Ulic Qel-Droma versus the Jedi Exile.

Wow. Just wow Escape. First: You ignore the entire debate, ignore the general topic, ignore what I have typed down and apparently ignore the intention why I've typed it down - just to come up with some pointless rants that, sorry, have nothing to do with the debate at all. You might not get it, but I, personally, find that rather annoying for some reason. Second: You keep repeating your stuff after I tried quite clearly to explain to you why your original intrusion into this debate didn't make much sense at all. Once more you ignore that and keep coming back at me with the same stuff that didn't have much to do with my posts. One might figure out why I find that even more annoying.

It's called composure, Nai. You've never even bothered with the patient routine or general etiquette. In moments like these, it does indeed bring a smile to my face. See, in your attempts to overwhelm me with an overabundance of masculinity (which, I must add, fails to impress via the internet), you admittedly are annoyed with me. I prefer civil debates and though I am far, far, far, far, far (this could go on) from perfect, were I -- too -- secretly of character resembling Dr. House or, my preferred favorite, Boston Legal's Alan Shore (excellent show, you should watch it) -- I'd have already accomplished my goal. I'm far from annoyed. Just amused.

And now this extraordinary unfunny "attack". How long are you posting here, Escape ? I'm quite sure that some people can tell you I was a cynical, insulting, arrogant ******* already, before I saw the first episode of House. So it could be that there is just a coincidental relationship in terms of character between House and me, which - of course - makes me like the character quite much because I've forgotten "egocentric" in the list of bad attributes above.

Yes, we're all glad you've found an idol with which to further your general attitude. The thing is, House usually doesn't admit he's being annoyed (unless he's using the admission in a sarcastic ploy), because it's a sign of weakness. You're essentially undermining your entire nature by doing so. Again, were I secretly of similar nature (or, like I said, one related to Mr. Shore), I would have already won. As it is, it both brings me great pride and great confusion why a sixteen year old American (a country not notorious for patience) can exhibit more maturity and patience than a twenty something German (though, granted, Germany isn't notorious for patience either).

Yeah. Who brought that point up again ? You don't know the answer ? CLICK ME
"Compare that to the likes of Luke Skywalker, Kyp Durron, Darth Sidious, and so forth... do the Ancient Sith (with the possible exception of Ragnos) compare?"

I could swear that it is your username next to that post there and I could also swear that Luke and Sidious had precisely nothing to do with this debate, before - as it always happens when you mention the name of an Ancient Sith and one of those two in a posting, regardless of circumstances - Gideon steps in and comes back with the "but they aren't as good as Luke or Sidious" stuff. Hooray. Notice how it never was a question if Ragnos or Sadow are better than Luke or Sidious. The question was if Ragnos or Sadow (+ Kun + Ulic) are more powerful than Kreia or the Exile - with regards to Kreia's quote about the Ancient Sith.

Yes. What I conveniently enjoy is that you missed a few things.

"Compare that to the likes of Luke Skywalker, Kyp Durron, Darth Sidious, and so forth ... do the Ancient Sith (with the possible exception of Ragnos) compare?"

A few things:

1.) I explicitly listed "Kyp Durron" and "and so forth" in there, not just Sidious and Luke. In fact, I've only used them as references. It isn't anything resembling a primary motive for debate, Nai.

2.) I also listed "the possible exception of Ragnos" in there, thus curbing the idea that I'm somehow "out to get" Ragnos.

3.) The issue I bring up is how much credibility you put in the power of the average Ancient Sith. In effect, I am required for adequete defense of my argument to mention the true powerhouses of the SW mythos and make a leveled comparison. Consider their names more support rather than primary, again.

Once again, no one is making an issue about Sidious's and Luke's superiority over the Ancient Sith. I suppose George Lucas is out to fellate Sidious because, as Lightsnake tells us, he constantly uses him as a "measuring stick" to gauge the power of others. Vader, Luke, Anakin, Mace, Dooku, Maul, the rest of the Jedi....

I can only suggest once more that you go and read the debate and then come back at me. Can it be that I was talking about overall skill of Sadow (not all ancients) in comparison to Kreia and the Exile (not every force user) and Sadow's knowledge passed down to Kun (again special case) and not about his raw power ? It appears to me that might be the case. So might I ask once more what the hell you are talking about ?

You mentioned the quote about all of the Ancient Sith. You went on and on about how uber they are. If you're referring to just a select few, try to make a distinction next time. Though, once again, Sadow is very powerful. But I'd also tell you that it seems even his power is not as great as you make it out to be.

And again you demonstrated your absolute inability to read what I type. It must be a hard job. Notice how I was just calling you out on your demand for "absolute proof". I don't see how your comment matches the quote above it but well - I could say the same about your entire post missing the topic of the debate by miles. So I shouldn't wonder, should I ?

I appreciate the diagnosis, doctor. Let's stick to the debate itself. If it's pointless, repetitive, and -- even what little I supposedly address -- is constantly defeated by your logic, why do you even continue to reply...?

Originally posted by Allankles
That advice should apply to you.

Unless you can give an argument that extends beyond mere character preference, as to how Ulic (with less impressive combat accomplishements) is above the Exile, I'd strongly suggest you gulp down a tonic of shut-your-trap.

Already have, so have others. Sure as hell beats your gameplay bullshit. You've lost the debate, move on.

I think thats enough allankes, Sexy is right, you got :

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Already have, so have others. Sure as hell beats your gameplay bullshit. You've lost the debate, move on.

My main points never involved any gameplay bullshit, unless having better combat feats than Ulic is gameplay bullshit.

Telling me I lost the debate, and I got owned doesn't really mean much. I mean, can you quote the best argument you have for Ulic word for word? Because I'm going to have to do that for you, the next time you think you're actually making a point of "winning" by posting such oh-so-meaningful bs.

Originally posted by Manslayer

Nice GIF I think I might borrow it.

Originally posted by Allankles
Nice GIF I think I might borrow it.

Incidentally, lol, I found that clip on Youtube the other day.

Originally posted by Gideon
Oh, please, Nai. You've had multiple problems with me on numerous occasions, and given the demeanor with which you continue to address me with makes me wonder if I didn't penetrate that psuedo-Housian facade a while back.

Do you like cheese with your whine ?

You aggrandize the power of the Ancient Sith constantly, and much how you credit me with "endless" rants about how Luke Skywalker and Darth Sidious reign proudly over the Ancient Sith (which they do), one could also credit you with an endless stream of rants proclaiming the Sith's dominance.

Thanks for giving me examples of my supposed "constant aggrandizing" of the ancient Sith which could be hard for this thread because it didn't happen. But thanks for your input anyway, Gideon.

Her statements are supportive and nature and are not conclusive. Once again (and I'm sure I'll be repeating this for days to come), the capabilities of Naga Sadow and Marka Ragnos are not in question. But when you even suggest that, by association, the rest of the Ancient Sith are "godly", we have a problem.

I wonder why you always seem to miss what I'm writing. Her statement is conclusive when we want to find out what her personal oppinion about the Ancient Sith is. And now show me where I wrote something else. Right. I didn't. So thanks once more for the meaningless talk, Gideon.

Excellent, so you have proof that Naga Sadow can generate solar flares and such feats -- and on the same scale -- as the feats he performed with assistance from his ship? Or that Exar Kun can do the same with his amulet blasts? You seem to forget the fact that the genius of these Sith Lords is not in question: but their raw power -- in effect how strong they are without their arcana and technology -- is.

No. I just figured out that "absence of proof" is not the same as "proof of absence". Did you ever see some Sith Lord cursing the loss of some of his gimmicks, mentioning he can't perform feat XYZ any longer ? When the Massassi gives Sadow the information that the ships weapon system are gone, I don't see Sadow cursing or crying how he's doomed now. Instead he simply destroys some of the Republics ships with his own unaided force powers. Which was, as I remind you, even more effective as using the weapon before to destabilize the star - an action the entire Republic fleet escaped if I may remind you.

You're comparing cigarettes to Ancient Sith arcana? How legitimate are we to take this comparison?

You notice that this was meant as rebuttal to your claim that the Sith must have needed object X, Y or Z to actually invent it which is quite the ridiculous claim. Hence the cigarette example.

Bingo. Another risk: death. Should one rival Sith desire another Sith's artifacts, you increase your chances of a struggle you very well might not win.

Lmao, Gideon. In a time coined by a constant battle for power between the Sith the additional risk of being killed because of greed for some toys is apparently pretty much insignificant.

Never mind the fact that Sadow's or any Ancient Sith's knowledge is not in question, much as you'd like to make the issue about knowledge.

I wonder why you skipped that nice allusion of mine to power and keep it up with the "knowledge". The knowledge is important because if you can equip your heir with knowledge about rather deadly force techniques you should have been able to use them yourself, which would result to power in a certain degree. But nevermind.

Not exactly god-status.

You might again go figure out that hyping the Ancients to "god status" has never been part of my argument in this thread and come back to me after you've done that.

No one suggested that he is reliant on the ship for everything. We said that he needed the ship to perform a specific (his strongest, I might add) feat.

The strongest feat according to what ? Your views ? Triggering some reaction inside the core of a star that makes the star go supernova some minutes after you've started the reaction must be more powerful than creating solar flares or summoning thousands of illusional and tangible troops ? I'd like to see your "absolute proof" for that claim, Gideon. Because it strikes me more impressive to summon entire armies out of nothing than manipulating some star to go supernova - especially when the latter has been replicated with normal technology in the SW universe.

Yes, and Lumiya could create Force Phantoms that were on par with their models. She's also like what? Three-fourths machine? She considers herself to be particularly weak in the Force, but adept at creating illusions, and she has nothing compared to the knowledge Sadow has. Once again: proficiency in one technique doesn't suggest godhood or anything resembling it. But, once again, no one is disputing Sadow's power -- though at this point, some of your logic seems particularly unstable.

This is compareable to summoning entire armies of creations that apparently are a match for normal Massassi warriors as the forces fighting against Sadow's troops aren't able to recognize any difference between illusions and real forces ? So I wonder how Lumyia is even remotely compareable.

You're making a big deal about the power of the Ancient Sith, when you've yet to prove they can perform their ubertechniques without assistance.

Yes. I'm making a big deal about the power of the Ancient Sith. Where exactly ? If you fail to recognize some allusions to the possible extend of the power of two specific Ancient Sith Lords as such (at a point where I already won this debate long ago...sorry) then it's not my problem, Gideon. Hence I said you should read before coming up with stuff like that - a possibilty that apparently escapes (ahaha) you.

We must conclude that even if Sadow possesses the "raw power" to destabilize a star's core or whatnot, he lacks the skill to utilize it without aid.

I don't know how you're always reach that conclusion. He completely doesn't care about the fact that the weapon of his ship (that you deem so important to him) doesn't work any longer. He then attacks that Republic forces with his unaided force powers and archieves a better result than he did with "destabilizing the star core" before that. Really. I could claim that he didn't repeat the action because it had no effect at the first time he used it. Wonder how you're going to argue that.

Ergo, we must -- by association -- place Anakin Skywalker on an even higher level because his raw power is well in excess of Sadow's, he just lacks the skill to perform his uber techniques on his own.

Again, Gideon. This doesn't follow. Because you want to limit your own line of thought to what seems the only possible explanation for you, you don't archieve overall soundness of your argument with that. See above. You'd basically have to proof that Sadow was not able to perform the feat without his ship - otherwise you can stay with your oppinion, but you can't draw conclusions from it.

Deduction is again, with me. You've yet to successfully refute why Sadow would rely on his ship if he could perform the technique itself, which means -- at best (for you) -- we have a stalemate. In which case, neither party wins, in which case I consider it a victory for me, personally, because I don't hold myself in nearly the high regard you have for yourself. Stalemating you would be an honor.

Once more, Gideon: He had a working tool at his hand that apparently made this certain application (much ?) easier for him that it might have been without the ship. Notice, for example, how his illusions instantly collapse when his rather deep meditation is disturbed. One might even say that he couldn't have performed the feat without his ship in that certain situation (as it would have needed more time than Sadow had or required more concentration that he could come up with in that certain situation). That all would be perfectly fine with me. But to say: "Because he used his ship to perform feat X, he can't perform feat X without the ship" doesn't make any sense for me as an argument.

And I'm holding myself in high regard ? Yay. If you think that is the case...

Yes, but you'd have to prove that Luke knew or thought that Kyp Durron was "likely weaker" than Ragnos or that Kun had "less Dark Side knowledge" than Ragnos as well.

That depends on how much knowledge Luke had about the ancient Sith. But seeing how a regular historian in the SW universe can come up with all information contained in the NEC, I guess it's rather save to assume that Luke had some nice insight into the history of the Sith. So he might have known what Sadow managed to do and also might have known that Ragnos was supposed to be far stronger than that - and also more knowledgeable than Kun given that Kun got most of his Dark Side knowledge from Sadow.

Originally posted by Gideon
Oh, hell, Nai. Lol, nobody's disputing that a reborn Ragnos would be a pain in the ass or that he would cause "major damage". But, sadly, Emperor Palpatine's purge destroyed -- what? In excess of 90% of all Jedi and Force-related repositories of knowledge? You'd also have to prove that Sidious taught Luke about Ragnos during his submission. Otherwise? Logic concludes that Luke likely -- addressed with a being he had no idea about -- and the curiosity that these deranged cultists would specifically base their idealogy around Ragnos and not some other Sith (thus leading to the conclusion that Ragnos is a major Sith badass, which he was), wanted to be safe than sorry.

See comment about the NEC above.

I disagree with your logic. Yes, I believed your constant referencing to the scepter and such aggrandized its power, thus insinuating that it is "godlike".

Wow. Giving a reference to an object is now equal to aggrandizing it's power ? I have a bottle of Coke standing right next to my desk right now. It's a nice bottle of Coke. It's filled with, you know, Coke...the bottle I mean. Ever held such a beautiful bottle of Coke in your hand ? The unmatched aerodynamic shape of such a Coke bottle is simply heart-touching. It's irresistible beauty makes me buy a bottle of Coke once a month each time. It's so tempting - that bottle of Coke. And that Coke contained in that bottle. Unbelievable. Tasty. Keeps you awake. And all that in a single Coke bottle. It...outstanding.

So...I count 8 references to a single item - I will now take the new godly artifact, go out of my door and smack some people with it's godlike powers. Hail to the King !

Because though the scepter is "powerful" it's not as potent as you've made it out to be. Thus. The. Problem.[/qoute]

Can I just point out the little fact once more, that I did just list the known features of the item and did nothing else ? So I guess the "problem" is just present in your fantasy. Can't do much there.

[quote]
Well, Nai, I could go back and nail you with the same accusation. So, let's try to avoid accusations of "missing the point" and argue it. If you don't want to discuss it, no one's stopping you. It's kinda like that time you accused me of making a thread about Sidious when it had nothing to do with him. You land all the blame on me, yet, all the while continuing to debate me. It's a very obtuse sign of human nature and -- if it were my intent -- you'd be furthering it along, like a puppet at my beck and call.

Man. Maybe I should put on the hood and rant about my "designs!"

You know that there is a difference between "argue" and "state the obvious" ? Hmm...

That's true. And (again), not in contest. You're once again making an issue about the point. It's not about the point but the reasoning. Using this line of logic, Ragnos still isn't an uberpowerful Sith Lord. Tavion "owned" the scepter. Is she anything above an averge Dark Jedi by association?

Hmm? Oh. You mean Ragnos being uberpowerful? Nope. I think he is. That he's somehow very powerful 'cause he owned the scepter? I disagreed with it and, yes, I just contested it.

I wonder how you always come up with the rather stupid idea that the goal of citing the scepter was to claim that Ragnos was godlike after I told you three times now, that the intent was to show that he wasn't completely powerless. Did that finally reach your head now, Gideon ? It can't be that hard to understand.

Originally posted by Gideon
It's called composure, Nai. You've never even bothered with the patient routine or general etiquette. In moments like these, it does indeed bring a smile to my face.

Wow. I reached my goal. Thanks.

See, in your attempts to overwhelm me with an overabundance of masculinity (which, I must add, fails to impress via the internet), you admittedly are annoyed with me.

Huh ? Can't recall mentioning the size of "little Nai" here which would be trying to overwhelm you with an overabundance of masculinity. Damn. I must definetly try to win debates by comparing the size of (virtual ? real ?) private parts. I guess Advent is debating in a class of her own then ?

I prefer civil debates and though I am far, far, far, far, far (this could go on) from perfect, were I -- too -- secretly of character resembling Dr. House or, my preferred favorite, Boston Legal's Alan Shore (excellent show, you should watch it) -- I'd have already accomplished my goal. I'm far from annoyed. Just amused.

Oh. I love Boston Legal and Alan Shore definetly rules. But for referrence: I'm not annoyed with you. I'm annoyed in general. Which, for a cynic, already counts as being amused.

Yes, we're all glad you've found an idol with which to further your general attitude. The thing is, House usually doesn't admit he's being annoyed (unless he's using the admission in a sarcastic ploy), because it's a sign of weakness. You're essentially undermining your entire nature by doing so. Again, were I secretly of similar nature (or, like I said, one related to Mr. Shore), I would have already won. As it is, it both brings me great pride and great confusion why a sixteen year old American (a country not notorious for patience) can exhibit more maturity and patience than a twenty something German (though, granted, Germany isn't notorious for patience either).

Hey. Silly me. I should place signs on sigs and avatars saying "just used because of general empathy towards character shown". Somehow you seem to be under the impression that I want to immitate House. Nope. I don't. And how can I undermine my own nature ? Jesus. That doesn't make much sense.

Aside of that you shouldn't confuse "being annoyed" with "being angry" as well as you shouldn't confuse "insulting" with "going mad". I don't lose my patience over post on some random internet boards. I can spout out insults while I am perfectly calm and the same counts for getting annoyed. To be honest I could have read the stuff and simply said "yup !" and closed my browser window (or move you to ignore like I did with DS) but I was just in the mood to come up with some flames and keep up the "debate".

1.) I explicitly listed "Kyp Durron" and "and so forth" in there, not just Sidious and Luke. In fact, I've only used them as references. It isn't anything resembling a primary motive for debate, Nai.

Which doesn't make Luke and Sidious disappear, does it ? And you used them as references for what, Gideon ? The topic here was Ulic VS the Exile. At best (regarding the Ancient Sith) it would be Sadow VS Kreia or the Exile. So what need there is to list Luke, Sidious or god knows who as reference for anything ?

2.) I also listed "the possible exception of Ragnos" in there, thus curbing the idea that I'm somehow "out to get" Ragnos.

And somebody accusing you of being out to get Ragnos happened where exactly in this debate ? Oh right...

3.) The issue I bring up is how much credibility you put in the power of the average Ancient Sith. In effect, I am required for adequete defense of my argument to mention the true powerhouses of the SW mythos and make a leveled comparison. Consider their names more support rather than primary, again.

The issues you have aren't particulary interessting for that debate. Where did I say anything about how much power I think your average Ancient Sith Lord has ? Oh right...didn't happen. I just tried to explain to Allankles that "an Ancient Sith" (in Kreia's quote) would include Sadow. What Kreia thinks about the power of the Ancient Sith isn't my personal oppinion as I think that the "average" Ancient Sith wasn't that powerful, since Odan and other Jedi apparently brought them to extinction.

So I might wonder once more why you needed an argument in the first place and - in result - a defense for it.

Once again, no one is making an issue about Sidious's and Luke's superiority over the Ancient Sith. I suppose George Lucas is out to fellate Sidious because, as Lightsnake tells us, he constantly uses him as a "measuring stick" to gauge the power of others. Vader, Luke, Anakin, Mace, Dooku, Maul, the rest of the Jedi....

The point is that Sidious was no part of this debate before somebody again had to start with Sidious and Luke. And it doesn't even make sense.

You mentioned the quote about all of the Ancient Sith. You went on and on about how uber they are.

Bad things are happening in your brain. Can that be, Gideon ? Where did I talk about the uberness of the Ancient Sith ? Oh right. It didn't happen.

If you're referring to just a select few, try to make a distinction next time.

Oh. How about reading my posts. It was pretty damn clear that in the context of the debate I was only referring to two Ancient Sith: Ragnos and Sadow. Sorry that it escaped your attention but I don't see how that is my fault and why I have to explain it four times to you.

Though, once again, Sadow is very powerful. But I'd also tell you that it seems even his power is not as great as you make it out to be.

🙄

I appreciate the diagnosis, doctor. Let's stick to the debate itself. If it's pointless, repetitive, and -- even what little I supposedly address -- is constantly defeated by your logic, why do you even continue to reply...?

Because it's fun and I just happen to have nothing else to do at the moment ?

Oh. I love Boston Legal and Alan Shore definetly rules. But for referrence: I'm not annoyed with you. I'm annoyed in general. Which, for a cynic, already counts as being amused.

This alone makes me feel a strong kinship with you. Bonding time is inexorable.

Originally posted by Allankles
Nice GIF I think I might borrow it.

Wow, Ulic the best lightsaber duelest? he wasn't even the best in the old sith wars era, let alone the best ever. Just a few people in the Old Sith Wars that could take him are Exar Kun, Revan, Malak, Kavar (maybe). He could still probably take down the Exile but that isn't saying so much.

Weren't kun and ullic equal in lightsaber skill, according to the narrator?

Ah, and ullic takes this.

Originally posted by kamhal
Weren't kun and ullic equal in lightsaber skill, according to the narrator?

Ah, and ullic takes this.

Before they they were sith lords exar kun and ulic stalemated when the fight was interrupted then Kun surpassed him especially with the creation of the double bladed lightsaber

This was stated right?

Originally posted by kamhal
This was stated right?

Honestly im not sure if it was stated here by there are few factors that makes it true.

1.Marka Ragnos made Kun the dark lord of the sith and ulic the apprentice because kun must have been stronger.

2.Kun created the double bladed lightsaber and had his unique style (wielding it often with only one hand) combine those two and ulic would most likely be confused to on how to counter it

3. By the time of the raid on coruscant Kun became so powerful that he could toy with his master then only wtf pwn when he ignited the second blade.

Ulic is no slouch at all with the saber but is just simply better than him.

1.Marka Ragnos made Kun the dark lord of the sith and ulic the apprentice because kun must have been stronger.

This doesn't prove that kun>ulic with the lightsaber, only proves that, if they were both equal in lightsaber skill and kun was the chosen one, then he was probably stronger then ullic in the force.

2.Kun created the double bladed lightsaber and had his unique style (wielding it often with only one hand) combine those two and ulic would most likely be confused to on how to counter it

Sorry but having your own style doesn't make you better. In fact it's known that all lightsaber styles have their strengths and weakenesses. Besides, he had very few time to perfect his style.

3. By the time of the raid on coruscant Kun became so powerful that he could toy with his master then only wtf pwn when he ignited the second blade.

Yet he beat vodo the same way he did in the first time, with pure raw strength. I didn't see that much skill either in bashing down a simple stick...

Originally posted by kamhal
This doesn't prove that kun>ulic with the lightsaber, only proves that, if they were both equal in lightsaber skill and kun was the chosen one, then he was probably stronger then ullic in the force.

I aware of that i was merely trying to point out that if the fight continued then kun would most likely come out the victor and being that they were engaged in a heated lightsaber combat (both seem to me to take pride in their lightsaber skills and seem to consider it their greatest strength) it would most likely end that way.

Sorry but having your own style doesn't make you better. In fact it's known that all lightsaber styles have their strengths and weakenesses. Besides, he had very few time to perfect his style.

Once again I know this but you have to take into account that he was the first person to use wield such a weapon and the style would thus be even more unfamiliar with it that Kun would have an advantage over ulic right there. And I know there are weaknesses for every style but tell me what is weakness of Kun's style is. And I am aware that he had six months of training with it. Yet Kun was still able to wield it do a great degree in his battle with Vodo.

Yet he beat vodo the same way he did in the first time, with pure raw strength. I didn't see that much skill either in bashing down a simple stick...

He never took the fight serious at all. And so what if he used raw strength it is obviously part of his unique style(that is not just raw strength) And for your information Kun even said that his master had bested him before when he was his apprentice too. Exact quote was A pity...you fought once,master vodo and bested me...... So vodo was not a slouch And how can you from a comic book that in his last fight that all he used was just raw strength the only slide that supports it as the last slide where he broke the stick again. And before Vodo pretty much admitted that kun was to much for him.

Anyway you look at it Kun is the better lightsaber duelist the Ulic. i don't even know why you would think otherwise.

You talk as if it was very clear that kun is better then ullic with the saber. And it's not.

Originally posted by kamhal
You talk as if it was very clear that kun is better then ullic with the saber. And it's not.