I love debating you Gideon, you don't throw around insults. 🙂
Originally posted by Gideon
[B]You've misunderstood me, so I'll clarify: he wasn't given instruction on this technique from another Jedi -- something that isn't common knowledge anymore. That the most powerful Jedi in the history of the Order (a Jedi over eight centuries old) was ignorant of the technique whereas Qui-Gon -- primarily due to his lack of blind faith in the Force and in the Jedi Order itself (he was realistic, not stupid) -- learned it. Yoda himself says that he still has much to learn, which is why he dedicates himself to becoming the late Qui-Gon's "apprentice".
No, I understood, I just believe that saying because Yoda didn't know the technique and Qui-Gon did makes him great in any way is a stretch. Yoda had no way to know of it, and Qui-Gon learned it from a third-party Yoda never happened to meet or come upon, which makes the comparison null in my point of view.
You had to ask, lol, at a bad time. You'll have to wait before I can provide the quotes to you verbatim, as I don't have my copy of Labyrinth of Evil on hand. However, the omniscient narrator reflects that "two-hundred years before the rise of Darth Sidious, the dark side had been gaining strength" -- and "the Sith, too, were pleased that the Jedi had been allowed to grow so strong" (it goes on to mention, I think, that it would make their 'victory' so much more sweeter).
Others have brought up the fact that authors vary in how and why stories are told. Though Lucas can give his stamp of approval for every one of these quotes, I don't think it means we should go around claiming that because a statement using absolute adjectives are used describing people, as the case of Yoda and Anoon Bondara, we should immediately assume they are massively powerful or skilled, despite what their actions prove.
That's true, but it doesn't make them any less valid, especially when the quotes are dictated by the omniscient narrator. George Lucas (the guy nothing -- not even feats and accomplishments can contradict) himself has referred to the prequel trilogy as "the prime of the Jedi" and "the golden age of the Jedi" -- and since the greatest war (up to that point) was coming into fruitation at that point, I highly doubt he was referring to 'peace' (and statements have been made that the Jedi 'dwindled down' to a 'mere 10,000', thus removing the possibility of referring to numbers).
Even if it isn't referring to numbers, it still doesn't have to refer to skill and power of the Jedi, since you've already tried proving the point that the Jedi were arguably at their weakest due to this "shroud" of the Sith. So which is it? "Golden age" could refer to perhaps their influence in galactic affairs or even their popularity among the Republic citizens. There's no way to tell.
You also bring up the greatest war of all time. This doesn't prove the Jedi's skill at all, considering the Republic had the greatest army the galaxy had ever seen up to that point, with the Clones being better than any average soldier and any droid, the Jedi weren't exactly fighting this war alone.
I'm sorry you feel that way, Se7in. But the fact of the matter remains. The Jedi were fewer in number and -- according to several sources (Yoda himself included: "blinded are we, if forsee the development of the clone army, we could not"😉 -- the Jedi were losing their ability to sense the future with the Force. It's not a stretch to assume that this would also include precognition even in battle. Nevermind the simple fact that their adversaries possessed technology and capabilities that vastly outstrip anything prior. The CIS or Republic would utterly curbstomp the **** out of any faction present in the Great Sith War, so why is it so difficult to believe that they simply weren't winning?Meanwhile, what terrible performance against dark siders? You mean the dark siders who were certainly weren't being hindered by the rising dark side?/quote]
Rancisis' defeat to Sora Bulq, the many Jedi Greivous slaughtered despite the extreme damage he takes from a single, but powerful, Force Push, the many kills Asajj inflicted, Dooku's undefeated status to virtually any Jedi he ever faced during the Clone Wars (save the special case of Anakin), and this Anoon character losing to Maul despite being the Order's "finest" swordsman.
[quote]
It's not so cut-and-dry, Se7in. Those 'armies of Sith' aren't coming close approaching the level of strength in the dark side possessed by Palpatine (who is a "black hole of the Force", "an event horizon", "darkness beyond darkness" according to the RotS novelization) and his apprentices. The fact that the Chosen One was destined to act during this time ought to make it clear that the Force was in a great tumult (specifically, it was unbalanced) whereas that was never the case during the Great Sith War.
So a combined army of Sith don't possess the strength of Dark Side influence Palpatine had? More quotes that mean nothing, given what we see from his abilities in the movies. I'll admit, Palpatine is an INCREDIBLY strong Sith Lord, but having more influence than an army of Sith? I beg to differ. Also, if the prophecy proves correct, Anakin was not "forced" to act until seeing the threatening of his own son's life and after the Jedi Order had been destroyed. Having less than a hundred Jedi and having a "mere" 10,000 is a big difference in when he chose to act, considering Anakin knew that Luke was literally the last of the Jedi, since he had been hunting Obi-Wan and Yoda for years and that their death had finally come. This shows even further that the purge was not enough for the Chosen One to act, therefore perhaps Palpatine's influence wasn't as great as previously thought.