Ulic Qel-Droma versus the Jedi Exile.

Originally posted by Borbarad
Really. You can't interprete sources like that.

The point here is that even though the Exile might have asked a question about a specific Sith Lord using a specific fighting method (in this case: lightsaber combat), Kreia's answer refers to all Ancient Sith. She's simply giving her own thoughts about the ancient Sith.

The context is irrelevant here. Basically it looks like this:
Q: "How strong was Tulak Hord with a lightsaber ?"
A: "If you were to face an Ancient Sith in combat, they would kick your ass."

Kreia doesn't exactly answer the question. She simply states her thoughts that the Ancient Sith would tool herself and the Exile in a fictional combat situation. And please...how can you question that when Kreia descripes the Sith Lords in the tombs in front of her as if she was an ancient Sith fanboy ? Not to mention the descriptions given through other sources.

Here's why context is important.

The Exile: Are you saying that our generations lightsaber combat is lacking as compared to the ancient sith (Note: not word for word but the Exile specifically ask this question)

Kreia: If we were to face the ancients in combat it would be like children playing with TOYS.

Notice the word toys in Kreia's remark - a reference to weapons (lightsabers) or overall force power? Kreia was obviously not making a comparison in general combat, but lightsaber combat specifically.

Jedi combat involves both force powers and lightsabers/swords, how could she make a comparison in general combat? Because that would involve making a comparison on force prowess, as well as lighsaber/sword skills. And the conversation with the Exile never ventured toward a discussion on force powers, ONLY lightsabers.

The context here reveals that Kreia indeed gave an answer to the Exile's query on lightsaber combat and not overall combat. Therefore, Kreia's statement excludes Sadow and all the known ancients.

Considering also that the known ancients have never been shown to be impressive combatants in any medium (Ragnos getting pwned by a young Jaden Korr), this makes sense.

Originally posted by Allankles
Here's why context is important.

The Exile: Are you saying that our generations lightsaber combat is lacking as compared to the ancient sith (Note: not word for word but the Exile specifically ask this question)

Kreia: If we were to face the ancients in combat it would be like children playing with TOYS.

Notice the word toys in Kreia's remark - a reference to weapons (lightsabers) or overall force power? Kreia was obviously not making a comparison in general combat, but lightsaber combat specifically.

No. She wasn't because the original context is this:

Kreia talks about the duelling abilities of Tulak Hord and mentions he was most likely the best duellist of the Ancient Sith (and that's all ancient Sith). Then the Exile asks how good they (in reference to all Ancient Sith) were in terms of duelling. Then Kreia gives that little answer. Kreia starts referring to the Ancient Sith as a whole (stating Hord was their best duellist), then the Exile ask how good they as a whole were in terms of duelling and then Kreia comes up with that statement. There is no way to exclude a group of Ancient Sith there.

Jedi combat involves both force powers and lightsabers/swords, how could she make a comparison in general combat? Because that would involve making a comparison on force prowess, as well as lighsaber/sword skills. And the conversation with the Exile never ventured toward a discussion on force powers, ONLY lightsabers.

Obviously they were talking about duelling abilities. And the duelling abilities of a force user always feature the use of the force. So even if they were specifically talking about lightsaber combat that wouldn't work without considering force abilities since they are part of the lightsaber combat among force users.

The context here reveals that Kreia indeed gave an answer to the Exile's query on lightsaber combat and not overall combat. Therefore, Kreia's statement excludes Sadow and all the known ancients.

No. It doesn't as they were first talking about Hord's skill in relation to all other Ancient Sith and then about the duelling abilities of the Ancient Sith as a whole. Anything else would make much sense. Otherwise Kreia would refer to a group of Ancient Sith (lightsaber users) and even then it wouldn't take your argument any further because then the skill of the none-lightsaber-wielding Sith Lords in comparison to the ones using lightsabers is unknown and the prior statement that Hord was their most formidable duellist also wouldn't apply on all Ancients.

But in this case we would have to assume that the Sith in the "golden age of the Sith" were the most competent when it came to duels (logically) and that would, my bad, include Sadow.

Aside of that I don't see much difference between lightsaber combat and normal sword combat.

Considering also that the known ancients have never been shown to be impressive combatants in any medium (Ragnos getting pwned by a young Jaden Korr), this makes sense.

LMAO.

a) In the comics Odan Urr makes it quite clear that the Sith forces attack with such skill and ferocity that even battle meditation is not capable of stopping them. I guess that means they were - indeed - pretty nice combatants.

b) Jaden Korr didn't fight Ragnos. He fought Ragnos spirit possessing Tavion. I'd say that the fact it just was a spirit (who are always weaker than the original even by far considering the words of Freedon Nadd about his own power in spirit shape), and had to use the body of a person far below him when it came to natural force abilities (effectively limiting him) aside from being a maybe 1,70 metre tall, average built woman while Ragnos was a muscle-packed giant apparently over 2 metres tall - I guess his raw physical abilities where also pretty limited.

So I don't see how you want to use this as argument how the Ancient Sith suck in direct confrontation. I'd say the fact that Jaden Korr had some nice difficulties with defeating Tavion possessed by a Ragnos who was leagues below to his own self when he was alive shows that the Ancient Sith must have been pretty tough in terms of duels and combat. The fact that Tavion (weaker than Ragnos) manages to put up a nice fight wielding a Sith Sword against Korr's lightsaber also doesn't speak much against the combat prowess of the Ancient Sith.

Originally posted by Borbarad
There is no "tear the core from the stars" technique. That's just telekinesis on a different level. You don't have a point. Yes. Sadow apparently knew how to become a special force spirit...now what ? Again: No point. And once more: I was telling you that Kun apparently knew the force drain technique and is therefore most likely able to use it on a single person if he can imbue it on several objects. What do you want to argue here. Not that it even matters in the first place considering the original argument.

And here the last resort of the owned idiot. "Hey. I found a typo. You suck". Ich weiß ja nicht, wie gut du Fremdsprachen beherrscht, Freundchen. Aber vielleicht würden dir bei 6 von solchen hin und wieder kleine Fehler unterlaufen. Oh right...you don't understand German ? And no: Morons in Germany usually aren't able to speak or write the slightest sentence in a foreign language. But thanks for asking.

I didn't see any text here owning me. I'm just entertaining myself with some noob that constantly owns himself and use some insults here and there to feed the troll. Works fine for me so far.

Translation: "I can't really counter your argument, Nai. So let me just toss some bullshit sentence in again."
Can you explain to me once more what the amulets have to do with the construction of something like a Dark Reaper. And when you at it you might also explain to me since when Sith can't project force energy beams any longer. Is Aleema Keto > people who studied the Dark Side over decades now ? Doesn't appear to logical to me.

Go play leapfrog with a unicorn, kid. The fact that you're a troll is what makes you a troll.

When TDTD got banned from KMC, you joined KMC at the same day.
When TDTD got banned from EOD, you joined EOD at the same day.
You both share the same name, are jewish and live in the same state.

Wow. The list of coincidences will never end. And now STFU, TDTD.

See above. You simply too stupid to produce a fake account that people don't recognize after your first two posts. So you're not just a troll but an extraordinary dumb troll.

I guess the little troll is a little bit angry because he's too stupid to create a fake account because he can't live without KMC or EOD for more than 24 hours - and now is being held up to ridicule for it. I'm so sorry, little one. Maybe you will grow up one day (far in the future I guess). Until then you'd better off playing with other kids in your age (12 ? 13 ? 14 ?) instead of trying to debate with people twice as old as you. So let mommy dry your tears with a nice cup of hot chocolade and STFU. Or cry yourself to sleep. Once more...I don't care. And now you can go on ranting with your sock account on my ignore list because you aren't really worth 2 seconds of my free-time.

Originally posted by Borbarad

No. It doesn't as they were first talking about Hord's skill in relation to all other Ancient Sith and then about the duelling abilities of the Ancient Sith as a whole. Anything else would make much sense. Otherwise Kreia would refer to a group of Ancient Sith (lightsaber users) and even then it wouldn't take your argument any further because then the skill of the none-lightsaber-wielding Sith Lords in comparison to the ones using lightsabers is unknown and the prior statement that Hord was their most formidable duellist also wouldn't apply on all Ancients.

Wrong. The conversation first starts off when Kreia mentions:"[Tulak Horde] was the greatest lightsaber duelist of the ancient Sith. " The Exile then goes on to ask about the lightsaber combat of his generation in comparison to Tulak's generation.

The comparison never deals with anything but lightsaber combat and it's quite clear to see that Sadow and his band of Sith politicians didn't use lightsabers. Therefore the context is contradictory to the point you're trying to make.

Horde's exceptional talent lay in lightsaber combat, not any other kind of dueling. Kreia never mentions anything else but ancient lightsaber combat which apparently Sadow and his (largely unremarkable) Sith didn't practice.

So let's recap. Kreia mentions Tulak Horde to the Exile (greatest LIGHTSABER duelist of the ancient Sith), sparking a comparison of lightsaber skills between the two respective generations. It can therefore be clearly and logically determined that since Sadow and his Sith colleagues never used lightsabers, Kreia was never referring to them.

Again, it's a good thing that Sadow's sith are not included, because that would be inconsistent with their portrayal in the comics - which is a band of magician/politicians with unremarkable combat abilities.

Originally posted by Allankles
Wrong. The conversation first starts off when Kreia mentions:"[Tulak Horde] was the greatest lightsaber duelist of the ancient Sith. " The Exile then goes on to ask about the lightsaber combat of his generation in comparison to Tulak's generation.

Thanks for presenting proof for my point. Kreia starts of with mentioning the Ancient Sith as a whole. Then the Exile asks how strong they are and Kreia replies again mentioning the Ancient Sith as a whole.

The comparison never deals with anything but lightsaber combat and it's quite clear to see that Sadow and his band of Sith politicians didn't use lightsabers. Therefore the context is contradictory to the point you're trying to make.

Once more: Wrong. If you want to use redcons and contradictions in the overall SW continuity, you have to use them in all cases or don't do it at all. The New Essential Chronology has Tulak Hords lifespan refined to the time between 6,900 BBY and 5,100 BBY (as he reigned before Ragnos took over who ruled for "more than a century"😉. But in this time period, the Sith were already using Sith Swords. Ajunta Pall had a Sith sword and he was one of the original Dark Jedi that came to Korriban (in 6,900 BBY) while Sith swords were also used at the time of Ragnos and Sadow. Aside of that we see in the GAotS / FotSE comics that the Jedi even at this time (5,000 BBY - a century or more after Hord's lifetime) do only have lightsabers attached to an external power source with a cable. I doubt that you can perform cunning stunts with such a weapon.

So you have pretty much three options here:

a) You accept the version that the Ancient Sith didn't use lightsabers at all because the weapon as it appears in todays SW mythos wasn't constructed like this before the Fall of the Ancient Sith Empire. Then Tulak Hord must have been using a Sith Sword instead of a lightsaber.

b) You can accept the version were lightsabers became prevalent in the Sith Empire in the time of Tulak Hord which is before the time of Ragnos, Sadow and Kressh. But in this case one would have to assume that the former canon sources are retconned and that the later Sith Lords (despite what is shown in the comics) did in fact use lightsabers too.

c) You can try to get both ideas together (and this is imho the most logical way of approaching the topic) and accept that there must have been lightsaber users and Sith sword users together during each given time in the Ancient Sith Empire. Everybody was using his preferred weapon. But in this case you can't exclude the sword users from the term "Ancient Sith".

In any case. Your argument as it is doesn't make sense.

Horde's exceptional talent lay in lightsaber combat, not any other kind of dueling. Kreia never mentions anything else but ancient lightsaber combat which apparently Sadow and his (largely unremarkable) Sith didn't practice.

Again: Wrong. See above. And it doesn't matter what talks about first. She is not referring to lightsaber combat specifically in the statement we discuss here. You can doubt that she was talking about combat in general but as she praises the Sith Lords burried in the Valley (including Sadow) with all kind of fellacious statements I don't see why she would do that if not being convinced that those people (including Sadow once more) are far superior to herself (or the Exile for that matter).

So let's recap. Kreia mentions Tulak Horde to the Exile (greatest LIGHTSABER duelist of the ancient Sith), sparking a comparison of lightsaber skills between the two respective generations. It can therefore be clearly and logically determined that since Sadow and his Sith colleagues never used lightsabers, Kreia was never referring to them.

Again: Totally ignoring the other context. Kreia keeps worshipping the Ancient Sith (including Sadow) with her other statements and then certainly she excludes a quite large group of that people (including the ones she praised before) from the group of "Ancient Sith" because she just wanted to refer to lightsaber combat when there was no generation of Ancient Sith that practiced lightsaber combat only ? That doesn't make any sense, now matter how often you repeat it.

Again, it's a good thing that Sadow's sith are not included, because that would be inconsistent with their portrayal in the comics - which is a band of magician/politicians with unremarkable combat abilities.

Lmao. Did you actually read the comics or any other sources about the Ancient Sith ?

From the Dark Side Sourcebook (about the Ancient Sith Empire):
"Through continued campaign of conquest they honed their battle arts, while simultaneously adding to the fortune and glory of their empire. When they ran out of foes, they fought against themselves in bloody wars of succession."

One should think that people who did nothing but "hone their battle arts" for severall millenia do possess some combat skill. Like Ragnos for example:

"Ragnos was a half-breed Sith, a warlord of tremendous physical power and a frightening grasp of the Dark Side of the force."

Yeah. Sounds like he sucks in combat. One must wonder how that "magicians" and "politicians" all have developed their rather muscle packed bodies. Debating ? Waving their hands to cast spells ? Another nice question would be why they carry pretty damn huge Sith Swords around and can wield them fast enough to have the blades leaving afterimages in the air. Doesn't seem to be the right job for politicians or magicians. The very same counts for driving such a sword into a wall or simply shatter it on a table.

Originally posted by Borbarad
Thanks for presenting proof for my point. Kreia starts of with mentioning the Ancient Sith as a whole. Then the Exile asks how strong they are and Kreia replies again mentioning the Ancient Sith as a whole.

No she doesn't mention the ancient Sith as whole, she talks ONLY of Tulak Horde being the greatest LIGHTSABER duelist of the ancient Sith. She clearly doesn't refer to the ancient Sith as a whole anywhere in any comparison. She and the Exile only speak specifically of lightsaber combat and make a comparison based off of that.

Really, stop ignoring the fine print. It is the details that matter here, you think I'd bother arguing this point if the context didn't contradict your assertions?

We're not all here fanboys like you are with your ancient Sith.

Originally posted by Allankles
No she doesn't mention the ancient Sith as whole, she talks ONLY of Tulak Horde being the greatest LIGHTSABER duelist of the ancient Sith. She clearly doesn't refer to the ancient Sith as a whole anywhere in any comparison. She and the Exile only speak specifically of lightsaber combat and make a comparison based off of that.

Really, stop ignoring the fine print. It is the details that matter here, you think I'd bother arguing this point if the context didn't contradict your assertions?

We're not all here fanboys like you are with your ancient Sith.

Allankles, what does "Ancient sith masters" mean to you?

Originally posted by Borbarad

So you have pretty much three options here:

a) You accept the version that the Ancient Sith didn't use lightsabers at all because the weapon as it appears in todays SW mythos wasn't constructed like this before the Fall of the Ancient Sith Empire. Then Tulak Hord must have been using a Sith Sword instead of a lightsaber.

b) You can accept the version were lightsabers became prevalent in the Sith Empire in the time of Tulak Hord which is before the time of Ragnos, Sadow and Kressh. But in this case one would have to assume that the former canon sources are retconned and that the later Sith Lords (despite what is shown in the comics) did in fact use lightsabers too.

c) You can try to get both ideas together (and this is imho the most logical way of approaching the topic) and accept that there must have been lightsaber users and Sith sword users together during each given time in the Ancient Sith Empire. Everybody was using his preferred weapon. But in this case you can't exclude the sword users from the term "Ancient Sith".

Those are your parameters and I'm afraid they have no logical basis given the context here.

A) Clearly ignores the fact that Tulak was a lightsaber duelist, it's illogical given that fact. A cannot be accepted as a logical conclusion, even without the context.

B) The second has no basis on canon or the actual continuity, where Sadow and his ilk are NEVER shown or mentioned as lightsaber duelists. Therefore, logically speaking we cannot accept such a conclusion. Leaving that alone Tulak was a lightsabr duelist of a different generation, essentially excluding Sadow's generation in the comparison.

C) The most logical conclusion you've formulated but not without it's flaws. If Tulak belonged to a generation of Sith that used both lightsabers and Swords then the comparsion by Kreia based on Tulak being the "greatest of lightsaber duelists in his generation", would effectively exclude the non-lightsaber users. This being the case as a result of the context of Kreia's quote, it can therefore be concluded that Sadow and all non lightsaber users were not included in her comparison.

Originally posted by Borbarad

One should think that people who did nothing but "hone their battle arts" for severall millenia [b]do possess some combat skill. Like Ragnos for example:

"Ragnos was a half-breed Sith, a warlord of tremendous physical power and a frightening grasp of the Dark Side of the force."

Yeah. Sounds like he sucks in combat. One must wonder how that "magicians" and "politicians" all have developed their rather muscle packed bodies. Debating ? Waving their hands to cast spells ? Another nice question would be why they carry pretty damn huge Sith Swords around and can wield them fast enough to have the blades leaving afterimages in the air. Doesn't seem to be the right job for politicians or magicians. The very same counts for driving such a sword into a wall or simply shatter it on a table. [/B]

Don't remember Ranos ever showing the full array of his combat abilities do you? So what exactly have you proved, I'd assume every celebrated generation of force users to be praised by the narrator, doesn't mean though, that they are remarkable in the overall mythos.

Ragnos is the prime example of character whose power is assumed rather than proved or demonstrated effectively.

Also, large muscles don't mean a thing in Jedi combat, you should know that. By this reasoning Yoda would get pwned by everyone he faced. No one doubts Ragnos was as Kreia said, "powerful physically and in the force", but in the big picture such praise doesn't make him remarkable. I could say the same for a whole cadre of other Jedi and Sith.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Allankles, what does "Ancient sith masters" mean to you?

I'm not really arguing that point am I? I'm trying to make Nai see the value of the context here. Tulak Horde was discussed because of his lightsaber combat, Sadow and all the known Sith never used lightsabers. So, from the context Kreia couldn't have been referring to Sadow.

Kreia and the Exile never discussed the entirety of the ancient Sith in this conversation, only Tulak Horde and other (unknown) ancient LIGHTSABER duelist (to which Sadow and his ilk were not a part of).

Originally posted by Allankles
Don't remember Ranos ever showing the full array of his combat abilities do you? So what exactly have you proved, I'd assume every celebrated generation of force users to be praised by the narrator, doesn't mean though, that they are remarkable in the overall mythos.

Ragnos is the prime example of character whose power is assumed rather than proved or demonstrated effectively.

Also, large muscles don't mean a thing in Jedi combat, you should know that. By this reasoning Yoda would get pwned by everyone he faced. No one doubts Ragnos was as Kreia said, "powerful physically and in the force", but in the big picture such praise doesn't make him remarkable. I could say the same for a whole cadre of other Jedi and Sith. [/B]

Originally posted by Allankles
No she doesn't mention the ancient Sith as whole, she talks ONLY of Tulak Horde being the greatest LIGHTSABER duelist of the ancient Sith. She clearly doesn't refer to the ancient Sith as a whole anywhere in any comparison. She and the Exile only speak specifically of lightsaber combat and make a comparison based off of that.

Dude. Either you play dumb or you are blind. She mentions the Ancient Sith as a whole when stating that Tulak Hord is their best lightsaber duellist. Or did you see some "of all the Ancient Sith that used lightsabers, Tulak Hord was the best" ? Of course not. It wouldn't even make sense as, talking about technique, lightsaber combat and Sith sword combat are pretty much exactly the same - a saber is a saber.

Really, stop ignoring the fine print. It is the details that matter here, you think I'd bother arguing this point if the context didn't contradict your assertions?

The context ? You mean the bit of the context you chose to accept because it might support your views. How about the context you are ignoring:

- the talk happens while they stand in front of the tombs of four Sith Lords, one of them being Sadow
- Kreia pretty much worships those four Sith Lords in regards to force powers or combat prowess. Every single one of them.

Especially considering the last of that "context point" I wonder how it even matters if you want to include Sadow in the statement we're talking about or not. Obviously somebody who worships his power doesn't consider himself to be able to beat the guy, or what do you think ?

We're not all here fanboys like you are with your ancient Sith.

Fanboy ? Apparently the only (KotoR) fanboy here is talking to me, desperately trying to construct something like an argument and still failing with it. Did it ever strike you that all Sith from Exar Kun, over Revan, the KotoR 2 Lords until Sidious just got that powerful because they used knowledge coming from the Ancient Sith ? You might want to think about that fact.

Don't remember Ranos ever showing the full array of his combat abilities do you? So what exactly have you proved, I'd assume every celebrated generation of force users to be praised by the narrator, doesn't mean though, that they are remarkable in the overall mythos.

Ragnos kept a rather huge group of powerful individuals (in terms of force powers) under his belt for more than a century, had his underlings dropping on their knees when he appeared as spirit because they thought he might even destroy them at that point. He influenced the history of the Galaxy even thousand years after his own death (Kun) and post DE Luke Skywalker apparently thinks that even the combined strength of all people in his Academy (including himself) might not be enough to stop a resurrected Ragnos.

Ragnos is the prime example of character whose power is assumed rather than proved or demonstrated effectively.

Yeah. Right. The guy constructed a freaking sceptre capable of force zapping places and planets empty, toss rather powerful force users around and bring 5000 year old mummyfied bodies back to life. I really wonder how the guy could possible have been powerful... 🙄

Also, large muscles don't mean a thing in Jedi combat, you should know that. By this reasoning Yoda would get pwned by everyone he faced. No one doubts Ragnos was as Kreia said, "powerful physically and in the force", but in the big picture such praise doesn't make him remarkable. I could say the same for a whole cadre of other Jedi and Sith.

Yes ? How many people you know that have the physical shape of a rather huge body builder, wield 2 metre long metal-swords one handed (as fast as one of Luke's most promissing students is able to wield a lightsaber around) and are equipped with a "terrifying grasp on the Dark Side" ? Ah yes. Thanks.

And thanks for completely ignoring my points and instead try to gloss over them. Fact: Sadow and Kressh both demonstrated some rather huge amount of physical strength and some pretty high speed in combat. Yet somehow they are "weak" magicians and politicians ? Nice to know that.

Ragnos kept a rather huge group of powerful individuals (in terms of force powers)

I hope you'll pardon me for somewhat challenging you here, Nai, but not being an expert on Ancient Sith, may I ask where it has been proven that they themselves are uber-powerful? Because we do know for a fact that Naga Sadow, for one, required the assistance of a ship to perform his most powerful feats. It would be fallacious to imply that it was "all them" and all by their merits of power. I do not contend that they weren't the pinnacle of dark side knowledge, but I would like conclusive proof defining the Ancient Sith themselves (without the assistance of technology) as uber-powerful.

and post DE Luke Skywalker apparently thinks that even the combined strength of all people in his Academy (including himself) might not be enough to stop a resurrected Ragnos.

What was that quote again? As far as I knew, Luke said that it "might" take all of the academy to stop the Remnant, not Ragnos. I don't recall anything ever being said that it would definately take the entire academy to stop him and that it might not be enough.

Yeah. Right. The guy constructed a freaking sceptre capable of force zapping places and planets empty, toss rather powerful force users around and bring 5000 year old mummyfied bodies back to life. I really wonder how the guy could possible have been powerful...

Toss rather powerful Force users around? Who? Nihilus could drain the Force from beings and planets, as could Traya (in her case, people), and Sidious could also imbue people with the Force as well. Ragnos -- or should I say his scepter -- is nothing particularly special.

Originally posted by Gideon
I hope you'll pardon me for somewhat challenging you here, Nai, but not being an expert on Ancient Sith, may I ask where it has been proven that they themselves are uber-powerful? Because we do know for a fact that Naga Sadow, for one, required the assistance of a ship to perform his most powerful feats. It would be fallacious to imply that it was "all them" and all by their merits of power. I do not contend that they weren't the pinnacle of dark side knowledge, but I would like conclusive proof defining the Ancient Sith themselves (without the assistance of technology) as uber-powerful.

Sadow, without the aid of technology, did create three complete armies out of tangible, fighting illusions. I think that qualifies him as rather powerful. Don't you think so ? And his ship ? I love how this is being paraded around to talk down Sadow's force powers. All I did see the ship doing (notice: it didn't have much energy left and the weapons have been said to have been out of order at that point), was focusing Sadow's power. Did it add something to his personal power ? I don't see proof for that suggestion in the sources. And even if it did: How much power would that have been ?

I mean. He most likely isn't able to rip the score of a star out with his unaided force powers. On the other handside: Which force user is capable of doing something like that ? And even 99 % of the power required for this comes from the ship - even the ability to lift 1 % of the mass that the core of a star has...is pretty uber in terms of telekinesis.

What was that quote again? As far as I knew, Luke said that it "might" take all of the academy to stop the Remnant, not Ragnos. I don't recall anything ever being said that it would definately take the entire academy to stop him and that it might not be enough.

Somehow I remember him speaking about Ragnos and not the Remnant. And were did I say "definately". I said that Luke apparently thought it might take the entire Academy to stop Ragnos.

Toss rather powerful Force users around? Who?

Kyle Katarn in the Dark Side ending. I know this isn't canon but it shows what the scepter could do when almost discharged.

Nihilus could drain the Force from beings and planets,

...while having next to no control about that power and it was slowly consuming himself as well.

as could Traya (in her case, people)

...with a technique that there was no defence against and after taking minutes of preperation time.

and Sidious could also imbue people with the Force as well. Ragnos -- or should I say his scepter -- is nothing particularly special.

So Nihilus, Traya and Sidious aren't powerful and nothing particularly special. Nice to know that, Gideon. 🙄 And notice how the original point of Allankles was that there is, practically, just the assumption that Ragnos was powerful without the slightest proof...

Originally posted by Gideon
What was that quote again?

"If Ragnos is resurrected, there's no telling what he might be able to do. It will take all of our strength to stop him."

'Him' referring to Marka Ragnos, not the Disciples of Ragnos; albeit, he does state that he isn't quite sure about his capabilities.

Originally posted by Borbarad
Dude. Either you play dumb or you are blind. She mentions the Ancient Sith as a whole when stating that Tulak Hord is their best lightsaber duellist.

The context ? You mean the bit of the context you chose to accept because it might support your views. How about the context you are ignoring:

- the talk happens while they stand in front of the tombs of four Sith Lords, one of them being Sadow
- Kreia pretty much worships those four Sith Lords in regards to force powers or combat prowess. Every single one of them.

Especially considering the last of that "context point" I wonder how it even matters if you want to include Sadow in the statement we're talking about or not. Obviously somebody who worships his power doesn't consider himself to be able to beat the guy, or what do you think ?

Kreia speaks of Tulak as "the greatest of lightsaber duelist of the ancient Sith." I don't see any reference to any other kind of combat there, do you? Last I checked, swords don't qualify as lightsabers.

As far as the rest of your argument goes, location is not part of context. And Kreia never praises any of the Sith, except maybe Tulak. She calls Ragnos powerful - that's it. Mentions Sadow's and Kressh's fight - that's it. Are you sure you're not just half-guessing, here? You don't seem to have the facts on Kreia's views, in hand. Look Kreia never worships the Sith.

I'll say again, location doesn't qualify as context in regards to Kreia's history lesson with the Exile. They could have had the conversation anywhere. I can't believe you actually believe the location is part of the context here, context is the content of their conversation, not their location.

I'll say it again, Sadow's and Kressh's combat abilities were unremarkable. Ragnos himself has never shown any combat feats (with the exception of supposedly beheading Seamus (Sp?). There's no evidence of the ancient Sith being combat gods.

These were a group of politician/magicians that experimented with their Sith magic for largely non-combat reasons. They were one of the least combative Sith generations. Remember how Sadow was disappointed by his peers contentment, and their lack of ambition? They had degenerated to politician/pseudo scientists, irrespective of their physical strength and or force power.

Tulak Horde as we clearly know, was not part of Sadow's generation, so this argument is pointless.

Right we saw how naga and kressh fought, sadow throws a brick and kressh couldnt block it.

Even before Kotor tsl came out people have already been hyping up the ancient sith

Originally posted by Advent
"If Ragnos is resurrected, there's no telling what he might be able to do. It will take all of our strength to stop [b]him."

'Him' referring to Marka Ragnos, not the Disciples of Ragnos; albeit, he does state that he isn't quite sure about his capabilities. [/B]

Thank you, Advent. Though, for the record, I will say that I -- for one -- am not denying the prowess and skill of Marka Ragnos. Yet certain parties confuse me (with their legendary disdain for 'unsupported quotes'😉 when they cite this sort of statement ellicted by someone who, admittedly, has no conclusive proof concerning the Sith Lord's actual abilities. Were we debating this based on a system related to legal proceedings, that line of thought would be scuttled.

Sadow, without the aid of technology, did create three complete armies out of tangible, fighting illusions. I think that qualifies him as rather powerful. Don't you think so ?

Certainly. Though, let us be precise. You are mentioning the feats of one of the numerous Ancient Sith Lords, and I was under the assumption that this particular one was regarded as one of the very most powerful of the Sith Lords at that time. Essentially, this would be like me citing Luke Skywalker's feats or Kyp Durron's and dictating that this would automatically apply for the rest of the New Jedi Order. And, they performed their feats without the assistance of Sith arcana and technology. Much more impressive.

No one was denying or questioning the power of Marka Ragnos or
Naga Sadow. I simply pointed out the truth: the most powerful feats attributed to the Ancient Sith are not without assistance. 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?

And his ship ? I love how this is being paraded around to talk down Sadow's force powers.

No one is "talking down" Sadow's Force powers. Yet the fact remains that he couldn't have performed the feat without his technological aid.

All I did see the ship doing (notice: it didn't have much energy left and the weapons have been said to have been out of order at that point), was focusing Sadow's power.

All you saw? Excellent. I assume there is some incontrovertible proof that dictates as such? I'll be happy to concede the point, though again, the fact remains, even if it did -- he still couldn't have performed the feat without the ship.

Did it add something to his personal power ? I don't see proof for that suggestion in the sources. And even if it did: How much power would that have been ?

So, what you're telling me is that there is no incontrovertible proof that the ship merely 'focused' Sadow's power and that it is purely up for debate?

Likewise, Nai, if you're going to subscribe to this logic, then let's do it completely and without prejudice. Anakin Skywalker, henceforth, must truly be a God. After all, his 'personal power' is twice that of Sidious's, so it's not really a detraction that he can't focus it or augment it by himself? Are we to truly give him God status?

I mean. He most likely isn't able to rip the score of a star out with his unaided force powers.

Isn't likely? So, you have some means of evidence suggesting that it is possible that he could?

On the other handside: Which force user is capable of doing something like that ? And even 99 % of the power required for this comes from the ship - even the ability to lift 1 % of the mass that the core of a star has...is pretty uber in terms of telekinesis.

Or perhaps he had 20%. Or 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000123% Or less.

Somehow I remember him speaking about Ragnos and not the Remnant. And were did I say "definately". I said that Luke apparently thought it might take the entire Academy to stop Ragnos.

As we've seen, Luke's knowledge concerning Ragnos is hardly conclusive. But again. No one denies his power.

Kyle Katarn in the Dark Side ending. I know this isn't canon but it shows what the scepter could do when almost discharged.

Non-canon. It's essentially irrelevant. Furthermore, it wasn't enough to kill Kyle. And, if I also recall, Jacen fled with the scepter. Fled. Implying he knew, even with the uberstaff at his command, he didn't like his odds.

...while having next to no control about that power and it was slowly consuming himself as well.

Are we discussing finesse or magnitude, Nai? In magnitude, Nihilus outclasses the scepter. In control? No, I'll agree. But, then again, Ragnos's scepter isn't the end all be end all.

...with a technique that there was no defence against and after taking minutes of preperation time.

Using a technique of which there is "no defense" is a detraction? One could arguably conclude that this alone makes her personal drain stronger than Ragnos's scepter; or at least more refined. She removed the Force from these folks completely. His couldn't.

So Nihilus, Traya and Sidious aren't powerful and nothing particularly special. Nice to know that, Gideon. 🙄

Lol, Nai, must we be sarcastic and hostile? If you don't like me calling you out on your claims, do us all a favor and reinforce them. It's more or less a problem on your part than mine.

Oh, and, no one said Nihilus, Traya, or Sidious weren't special. Nihilus and Sidious especially. What I said was that the scepter's feats have been replicated by people, and in more than one way, it's been a better job.

And notice how the original point of Allankles was that there is, practically, just the assumption that Ragnos was powerful without the slightest proof...

Then Allankles needs to re-examine the situation. Ragnos is very powerful, one of the best. Is he above Luke? Nope. Sidious? Nope. But he's top tier, you'd better believe it. It's just that, Nai, not all of us believe that the Ancient Sith are ubergods of the Force. I give them credit for having an assload of Sith knowledge and for their upper tiers being particularly robust. But the average Ancient Sith? Nothing impressive at all. And, as Manslayer suggests down at the bottom, I'm not thinking that their 'raw Force power' is anything special, either.

I'll concede the point. But only when you give me absolute proof.

Who are the upper tiers of the ancient sith besides ragnos?