Bane has beaten people in the dueling ring before, did he master all the moves of those people's saber forms? How about Sirak's buddies, Bane fought them did he master their moves? No, prove that Bane can only win when he knows all of his opponents moves.
^. My my i misread that,
Did he master those forms? No, Did he remember their sequences when he sparred with kasim because he demonstrated all the sequences? Yes!
Manslayer, you're undeniably mad. Trying to put Vader's slightly unfamiliar [to Bane] form in the same light as Kas'im's, which consisted of every single move and sequence there is for all 7 forms of lightsaber combat which was said to be numbered in the millions, and which was completely unfamiliar to Bane is crazy.
As for the battle, Bane shits on Vader.
Bane absolutely outclasses him in the force. Using strength in the force attributed as being greater than that of hundreds of force users combined (Source: inside flap of PoD), and utilising that strength with force control that was adequate in directing power strong enough to wipe out an entire planet without getting blown apart in the process, he'd absolutely demolish Vader.
It's actually probably closer in saber combat. Technique wise Bane's somewhat lacking.
Only reason Vader would lose in sabers is his lack of mobility, although his custom style makes up for lack of agility. Physically, I'd say they're pretty close in strength, given Bane being a "mound of muscle" enhanced with the orbalisks, and Vader's mechanical, robotic enhancements.
Vader's agility is the only hindrance I see here. And he is incredibly intelligent and would certainly put up an extremely tough fight to anyone to include Bane. I just can't prove that he'd win, so I say that Bane would. On paper, he has more going for him, although that doesn't ensure a victory.
The force now...you have to be joking right? You would have to prove that Bane is at least 80% of ROTJ Sidious, which is what Vader became. So pure, raw talent and abilities coupled with being taught be the greatest, most powerful Sith lord in history, and Vader is ahead of Bane. Are you referring to the thought bomb? If so, that has no bearing on offensive force techniques or abilities, it just showed immunity to a certain attack. Yoda showed the ability to counter lightning, but didn't have the techniques to kill Sidious via the force.
Same thing here. Just cause he can protect himself X, doesn't mean he can perform Y and Z to take out someone the likes of Vader.
Only reason Vader would lose in sabers is his lack of mobility,
Along with his inferior strength in the force, inferior non-force aided strength, inferior non-force aided speed, and the healing abilities and protection that the orbalisks provide.
although his custom style makes up for lack of agility. Physically, I'd say they're pretty close in strength, given Bane being a "mound of muscle" enhanced with the orbalisks, and Vader's mechanical, robotic enhancements.Vader's agility is the only hindrance I see here. And he is incredibly intelligent and would certainly put up an extremely tough fight to anyone to include Bane. I just can't prove that he'd win, so I say that Bane would. On paper, he has more going for him, although that doesn't ensure a victory.
I would probably agree with all of that.
The force now...you have to be joking right? You would have to prove that Bane is at least 80% of ROTJ Sidious, which is what Vader became.
Given his power was stated as being greater than that of the entire BoD, I'd say Bane could be well stronger than Palpatine in the force. His incredible displays despite his lack of age and experience in comparison would certainly suggest as much. Either way, nothing indicates that Palpatine (and thus, the weaker Vader) are on that level in force potential, so the burden of proof is on you.
So pure, raw talent and abilities coupled with being taught be the greatest, most powerful Sith lord in history, and Vader is ahead of Bane.
Firstly, all the evidence points to Bane being stronger in the force as explained above. Neither Sidious or Vader have displayed anything to make one believe that they possess the power equivalent to that of hundreds combined, and by comparing their learning rate which is very much correlated to strength in the force, Bane has either beat by a large margin.
Secondly, you really want to compare Vader's talent to Bane's. LMAO!! The guy was only capable of mastering force lightning in less than an hour, and an entire holocron's worth of sith rituals in a few days. Vader doesn't come close to Bane, talent wise.
Thirdly, you label Palpatine as the most powerful Sith Lord in history, which is quite a claim to make. Could I have some proof? I'd certainly put Exar and Nihilus above him personally.
Finally, since when does powerful force user equate to powerful teacher? That's a ridiculous notion to make. You'd firstly have to consider the fact that it's very likely that Palpatine held Vader back; he's certainly never produced anything which would suggest that he was being taught some extraordinary stuff in terms of knowledge, and we know that it's the way of a Sith Master to hold back their students so that they would never become powerful enough to challenge them. Burden of proof is again on you.
Really... Silly, silly argument.
Are you referring to the thought bomb? If so, that has no bearing on offensive force techniques or abilities, it just showed immunity to a certain attack. Yoda showed the ability to counter lightning, but didn't have the techniques to kill Sidious via the force.Same thing here. Just cause he can protect himself X, doesn't mean he can perform Y and Z to take out someone the likes of Vader.
I was referring to the storm like ritual that Bane and the BoD performed. The entire BoD focused their power through Bane (Bane also appears to have been draining them), and Bane directed all of their power onto Ruusan. The attack was described as consuming everything in its path, and was said to eventually destroy the whole of Ruusan. Now before you point out that the power wasn't entirely Bane's, I know that, I'm just pointing out his exceptional control and mastery over the force.
I have most of those sources, and am pretty sure that they in no way do anything like that. Not believing it until I see it. Though I would think that Palpatine would be more powerful than Bane personally, given his vastly superior knowledge and experience as well as his showings. Not Exar or Nihilus though.
Here are a few, Proteus.
Courtesy of the Dark Empire Sourcebook:
“[The Galactic Emperor] had succeeded where all others failed in taming the Dark Side. He would journey across the universe, spreading the shadow of his rule, blotting out the stars themselves, and taking his Dark Rule to other helpless galaxies.”
Courtesy of the Complete Visual Dictionary:
"The greatest master of evil ever to use Sith power bides his time."
First Quote: While I'll admit that that's a pretty nice quote, it's hardly as cut and dry as what Lightsnake had me to believe (if that is something he was referring to). You have to firstly consider that Darth Sidious is the only sith thus far seen to truly excel at using the darkside with subtlety (examples: his ability with force concealment, the shroud of the darkside that weakened the Jedi Order as a whole, his ritual that make the darkside within Anakin Skywalker stronger, granting his minions with abilities) and while they are indeed extremely impressive, it hardly fully correlates with combat prowess, which is what Sith like Nihilus and Exar excelled at. Also, not many Sith would choose to tame the darkside. Taming the darkside, by definition, would be toning it down; something not many sith would wish.
Second quote: Well he was the greatest. He achieved what all Sith truly dreamed to achieve, that is the destruction of the Jedi and dominant control over the Galaxy. But, greatness in no way equates to power.
First Quote: While I'll admit that that's a pretty nice quote, it's hardly as cut and dry as what Lightsnake had me to believe (if that is something he was referring to). You have to firstly consider that Darth Sidious is the only sith thus far seen to truly excel at using the darkside with subtlety (examples: his ability with force concealment, the shroud of the darkside that weakened the Jedi Order as a whole, his ritual that make the darkside within Anakin Skywalker stronger, granting his minions with abilities) and while they are indeed extremely impressive, it hardly fully correlates with combat prowess, which is what Sith like Nihilus and Exar excelled at. Also, not many Sith would choose to tame the darkside. Taming the darkside, by definition, would be toning it down; something not many sith would wish.
'Taming the dark side', by definition, would translate to harnessing it and controlling it, something Sith Lords endeavour to do all throughout their history. While I could understand Exar Kun excelling at "combat", I'd like for you to prove that Nihilus managed such specifications. On a whole, Sidious was the strongest with the dark side. Stronger than Kun or Nihilus. That, to me, would qualify for "most powerful" rather than combat skill. Even though there's nothing to say that Kun is superior to Sidious in direct combat.
Second quote: Well he was the greatest. He achieved what all Sith truly dreamed to achieve, that is the destruction of the Jedi and dominant control over the Galaxy. But, greatness in no way equates to power.
This quote was issued in the beginning of the AotC edition. There was no war. No Empire. The Republic was still operating. I have a hard time believing that Sidious getting himself elected somehow outclasses the achievements made by those such as Bane, Kun, and Revan.
Don't even go there and use some logic and reasoning skills. He's mentioned as most powerful in a direct reference to his power in combat. Exar also tried to use trickery and subtlety...Palpatine also DID excel with combat (maul's Journal, killing three Jedi Masters in seconds, etc.)
With the Sith? Greatness DOES equate to power? Weak Sith don't achieve anything...they fail or die. They don't see weaklings as 'great', certainly not 'greatest.'
And 'taming' the Darkside means 'mastering' it, which ALL Sith strive to do.
His feats also crush Exar's and Nihilus's into the dirt. As far as power goes, power has meant power in the force in regards to SW....To say 'Oh, it refers to something ELSE' spits on Occam's Razor, especially taking it in regards to combat.
Want 'combat prowess?' See 'tracing somebody's outline with a lightsaber so fast a single involuntary twitch would leave him (Maul) in pieces)
Or reducing three Sith acolytes to charred bones. Or Heritage of the Sith, which says he was the culmination of Sith Power. In the Force, Palp>Bane, and Exar and pretty much any other Sith.
Also, after not touching a lightsaber for 13 years he killed 3 of the order's finest swordsmen in a matter of sheer seconds. He forced Mace into a retreat temporarily, and stalemated Yoda overall. That's pretty impressive.
And this was only by ROTS; I'm sure as his strength in the force grew, so did his ability to perform deadly force attacks.
His force storm can take out entire fleets...that's pretty big.
'Taming the dark side', by definition, would translate to harnessing it and controlling it, something Sith Lords endeavour to do all throughout their history.
Don't be narrow minded. Ignore the entire concept of 'taming' something all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that when you tame something, you tone down its destructive nature. If you honestly think someone like Nihilus would in any way choose to do such a thing, you're crazy. Same applies to Exar, though not to as great a degree.
While I could understand Exar Kun excelling at "combat", I'd like for you to prove that Nihilus managed such specifications.
Nihilus is a funny case. He doesn't really focus on anything. He just devours anything in his path. Kind of like an exogorth. However, in terms of what I'm arguing, which is who would be better equipped to win a fight, the same would apply to Nihilus.
On a whole, Sidious was the strongest with the dark side. Stronger than Kun or Nihilus. That, to me, would qualify for "most powerful" rather than combat skill.
I still haven't seen absolute proof for this, as of yet. Though, and as you've also acknowledged, simply having greater power doesn't always mean you are better equipped to win in a combat situation.
Even though there's nothing to say that Kun is superior to Sidious in direct combat.
I would think so. His four thousand year old force spirit (and all evidence points to Kun in his real form being infinitely more powerful) was capable of dishing out a hell of a lot of power. In his true form, he was capable of draining thousands of Massassi effortlessly, freezing tens of thousands of beings effortlessly, and he pretty much owned at everything he did. His very steps were said to make the ground tremble. I'm actually very confidant in saying that excluding the Skywalker line, he may have had the greatest potential out of any force user there is. Hell, he even appears to have been some kind of sith chosen one.
This quote was issued in the beginning of the AotC edition. There was no war. No Empire. The Republic was still operating. I have a hard time believing that Sidious getting himself elected somehow outclasses the achievements made by those such as Bane, Kun, and Revan.
Could the quote may not have been referencing a time in the future? It would be like someone inside the SW universe -- let's say a historian -- was giving a lecture on Palpatine, and said something like "The Greatest Dark lord of the Sith in the entire Republic's History was born in [insert random date]." What's attributed to Palpatine is something he gained at a later time, yet it's given while speaking of an earlier date. Is that possible in this context? If it's not too much trouble, could I actually have maybe the entire passage? Either way, I'm really too tired at this moment to go into detail, but there are many things that the quote could be in reference to; it's hardly conclusive.
I would think so. His four thousand year old force spirit (and all evidence points to Kun in his real form being infinitely more powerful)[ was capable of dishing out a hell of a lot of power. In his true form, he was capable of draining thousands of Massassi effortlessly, freezing tens of thousands of beings effortlessly, and he pretty much owned at everything he did.
He didn't drain them...the obelisk he's chained to did and they offered their lives...and Palpatine was capable of mindwiping the entire Imperial city and controlling every being in the imperial fleet.
His very steps were said to make the ground tremble.
I'm actually very confidant in saying that excluding the Skywalker line, he may have had the greatest potential out of any force user there is. Hell, he even appears to have been some kind of sith chosen one.
Could the quote may not have been referencing a time in the future?
It would be like someone inside the SW universe -- let's say a historian -- was giving a lecture on Palpatine, and said something like "The Greatest Dark lord of the Sith in the entire Republic's History was born in [insert random date]."
What's attributed to Palpatine is something he gained at a later time, yet it's given while speaking of an earlier date. Is that possible in this context? If it's not too much trouble, could I actually have maybe the entire passage?
Either way, I'm really too tired at this moment to go into detail, but there are many things that the quote could be in reference to; it's hardly conclusive. [/B]
Don't be narrow minded. Ignore the entire concept of 'taming' something all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that when you tame something, you tone down its destructive nature. If you honestly think someone like Nihilus would in any way choose to do such a thing, you're crazy. Same applies to Exar, though not to as great a degree.
Accusing me of being narrow minded is all well and good, Proteus, but it can't change the facts. Sadly, you've only listed one possible definition of taming. Given the context of the statement, taming is synonymous with mastey and domestication. You're suggesting that Sidious somehow "toned down" the destructive nature of the Force, which is a tall claim, and would require proof -- especially since Sidious is responsible for the application of some of the most destructive Force techniques ever used. I'm afraid that logic isn't with you on this one.
Nihilus is a funny case. He doesn't really focus on anything. He just devours anything in his path. Kind of like an exogorth. However, in terms of what I'm arguing, which is who would be better equipped to win a fight, the same would apply to Nihilus.
You've, again, yet to provide any proof. You made the claim that Darth Nihilus is combat oriented. You're now rerouting your claim and making it that Nihilus would be better equipped to win in a fight, which -- again -- you've yet to prove.
I still haven't seen absolute proof for this, as of yet. Though, and as you've also acknowledged, simply having greater power doesn't always mean you are better equipped to win in a combat situation.
Thirdly, you label Palpatine as the most powerful Sith Lord in history, which is quite a claim to make. Could I have some proof? I'd certainly put Exar and Nihilus above him personally.
^ That is the claim that Lightsnake and I are addressing. Power. Not combat oriented skill (though, in any case, you've yet to prove Kun or Nihilus are better). We've proven Palpatine is more powerful and now you want to make the issue about who would win in a fight.
I would think so. His four thousand year old force spirit (and all evidence points to Kun in his real form being infinitely more powerful) was capable of dishing out a hell of a lot of power. In his true form, he was capable of draining thousands of Massassi effortlessly, freezing tens of thousands of beings effortlessly, and he pretty much owned at everything he did. His very steps were said to make the ground tremble. I'm actually very confidant in saying that excluding the Skywalker line, he may have had the greatest potential out of any force user there is. Hell, he even appears to have been some kind of sith chosen one.
Palpatine drained Byss for years, sustaining his health -- which was compromised due to the raw dark side energies within him. He could create Force Storms, "capable of demolishing fleets and tearing the surfaces off worlds". He could destroy lightsabers by gesturing, shrug off a "ton of machinery" dead weight that Leia Skywalker dropped on his head. According to the audio sourcebook, during his fight with Luke, Palpatine generated dark side waves that killed nearby Imperial units. I could just as well say that Palpatine "owned at everything he did", which is unsubstantiated, much like your claim with Kun. This is ignoring the fact that Palpatine's mere presence unbalanced the Force and emitted a shroud over the Jedi that dulled their senses and precognition.
Could the quote may not have been referencing a time in the future? It would be like someone inside the SW universe -- let's say a historian -- was giving a lecture on Palpatine, and said something like "The Greatest Dark lord of the Sith in the entire Republic's History was born in [insert random date]." What's attributed to Palpatine is something he gained at a later time, yet it's given while speaking of an earlier date. Is that possible in this context? If it's not too much trouble, could I actually have maybe the entire passage? Either way, I'm really too tired at this moment to go into detail, but there are many things that the quote could be in reference to; it's hardly conclusive.
I don't have my copy of the Dictionary on hand, but I've posted the quote numerous times. If you'd like, I'll do my best to hunt for the whole thing for you.
Originally posted by Lightsnake
Don't even go there and use some logic and reasoning skills.
I can see why you wouldn't want me to 'go there and use some logic and reasoning skills.'
He's mentioned as most powerful in a direct reference to his power in combat.
That's great, any moron can claim random shit, but until I see quotes and the like, which Gideon has been kind enough to provide, I'm not believing any of this.
Exar also tried to use trickery and subtlety...
To the same degree as Palpatine? No way, that only truly started with Bane's Ro2 lineage.
Palpatine also DID excel with combat
Never said he didn't, but to the degree that Exar did? Or Nihilus? Or Nadd? Highly doubt it.
(maul's Journal,
How elaborate. 🙄
killing three Jedi Masters in seconds, etc.)
Very nice. Nihilus was able to play around with someone who could effortlessly do the same.
With the Sith? Greatness DOES equate to power?
Are you asking me or are you telling me? If you're telling me, you're wrong. It doesn't matter that they're sith, greatness is always measured through achievements. It speaks for intelligence more than anything else, when looking at the achievements in question.
Weak Sith don't achieve anything...they fail or die. They don't see weaklings as 'great', certainly not 'greatest.'
Those are some very black and white statements there, and even if they're true, it's not necessarily because they're weak that they fail or that they're viewed as such.
And 'taming' the Darkside means 'mastering' it, which ALL Sith strive to do.
No, it means that you tone down its destructive nature. Assuming otherwise displays a clear lack of understanding of the english language.
His feats also crush Exar's and Nihilus's into the dirt.
They really don't. I've already mentioned some of Exar's, and Nihilus? The guy that can drain millions of force sensitive beings effortlessly in what can be deduced as a very short amount of time is more effective than Palpatine is in a hypothetical versus match. hell, we don't even know if Palpatine has a defence to Nihilus' ability.
As far as power goes, power has meant power in the force in regards to SW....
You seem to misunderstood the argument, what I was saying, and what Gideon agrees with, is that power in the force isn't directly proportional to effectiveness in combat.
To say 'Oh, it refers to something ELSE' spits on Occam's Razor, especially taking it in regards to combat.
Not that such was being said, you're clearly wrong. It's up to the people who put forth these quotes to fully explain them. Aside from that, it's a very narrow minded approach to automatically assume that power always refers to combat prowess. As far as power goes in Star Wars, military and personal combat situations both appear as frequently as the other. You're arguing this in a very illogical manner.
Want 'combat prowess?' See 'tracing somebody's outline with a lightsaber so fast a single involuntary twitch would leave him (Maul) in pieces)
Oh wow, a force user possessing great precision, I'm impressed. I guess AotC Anakin Skywalker is a god then, giving he displays precision in pretty much its most extreme form when slicing that poisonous creature off of Padme.
Or reducing three Sith acolytes to charred bones.
Which is clearly not beyond people like Exar and Nihilus. In case I wasn't clear, I'm not denying that Sidious is extremely powerful, or even one of the most powerful Sith Lords ever, but I just don't see him as being the most powerful, and nothing you've said has swayed me in any way. Really, nothing you've said is beyond people like Exar, Nadd or Nihilus.
Or Heritage of the Sith, which says he was the culmination of Sith Power.
Could I have a quote? You strike me as the type to make these things up.
In the Force, Palp>Bane, and Exar and pretty much any other Sith. [/B]
You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree.