf. You can easily deduce as much, but nothing's really set in stone. The only measure of their power is Gandalf's own statement, which is perfectly fallible (Unlike yours).

Bah, talking Rings again.

Um . . . wouldn't it be false, considering how J.R.R Tolkien is like George Lucas in this instance? The supreme authority, considering how the original trilogy belongs to him?

If Lucas said "Ragnos is the uber-man and supreme God of the Force", then not even Anderson could be able to disprove that.

Apparently, according to LS, it was a definitive statement.

Um . . . wouldn't it be false, considering how J.R.R Tolkien is like George Lucas in this instance? The supreme authority, considering how the original trilogy belongs to him?

If Lucas said "Ragnos is the uber-man and supreme God of the Force", then not even Anderson could be able to disprove that.

For this, though, Darth Sexy = Tolkien...

Originally posted by Escape81
Um . . . wouldn't it be false, considering how J.R.R Tolkien is like George Lucas in this instance? The supreme authority, considering how the original trilogy belongs to him?

If Lucas said "Ragnos is the uber-man and supreme God of the Force", then not even Anderson could be able to disprove that.

Yup, and Lucas is the God of canon, so what are you getting at? And I don't care what anything is according to lightsnake, I'm interested in debates, not fanboyism.

Also, if Lucas said "I think Ragnos is more powerful than blah blah blah", that seems more of an opinion than something like "Ragnos is more powerful than blah blah blah".

Bro, most powerful of the most powerful means he was the most powerful.

I disagree, for two reasons:

1. The TotJ comics where that was specifically stated is several years old. The New Essential Chronology is newer, and with the LFL approval, retcons that statement.

2. Marka Ragnos has never (EVER) been described as "the most powerful Sith Lord in history" - which Sidious has.

Sidious was the greatest sith lord, there is no doubt there, but with the statement that was made about him, you can clearly interpret it a few ways.

Um . . . no, it can't. The official statement was:

"Yoda could not defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history".

What would Sidious's intellectual or political power have anything to do with the context of the situation? They were having a battle to the death, not a debate in the Senate.

Ragnos' statement was absolute and clear.

Says he was the most powerful of the most powerful. I could impose the same question on you. Perhaps they meant "authority". Especially when the context of the situation had nothing to do with a fight or a battle, unlike Sidious's.

Until you can quantify what "most powerful" means in terms of Sidious, or show me the clear and definitive statement of Anderson, it is still a LOT more logical to assume the Ancient Sith were the greatest.

No, not really. I disagree entirely. Sadow required his ship to do anything spectacular. Simus and Ragnos haven't been depicted doing battle.

And yes, the ancient sith of the golden age would destroy the golden age of the Jedi, because those two things are complete opposites, if you thought about it. The Golden age of the Jedi is peace, the Golden age of the Sith is power, and magic.

No, that's not how it works.

If you're going to tell me that "golden age" and "power" mean specifically different meanings for the Jedi and Sidious and Ragnos and the Sith, then you have another thing coming.

If the "golden age" is to be interpreted as "size and power", then the same thing applies for the Jedi.

Furthermore, when Lucas says this - it is during AotC. A time when a Sith Lord was masterminding the ultimate destruction of a galactic government and began to engineer a collosal war.

Hardly "peace".

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Yup, and Lucas is the God of canon, so what are you getting at? And I don't care what anything is according to lightsnake, I'm interested in debates, not fanboyism.

Also, if Lucas said "I think Ragnos is more powerful than blah blah blah", that seems more of an opinion than something like "Ragnos is more powerful than blah blah blah".

Means I'm sort've agreeing with you . . . read carefully.

But here's the difference.

Tolkien (like Lucas) is the supreme Canon authority. Your statement of "Gandalf more powerful than Sauron" would NOT be considered valid because Tolkien still possesses the higher authority.

In this instance, Lucas has not commented on Ragnos or Sidious.

I thought the golden age started with the PT.. And I am indeed going to say that the Golden Age means something entirely different for both. SO now we are at a crossroads again. Who is to say which statement is more accurate? I can also say that Yoda was equal to "the greatest sith lord in history" by having a clear disadvantage the whole fight. So is Yoda>Ragnos, or Kun, or Nadd, or Sadow? And is DE Luke>Ragnos, etc.. Too many technicalities.. If we talk about raw power, Ragnos would obliterate Sidious. If we talk about masterminding, Sidious is the greatest ever known. If we talk about force abilities, most of what Sidious uses was derived from the ancient sith.

Sexy was working under the premise that he was the creator of LotR. Hence my post.

Originally posted by Escape81
Means I'm sort've agreeing with you . . . [B]read carefully.

But here's the difference.

Tolkien (like Lucas) is the supreme Canon authority. Your statement of "Gandalf more powerful than Sauron" would NOT be considered valid because Tolkien still possesses the higher authority.

In this instance, Lucas has not commented on Ragnos or Sidious. [/B]

So we're back to square 1. And at the same time I feel that it's pretty obvious since Skywalker himself said it would take him and the ENTIRE Jedi Academy to even HOPE to deal with a living Ragnos, while it took Luke and Leah to deal with DE Sidious.. If you look at facts and use logic, you'll see where all of ths goes..

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
So we're back to square 1.

No. Because though Lucas hasn't come out and said "Sidious is the most powerful", he has not done the same for Ragnos, either.

Right escape, that is why it is up to US to use logical deduce facts, not deal with irrelevant text.

I thought the golden age started with the PT.. And I am indeed going to say that the Golden Age means something entirely different for both.

But you have no proof to back it up.

Indeed, I could say Sidious's Galactic Empire was "the golden age of the Sith", because Sidious's Empire is, militaristically speaking, ungodly superior to Ragnos's, and Sidious controlled the galaxy, whereas Ragnos's Empire was highly limited and very, very tiny.

Who is to say which statement is more accurate? I can also say that Yoda was equal to "the greatest sith lord in history" by having a clear disadvantage the whole fight.

The NEC says he "lost". My personal opinion is that they stalemated. But the bottom line is, the term "power" in this instance is not ambiguous given the context of the situation - which was a battle to the death.

So is Yoda>Ragnos, or Kun, or Nadd, or Sadow? And is DE Luke>Ragnos, etc.. Too many technicalities.. If we talk about raw power, Ragnos would obliterate Sidious.

I do believe that Yoda is at least equal to the Ancient Sith. And, as for DE Luke, you have to understand that Sidious floored his ass in saber combat, and yet, less than a day later, he becomes skilled enough to defeat Sidious in combat?

Now before you jump on me, please let me state that the following is an opinion - but, I believe that Leia had something to do with the fight, considering how Sidious had the upper hand in the comics, and then the panel with Leia is shown (her outline is highlighted and mystical) and WHAM! Sidious is disarmed, literally.

Secondly, Sidious (still) was highly superior to Luke in the Force.

If we talk about masterminding, Sidious is the greatest ever known. If we talk about force abilities, most of what Sidious uses was derived from the ancient sith.

I don't deny that he is the greatest. In terms of achievements, he pwns all other Sith Lords.

But, then, there's also the fact that Sidious could have augmented these Force powers that "derived from the Ancient Sith".

whereas Ragnos's Empire was highly limited and very, very tiny.

This is actually a common misconception... Ragnos' Sith Empire was surprinsingly big. Nai pointed that out once. It easily took up 1/6ish of the galaxy.

Not nearly as big as Palpatine's, but much bigger than the Hutt's, the Rakata's...

Originally posted by Generic Hero
This is actually a common misconception... Ragnos' Sith Empire was surprinsingly big. Nai pointed that out once. It easily took up 1/6ish of the galaxy.

Not nearly as big as Palpatine's, but much bigger than the Hutt's, the Rakata's...

Excuse me for not elaborating, but that is what I meant. In comparison to Palpatine's.

Right and I agree with you on everything except I never understood how Yoda lost.. Ive seen arguments on here battling over the definition itself. In my personal opinion it was a stalemate in terms of the battle itself, and a victory in the longrun. I do not believe Yoda is equal to any of the ancient sith, or the majority of the TOTJ characters, seeing as they had more raw power and force abilities. I am of course speaking of a versus logic, in which Yoda would go down to a lot of people. In terms of Wisdom yes Yoda was among the greatest of all time, but explain how he would defeat any of the ancient sith, or Kun, Nadd, Vodo, etc..

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Lightsnake, I love how you take irrelevant OPINIONS as canon sources just to boost your character. No really.. I don't know why you throw around the same arguments for months at a time, wait til people leave, and throw it back again. Exar Kun was NOT stronger than Ragnos, that is proposterous. With your logic, Kun>Sadow and Kun>Kressh and all of the ancient sith. And you still cannot quantify Palpatine's "Power", nor understand that by your logic, Palpatine was the most powerful of his time, as Ragnos was of his, as you say.

And in spite of all of this, you really DO fail to fully grasp the concept of a versus forum. Explain how Palpatine's force storm is going to win him a battle with Kun, or Nadd, or anyone more powerful than him. Then again, you can't even quantify the power.. And before I "Embarass" myself, maybe you should take a look at all of your Sidious arguments from the past year, and see who's the embarassment. Try to provide facts, not opinions nor arbitrary text.. Thanks "Honey".

That's it. Time to take off the gloves:

Understand something, you irritating, immature little brat: what I've posted in the way of emails and quotes, I scanned in and posted here and at Janus's site, so there'd be zero way to argue it. Escape's seen them, got it? And according to Kevin J. Anderson, Exar Kun is stronger than Marka Ragnos and the other Ancient Sith. I don't have to prove anything to you, got it? I've proven it here before and I posted the thrice damned email for the benefit of others. They've seen it. You haven't? Too ****ing bad.

How's Palpatine's force storm gonna help him? Hm, he can only control the size and withstand it totally unless his control is cut off by people wielding the entire power of the lightside against him, I suppose a combination of that! Or his instakill, or any of the thousands of other techniques he knows and invented. You know something? Official sources saying "Yes it did." is proof enough...I've proven that too with links to LFL's canon policies.

Hold on a second, youre using name calling and getting angry about a debate, yet I'm immature.. Hey lightsnake, can we say projection? Life is good, everything will be OK.. You keep talking about these scans yet you've had at least 15 minutes of just taking 30 seconds and posting them again instead of crying. All of your nonsense is purely speculative at this point, you use the exact same debates everytime and they always get beaten, can you move on to something new that doesn't involve "Well he said this you'll just have to find the proof himself". And this isn't even the fact that Sidious needs distance to create his force storm, and seeing as it is a 2 on 2 match, his force storm, which was derived from the ancient sith, is as useless as Sadow blowing up a storm.

Except he doesn't. As he can control the size. And power.

Try again, though

Great argument lightsnake! "I have no logic but just accept it because I will feel better". I don't know how old you are but it's clear you don't have any common sense. It's a 2 v 2 VERSUS match, he is NOT going to just create a gigantic force storm(you know how big they are obviously), and not kill himself in the process. By the time he's done creating one and generating some space, Ragnos or Sadow would have punted him to the nearest star, or used the amulet.

What part of 'other posters have seen it, ask them."

and no, he wouldn't create a giant force storm...he'd create a small, ship sized one....or simply do one of the million other attacks he has. and punt him to the nearest star? Listen to yourself...and here's another tiny factor: Given that Palpatine's spirit is able to outlast his body, losing said body ain't gonna be that much a loss

Oh youre right Lightsnake because someone as powerful as the ancient sith, where Sidious got his techniques from, are just going to prance around while Sidious enters their bodies.. That's brilliant.. And what are these millions of techniques Sidious apparently knows, or is that another ambiguous statement. And stop saying "others have seen it", that doesn't make your debate a fact. I can also say "the general consensus of this forum is that Ragnos and the ancient sith pwn all, because its been done many times". You see the stupidity in that statement? Thank you.