Exar Kun, Darth Bane, Darth Revan vs. ROTS Yoda, Mace and Anakin

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Err....force power? knowledge of numerous force techniques? Those seem like pretty decent qualifiers.

So the Ancient Sith aren't able to use the force and don't know numerous force techniques any longer nowadays? Gosh. How is it possible that I missed that fact? Damn it!

It's difficult to argue a definite when one side has extremely limited to no showings whatsoever. It does leave one with a nice conclusion, however.

No, Lightsnake. It doesn't leave one with a nice conclusion. It leaves one with an impression. The conclusion is whatever happens inside your head after seeing the impression. Yet my view on the matter is not limited to some random quotes which, considering they appear in fictional literature alltogether, aren't relieable. And also I don't attempt to pass my opinion down as fact.

For instance, Darth Bane has demonstrated substantial skill, power and knowledge that, frankly, if the Sith'Ari prophecy is to be believed, places him heads and shoulders above the Ancient Sith. There is nothing the Ancient Sith have demonstrated that would be conducive to a versus fight against him. Who do we side with? The one with backing or without it?

Oh look. Lightsnake attempting to debate once more.

Believing or not believing the prophecy should not be an deciding factor in an argument. You make it a deciding factor. We could bury that argument right there. But just for the fun of it...

What was it that puts him above the Ancient Sith? Did we see him tearing the spirit right of a Jedi on par with post-DE-Luke Skywalker as Kun did, using a technique which Luke didn't have any defence against? Did we see him wielding a two metre long metal sword around so fast that he could match the speed of a Jedi using a lightsaber, as Ragnos did while possessing a [in comparison to his original] weak body [that of Tavion]? Knowledge? Did we see him spawn creatures with Sith Alchemy that pose a threat to even Jedi or construct force enhancing gimmics, the lesser being "deadly" amulets, the more powerful one being a ship which allows it's user to erase entire solar-systems from existance?

No? Then I don't see how he is to be placed above the Ancient Sith in any of that categories. Which is an especially stupid take on the issue as all "knowledge" and "power" that Bane had is practically coming from a Ancient Sith training facility which makes Bane an Ancient Sith trainee, so to say.

And that you have nowadays arrived at a point where you're plain and simply ignoring "evidence" that leads to the idea that the Ancient Sith are more powerful, more knowledgeable or better combatants than Sidious doesn't mean that said "evidence" doesn't exist.

We can dozens, if not hundreds of versus matches for that to be taken to account. This is, after all arguing facts from Star Wars canon and nobody has ever been particularly shy about arguing straight from quotes from either sources or omniscient narrators.

Ah, ah, ah.
The point is not that people argue based on quote here. The point is that the matter is argued based on quotes while ignoring anything else. In fact I could just run around here, just being equipped with the words "hyperbole", "according to your interpretation" and "logical fallacy" and that would still be enough to win the debate.

And aside of that: There isn't even a versus fight debated here. There is no case that is made for Sidious. No. It's the defence of the (not proven) premise that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord in history, which leads to an automatic win for him whenever he should be put in a VS-match against any single pre-PT-era character there is. And mind you: That happens entirely off-topic, as I may point out and wow – I'm still not seeing a single argument here. I just see two people pointing to, well, pretty much nothing. I mean hey...Gideon might repeat the line "It has been proven" another 200 times, to make himself feel better. Doesn't change a thing.

I'm going to say the words 'He was the most powerful of the most powerful' and leave it there. There seemed little skill when it was argued for backing of Marka.

Yeah. Because you've seen so many arguments here, which just involved that single quoted handed in and nothing else, correct? Cool thing, though. Because I just remember pages after pages filled with stuff pointing towards Ragnos superiority. But in reality, it was just that statement. Gosh.

[quot€]
'Any?' Oh, come now, that's just flagrant baiting. There is, however, substantial evidence that Palpatine is an incredible duelist-including G-canon statements- and that he not only has access to just about everything the Ancient Sith know, but has invented techniques of his own and has recovered a substantial trove of what was previously lost.
[/quote]

Stop it right there, Lightsnake.
Where is the G-canon statement saying that Sidious had access to just about everything the Ancient Sith knew? Right answer: It doesn't exist. He invented own techniques? Of unknown nature. Doesn't matter. And he recovered a substantial trove of what was previously lost? Another fairytale incoming, Lightsnake? How would he have been able to recover stuff that exploded on Malachor, was wiped out together with the Ancient Sith Empire or was reduced into ashes on Yavin 4? The idea that he was capable of using time-travel is new to me, you know?

And seriously, open to interpretation or not, some are pretty airtight. In fact, more than 'some' are pretty airtight. If 'everything' is subject to interpretation, let's argue for Johun 'I move faster than the eye can see' Othone taking down Nomi Sunrider in a saber fight.
Some things are rather clear cut. Are we going to argue Yoda is somehow not the most powerful Jedi in the order?

What path does this follow? 'There's always room for interpretation' means proof is impossible to come by? I'm sure I could find some absolutes you are in complete agreement, Nai.

No, Lightsnake. You can find ideas that I may agree with, which doesn't mean that they are correct. And they are facts which I can't argue against (e.g. Alderaan was blown up by the Death Star). Aside of that? There is nothing being "airtight" around in the SW universe, since there are almost no situations that clearly put character X above character Y.

Take Yoda being the most powereful Jedi as an example. One could attempt to make a case for Mace Windu, because he managed to beat someone who you [and Gideon] see as Yoda's equal and who Yoda wasn't able to defeat. Or one could make a case for Anakin being the most powerful Jedi because he, being in "the z0ne" can even turn the abilities of somebody like Dooku into a joke. Yes, Lightsnake. This can all be argued.

Which would already ignoring the fact that you're presenting false analogies here. See – comparing Yoda to the other people in the PT era Jedi Order might result in some "airtight" conclusion. Yet attempt to do the same comparing Yoda to Jedi who lived in other eras. One could easily walk in here and argue that Revan, as a Jedi by the end of Kotor, has been more powerful than Yoda. One could make a case for, let's say, Thon to be Yoda's superior in force abilities.

Actually, he can present more facts and evidence than you can. And demonstrate why he is more likely correct. A refusal to change stance when the point becomes that hard to defend leaves you at a rather poor turn in the road

Eek. He doesn't present jack shit, Lightsnake, as you may have noticed. Not a single thing here. And he demonstrates why it's stupid to thrust quotes no matter what. Great job, though.

And what the hell? You find it particulary intelligent attempting to lecture me on points hard to defend? I'm really surprised, you know. Since apparently I'm not even attempting to make a point – I'm attacking those Gideon tries to make. And aside of that: Passing something which is an opinion based on the interpretation of literature down as fact, and trying to defend said "fact" properly, is not hard but impossible. And because of that, you are pretty much one of two people here, who shouldn't even think about lecturing me about "poor turns in the road", considering the fact that you sucessfully navigated yourself into a Dead End.

And just for the record, Lightsnake: It doesn't matter if he can bring in more "facts" and "evidence". As long as I'm able to deny it, he still fails to establish his point. Which, of course, also means that I don't even have to make a point here. I just can sit here and torpede your and Gideons pretty opinion and the result will always be the same: The "Sidious is the most powerful Sith eveeeeeer" Titanic, hitting the "Oh really? Says who?" iceberg, which ends with the ship sinking to the "Who the hell gives a crap?" depths of the deep blue sea.

If it's not onscreen, it won't happen? Well, here's a bit of logic by the subject: Lucas has said clearly that you need to be Yoda or Mace to compete with Palpatine. Is Dooku Yoda or Mace? Given that Bane is incredible likely to be the Sith'Ari, he who will 'destroy the Sith' and 'make them stronger than ever before...' if that holds true, it would indeed set Palpatine above a good deal of forebears. A fairer question may be where's the evidence of ragnos to put him above Palpatine or Bane?

Oh look. Lightsnake's playing stupid again.
It's pretty obvious that Lucas is referring to the point in time represented by the end of RotS with that quote which was, by the way, given as an answer to the question if Anakin at that point in time, could have been able to take out Sidious. Considering that Dooku was dead at that point in time, I guess he's automatically excluded, which also counts for every other Jedi and Sith not still being alive at that time. Or do you want to tell me that LotF Luke can't take out RotS Sidious "because he isn't Mace or Yoda"?

And whoopie-ka-doodle. IF we believe that Bane is the Sith'Ari and IF we believe that the prophecy is true and IF we believe that the word "Sith" in the prophecy refers to a single Sith Lord instead of the Sith as a group and IF we believe that said "powerful" is only a reference to force powers and combat skills and IF we, on top of that, ignore that the Sith had to switch the philosophy from "direct combat" to "manipulation" and ignore that a shitloard of stuff was lost over a 5,000 year time span....yes...then we could in fact believe that this puts Sidious above the Ancient Sith in direct combat.

We could also assume that a todays student of Religion has a deeper insight into the nature of God than Jesus Christ, because the latter did never have the opportunity to read the bible. What is it? Stupid-Argument-Week and nobody did send me a memo?

If that's the case, however, why should anyone get into the debate? It seems clear you're meaning for them to swing to your side, but you're essentially saying your opinion won't change

Really Lightsnake. Do you want my head to explode? There is no "my side" that people can swing to as I don't defend my personal ideas here. If all people here would agree with me on one issue, I'll be the first one arguing against my own previously made points, if I see a way how this can be done. As Gideon always points out, I'm switching "my opinions" on a regular basis here. He thinks thats some way to attack me [even though knowing that ad hominem doesn't win debates]. In fact it's just my method of debating. The bottom line is that my opinions don't affect the side I may take in debates on this forum here, nor does this forum affect my opinions. Why should it? It almost never happens that points here pop up which I haven't previously considered. And if it happens, I might change my opinion – but then we're back at the general basis for my visits here: My opinions don't affect the side I take in a debate. Which means, that it doesn't matter if my opinion does or doesn't change.

There's a LOT more we could argue than just Palpatine vs. Ragnos. How about Bane vs. Exar Kun? How about Mace Windu vs. Kas'im? Caedus vs. Naga Sadow? There's a LOT that's up for fun debate

Are you in so desperate need to dodge the issue?

Apparently, sport, you either not willing or able to think about the stuff you toss in here. Assuming you're right about Bane and Sidious: Bane VS Kun? "But Bane is the Sith'ari and made the Sith more powerful than they ever were before. So he must win." Thanks. Mace Windu vs. Kas'im? "Mace Windu managed to overpower the most powerful Sith Lord in history – so he will rape Kas'im". Thanks again. Caedus vs. Sadow? "Caedus is almost on par with LotF Luke, who managed to defeat Sidious, the most powerful Sith Lord ever, in his DE incarnation almost 3 decades prior to the action in LotF. Caedus will destroy Sadow". Yup. Seems like a lot of fun...

Sidenote: Vitriol aside, how goes, Nai?

I have a cold and too much work to do. Hence it takes weeks before I can come up with some replies here nowadays.

Originally posted by Borbarad
ladyc

Yoda told Kenobi he was not strong enough to face Palps.

Dooku never showed at any time that he actually posed a threat to Yoda.

Palpatine is way stronger and faster by DE.

Post as much as you want nothing changes the fact that Dookie was subservient to Palps, was ACTUALLY surprised that he was betrayed by him. Every canon source has stated that no Sith lord surpassed Palpatine in Raw Power or Knowledge.

Palpatine is completely and utterly superior to Dookie in everyway.

Get the **** over it.

Originally posted by Borbarad
So the Ancient Sith aren't able to use the force and don't know numerous force techniques any longer nowadays? Gosh. How is it possible that I missed that fact? Damn it!

And considering one of your beloved Ancient Sith was obliterated in a force duel by Darth Wyyrlok of all people in the last issue of Legacy, what reason do I have to believe in their superiority?

Ah, ah, ah.
The point is not that people argue based on quote here. The point is that the matter is argued based on quotes while ignoring anything else.

In fact I could just run around here, just being equipped with the words "hyperbole", "according to your interpretation" and "logical fallacy" and that would still be enough to win the debate.

And aside of that: There isn't even a versus fight debated here. There is no case that is made for Sidious. No. It's the defence of the (not proven) premise that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord in history, which leads to an automatic win for him whenever he should be put in a VS-match against any single pre-PT-era character there is.

And mind you: That happens entirely off-topic, as I may point out and wow – I'm still not seeing a single argument here.

I just see two people pointing to, well, pretty much nothing. I mean hey...Gideon might repeat the line "It has been proven" another 200 times, to make himself feel better. Doesn't change a thing.

[Quot]
Yeah. Because you've seen so many arguments here, which just involved that single quoted handed in and nothing else, correct? Cool thing, though. Because I just remember pages after pages filled with stuff pointing towards Ragnos superiority. But in reality, it was just that statement. Gosh. [/Quote]
Yeah, pages and pages of distortion, ridicule and falsehood, with really nothing indicating Ragnos's superiority beyond it.
Nobody's denying the Ancient Sith are powerful Nai, and that Ragnos is high up on the list. But the extent he was held to was ****ing ridiculous and you know it.

Stop it right there, Lightsnake.
Where is the G-canon statement saying that Sidious had access to just about everything the Ancient Sith knew? Right answer: It doesn't exist.

He invented own techniques? Of unknown nature. Doesn't matter.

And he recovered a substantial trove of what was previously lost? Another fairytale incoming, Lightsnake? How would he have been able to recover stuff that exploded on Malachor, was wiped out together with the Ancient Sith Empire or was reduced into ashes on Yavin 4?

The idea that he was capable of using time-travel is new to me, you know?

No, Lightsnake. You can find ideas that I may agree with, which doesn't mean that they are correct. And they are facts which I can't argue against (e.g. Alderaan was blown up by the Death Star). Aside of that? There is nothing being "airtight" around in the SW universe, since there are almost no situations that clearly put character X above character Y.

Take Yoda being the most powereful Jedi as an example. One could attempt to make a case for Mace Windu, because he managed to beat someone who you [and Gideon] see as Yoda's equal and who Yoda wasn't able to defeat.

Or one could make a case for Anakin being the most powerful Jedi because he, being in "the z0ne" can even turn the abilities of somebody like Dooku into a joke. Yes, Lightsnake. This can all be argued.

Which would already ignoring the fact that you're presenting false analogies here. See – comparing Yoda to the other people in the PT era Jedi Order might result in some "airtight" conclusion. Yet attempt to do the same comparing Yoda to Jedi who lived in other eras. One could easily walk in here and argue that Revan, as a Jedi by the end of Kotor, has been more powerful than Yoda. One could make a case for, let's say, Thon to be Yoda's superior in force abilities. [/B]

On could argue it, sure. Of course, they'd need to ignore established canon and in Revan's case, present a lot of assumption.

Originally posted by Borbarad
[B]Eek. He doesn't present jack shit, Lightsnake, as you may have noticed. Not a single thing here. And he demonstrates why it's stupid to thrust quotes no matter what. Great job, though.

And what the hell? You find it particulary intelligent attempting to lecture me on points hard to defend? I'm really surprised, you know. Since apparently I'm not even attempting to make a point – I'm attacking those Gideon tries to make.

And aside of that: Passing something which is an opinion based on the interpretation of literature down as fact, and trying to defend said "fact" properly, is not hard but impossible.

And because of that, you are pretty much one of two people here, who shouldn't even think about lecturing me about "poor turns in the road", considering the fact that you sucessfully navigated yourself into a Dead End.

And just for the record, Lightsnake: It doesn't matter if he can bring in more "facts" and "evidence". As long as I'm able to deny it, he still fails to establish his point. Which, of course, also means that I don't even have to make a point here. I just can sit here and torpede your and Gideons pretty opinion and the result will always be the same: The "Sidious is the most powerful Sith eveeeeeer" Titanic, hitting the "Oh really? Says who?" iceberg, which ends with the ship sinking to the "Who the hell gives a crap?" depths of the deep blue sea.

Oh look. Lightsnake's playing stupid again.
It's pretty obvious that Lucas is referring to the point in time represented by the end of RotS with that quote which was, by the way, given as an answer to the question if Anakin at that point in time, could have been able to take out Sidious. Considering that Dooku was dead at that point in time, I guess he's automatically excluded, which also counts for every other Jedi and Sith not still being alive at that time.

And the question, IIRC was 'Why did Mace bring the B-team to fight Palpatine?'

Or do you want to tell me that LotF Luke can't take out RotS Sidious "because he isn't Mace or Yoda"?

And whoopie-ka-doodle. IF we believe that Bane is the Sith'Ari and IF we believe that the prophecy is true and IF we believe that the word "Sith" in the prophecy refers to a single Sith Lord instead of the Sith as a group

and IF we believe that said "powerful" is only a reference to force powers and combat skills and IF we, on top of that, ignore that the Sith had to switch the philosophy from "direct combat" to "manipulation" and ignore that a shitloard of stuff was lost over a 5,000 year time span....yes...then we could in fact believe that this puts Sidious above the Ancient Sith in direct combat.

We could also assume that a todays student of Religion has a deeper insight into the nature of God than Jesus Christ, because the latter did never have the opportunity to read the bible. What is it? Stupid-Argument-Week and nobody did send me a memo?

Really Lightsnake. Do you want my head to explode? There is no "my side" that people can swing to as I don't defend my personal ideas here. If all people here would agree with me on one issue, I'll be the first one arguing against my own previously made points, if I see a way how this can be done. As Gideon always points out, I'm switching "my opinions" on a regular basis here. He thinks thats some way to attack me [even though knowing that ad hominem doesn't win debates]. In fact it's just my method of debating. The bottom line is that my opinions don't affect the side I may take in debates on this forum here, nor does this forum affect my opinions. Why should it? It almost never happens that points here pop up which I haven't previously considered. And if it happens, I might change my opinion – but then we're back at the general basis for my visits here: My opinions don't affect the side I take in a debate. Which means, that it doesn't matter if my opinion does or doesn't change.

Are you in so desperate need to dodge the issue?

Apparently, sport, you either not willing or able to think about the stuff you toss in here. Assuming you're right about Bane and Sidious: Bane VS Kun? "But Bane is the Sith'ari and made the Sith more powerful than they ever were before. So he must win."

Thanks. Mace Windu vs. Kas'im? "Mace Windu managed to overpower the most powerful Sith Lord in history – so he will rape Kas'im". Thanks again. Caedus vs. Sadow? "Caedus is almost on par with LotF Luke, who managed to defeat Sidious, the most powerful Sith Lord ever, in his DE incarnation almost 3 decades prior to the action in LotF. Caedus will destroy Sadow". Yup. Seems like a lot of fun...

I'm not particularly interested in debating this point any longer, Nai. It has been a constant circle of three years. All you do is sit and say "no" when I provide quotes and evidence. I'm growing tired of pointing out the hypocrisy and the lack of evidence. The fact that you think our contributions are equal even though my evidence is in mountains and yours is in handfuls has no merit to it. We're simply going to move on. I'm not interested in getting into flame wars any longer. I'm content with the fact that the pro-Ragnos mentality is long dead and gone and we have embraced a larger perspective.

It has been fun, though. Perhaps, if you wish to continue at a time when you disregard your constant baiting and allow yourself to be a little more relaxed in the mindset, I could be persuaded to continue. If not, carry on.

Originally posted by Gideon
I'm not particularly interested in debating this point any longer, Nai. It has been a constant circle of three years. All you do is sit and say "no" when I provide quotes and evidence. I'm growing tired of pointing out the hypocrisy and the lack of evidence. The fact that you think our contributions are equal even though my evidence is in mountains and yours is in handfuls has no merit to it. We're simply going to move on. I'm not interested in getting into flame wars any longer. I'm content with the fact that the pro-Ragnos mentality is long dead and gone and we have embraced a larger perspective.

It has been fun, though. Perhaps, if you wish to continue at a time when you disregard your constant baiting and allow yourself to be a little more relaxed in the mindset, I could be persuaded to continue. If not, carry on.

Originally posted by Gideon
I'm not particularly interested in debating this point any longer, Nai. It has been a constant circle of three years. All you do is sit and say "no" when I provide quotes and evidence. I'm growing tired of pointing out the hypocrisy and the lack of evidence. The fact that you think our contributions are equal even though my evidence is in mountains and yours is in handfuls has no merit to it. We're simply going to move on. I'm not interested in getting into flame wars any longer. I'm content with the fact that the pro-Ragnos mentality is long dead and gone and we have embraced a larger perspective.

It has been fun, though. Perhaps, if you wish to continue at a time when you disregard your constant baiting and allow yourself to be a little more relaxed in the mindset, I could be persuaded to continue. If not, carry on.

For the record, I meant all of this genuinely. It was fun in that it was a challenge for patience. It is, as the Joker describes, "when an unstoppable force meets an unmovable object." You're not going to change my opinions and I'm not going to change yours.