I wasn't positive we were covering all of them. In a nutshell, an assessment on Ludo Kressh should probably go something like:
"Raw power: Beneath Naga Sadow.
Force Mastery: Beneath Naga Sadow.
Combat Abilities: About equal to Naga Sadow.
Conclusion: Besides being the Dark Lord of the Sith too, beneath Naga Sadow."
Heh.
Originally posted by Enyalus
I wasn't positive we were covering all of them. In a nutshell, an assessment on Ludo Kressh should probably go something like:"Raw power: Beneath Naga Sadow.
Force Mastery: Beneath Naga Sadow.
Combat Abilities: About equal to Naga Sadow.
Conclusion: Besides being the Dark Lord of the Sith too, beneath Naga Sadow."
Heh.
Sources and elucidation, sir. Remember: your assessment of each character is no different from any generic persuasive essay; the first rule of persuasive essays is to treat the audience as though they are completely ignorant of the specifics of the topic.
In this case, I am.
Originally posted by Borbarad
[b]In defence of the Ancient SithLet's throw a brick !
One must love the attempts to limit Naga Sadow to that force feat and, even more than that, talk him down based on that feat. Let us not forget, that the Sith Lord used the brick throwing manouver while engaging another Sith Lord in combat. How many people have you seen employing force manouvers like that during melee combat? The only person that I could name doing something like that - just off my mind - is Count Dooku.
[/B]
Darth Vader: Both against Luke in ESB, and against that jedi master on kashyyk in RODV, in RODV he tears a bridge apart and destroys the jedi with it, while in the midst of combat.
Originally posted by Gideon
Sources and elucidation, sir. Remember: your assessment of each character is no different from any generic persuasive essay; the first rule of persuasive essays is to treat the audience as though they are completely ignorant of the specifics of the topic.In this case, I am.
Right you are. Mmkay, in that case I vote for doing Ludo after concluding Sadow, based on chronological order excluding Marka 'til the end.
Originally posted by GideonPalpatine's dark energies turned Byss dark, IIRC. They left a taint - that doesn't mean that he's been focusing his power on corrupting it.
Byss was a nascent planet turned into a dark side nexus as a direct result of Palpatine's personal power, Faunus. To say that he was drawing upon its energies is to concede that he is using his own power to fuel his techniques.
Where does the Dark Side Sourcebook specifically state that the Emperor was using Byss to empower himself?You're intentionally being daft. Don't. It's implied by the text, when the author notes that "on Byss," Palpatine seemed invulnerable.
And actually, there's another example of one of your double-standards. Sadow and spirit-Ragnos/Tavion were being empowered by Korriban, Count Dooku's dark side powers were bolstered by the darkness of Vjun, and yet Darth Sidious gained nothing from Byss?
Stop being a hypocrite.
a.) You can't prove that.I'll get back to you on this when I go through the provided quotes.
b.) If you can, let me know, because that would only bolster Palpatine's high reputation as it is; transforming a nascent planet into a site of dark side energy more potent than Korriban singlehandedly? At a time when he was hardly ever there? Nice.You seem to think that I care what it means for Palpatine. I'm not trying to put him down in any way.
Oh, come now, though. I thought Darth Bane's powers were more potent than the Emperor's.Nice job in completely twisting my argument, in which I asked you to prove that Palpatine's lightning was more powerful than Bane's, but alright. Show me one instance where Palpatine displayed destructive telekinesis on par with Bane. Just one.
Are you high?The levels civility and professionalism here are astounding. I'm sure Publius would be proud.
Count Dooku, after swearing to "deal with the Jedi", confronts Windu and then decides to get the hell out. Not to mention, unlike Dooku on Tattooine, Windu was blindsided by Magnaguards. When Dooku confronted Anakin, he was overpowered and knocked on his ass; Skywalker only ran to save Ahsoka.Do you even understand what happened when Desann fought Luke? They duel, Desann jumps away to a lower level and Force-pushes Luke when he follows. He then throws his lightsaber, dropping a wall on the Jedi, and runs away. He didn't "technically overcome" him.
Guess, by your logic, Windu didn't defeat Palpatine, even though you're always pointing that out, since he just knocked the Emperor on his ass, too.Except that there were no distractions, and he ended the duel with his lightsaber at Palpatine's throat. Don't be ridiculous.
Skill =/= power, Faunus.He wasn't using his own body's "immense" power, so he would've needed skill to defeat the incredibly talented Jaden Korr in a duel, even with the boost from Korriban.
For the record, as well, Jaden Korr was an initiate at the time he confronted Ragnos.He was "the most promising" Jedi Knight in the Academy, which at that time had Kyp Durron in its ranks; he'd been promoted because he was prodigious, even having constructed a lightsaber without any formal training. Stop trying to downplay his abilities.
Why didn't the Dark Lord, empowered by Korriban, his vaunted scepter, and Tavion's own abilities manage to subdue him? Palpatine, for lack of technical skill, still managed to crush Tinn, Kolar, and Fisto due to a superior command of the Force.Because he was in a weaker body, he hadn't touched his weapons in five thousand years, and he'd apparently required the Force-energy stored in his staff to even emerge and possess Tavion to begin with. He wasn't anywhere near where he would've been. This is fact, stop being daft.
Can you prove all of that? Sith spirits on Korriban were capable of putting Palpatine in a Bacta tank when united and pissed.Funny that you've never brought that up before.
Because he was in a weaker body, he hadn't touched his weapons in five thousand years, and he'd apparently required the Force-energy stored in his staff to even emerge and possess Tavion to begin with. He wasn't anywhere near where he would've been. This is fact, stop being daft.
Originally posted by Faunus
Palpatine's dark energies turned Byss dark, IIRC. They left a taint - that doesn't mean that he's been focusing his power on corrupting it.
Is this some sort of irrelevant misdirection? The dark side energies that saturated Byss were generated from Palpatine himself. Even if he is being fueled by the energies there, it is irrelevant since the powers came from him.
You're intentionally being daft. Don't. It's implied by the text, when the author notes that "on Byss," Palpatine seemed invulnerable.
You're intentionally being daft. I asked you to provide the statement from the Dark Side Sourcebook that specifically denoted Palpatine was being empowered there.
And actually, there's another example of one of your double-standards. Sadow and spirit-Ragnos/Tavion were being empowered by Korriban, Count Dooku's dark side powers were bolstered by the darkness of Vjun, and yet Darth Sidious gained nothing from Byss?
Unlike the late Marka Ragnos, Tavion, and Count Dooku, Palpatine was responsible for the dark side energies surrounding him.
Stop being a hypocrite.
You could prove hypocrisy by proving that the situations between Ragnos, Tavion, Dooku, and the Emperor were all the same. They weren't.
I'll get back to you on this when I go through the provided quotes.
Please do.
You seem to think that I care what it means for Palpatine. I'm not trying to put him down in any way.
Yes, so you've said. But, really, why else would you try to argue that Palpatine's Force lightning wasn't superior to that of his direct inferior, Darth Bane, someone whose experience with Force lightning doesn't really register next to that of the Emperor's.
Nice job in completely twisting my argument, in which I asked you to prove that Palpatine's lightning was more powerful than Bane's, but alright. Show me one instance where Palpatine displayed destructive telekinesis on par with Bane. Just one.
I don't have to, you see. I'm in the great position of being supported by canon statements where it is stated without ambiguity that the Emperor is more powerful than Darth Bane.
The levels civility and professionalism here are astounding. I'm sure Publius would be proud.
My Master is always proud.
Do you even understand what happened when Desann fought Luke? They duel, Desann jumps away to a lower level and Force-pushes Luke when he follows. He then throws his lightsaber, dropping a wall on the Jedi, and runs away. He didn't "technically overcome" him.
Right, because Force pushing your opponent aside and knocking a wall down on him in the context of a duel is not a legitimate win. Skywalker was down for the count, Desann was able to move on. Don't be petty, Faunus. No one is arguing that Desann was stronger, but he did win.
Except that there were no distractions, and he ended the duel with his lightsaber at Palpatine's throat. Don't be ridiculous.
You will be so kind as to list the distractions for Desann's duel with Skywalker and Anakin's duel with Dooku. Yes, I have noticed that you're conveniently not arguing that anymore. Is silence synonymous with concession?
He wasn't using his own body's "immense" power, so he would've needed skill to defeat the incredibly talented Jaden Korr in a duel, even with the boost from Korriban.
He was using the power of someone else's body on a planet entrenched in dark side energies and empowered by his scepter. Curious how Tavion is a "weakling" whereas Jaden Korr is "incredibly talented." My, you do like to shade things, don't you?
He was "the most promising" Jedi Knight in the Academy, which at that time had Kyp Durron in its ranks; he'd been promoted because he was prodigious, even having constructed a lightsaber without any formal training. Stop trying to downplay his abilities.
He was considered one of the most promising Jedi, Faunus, not the most promising. Moreover, if Korr had been promoted to his great ability based on prodigious talent, one would assume that Tavion herself would have demonstrated remarkable ability, since she was third-in-command of a galactic movement to restore the Empire. I didn't deny Korr's skill, merely pointed out that he has hardly had the skill and acquired experience of a Master.
Because he was in a weaker body, he hadn't touched his weapons in five thousand years, and he'd apparently required the Force-energy stored in his staff to even emerge and possess Tavion to begin with. He wasn't anywhere near where he would've been. This is fact, stop being daft.
You seem to be confusing me with someone else. I am not arguing that Ragnos was weak by any means. I specifically have noted him to be, arguably, on par with the Emperor himself. But welcome to the purpose of this thread, Faunus. You expose what you see to be "flaws" or weaknesses in the Emperor, am I not entitled to do the same with Ragnos? Fact of the matter is, despite, what, a thousand years of difference, Exar Kun -- on a planet steeped with Jedi -- managed to provide more awe inspiring demonstrations of power as a spirit than Marka Ragnos. He's not infallible. He's not even close.
Funny that you've never brought that up before.
I have. It was stated in "the Emperor's Pawns" guide. But you say that as though it changes anything. Get back to the entire argument, Faunus, or concede the parts you didn't respond to.
Originally posted by Faunus
You're intentionally being daft. Don't. It's implied by the text, when the author notes that "on Byss," Palpatine seemed invulnerable.And actually, there's another example of one of your double-standards. Sadow and spirit-Ragnos/Tavion were being empowered by Korriban, Count Dooku's dark side powers were bolstered by the darkness of Vjun, and yet Darth Sidious gained nothing from Byss?
It wasn't the Dark Side Sourcebook, it was the Dark Empire Sourcebook. I slipped up and said the wrong one once, too. Instead of correcting me (they should've known what I was referring to), they decided to ask where in the incorrect Sourcebook it said that.
Originally posted by Enyalus
It wasn't the Dark Side Sourcebook, it was the Dark Empire Sourcebook. I slipped up and said the wrong one once, too. Instead of correcting me (they should've known what I was referring to), they decided to ask where in the incorrect Sourcebook it said that.
Stop right there. Faunus mentioned the Dark Side Sourcebook, not the Dark Empire Sourcebook. It is not my fault that he did so or my job to infer that he meant another sourcebook when that one could just as well apply; I do not have the contents of each of those publications memorized, and it was possible that I missed a statement in one that could potentially destabilize my case.
And even if I did know what he was referring to, it goes back to that philosophy I mentioned to you, Enyalus: cover thy ass.
Originally posted by Enyalus
Yes, but he was referring to a quote in which I've posted in this very thread at least half a dozen times and listed the source for it.
Nowhere does Faunus state that he was explicitly referring to the invalid source you mentioned.
I know you read my arguments.
Some of them.
You really forgot? I don't buy it.
Yes, but you can't prove my intent or that I was deliberately goading Faunus to provide a source that he couldn't. I mean, what's unlikely about me simply not knowing? We're all fallible.
But yes, cover thy ass. 😉 I got it, I got it.
You will learn, grasshopper. 😉
My source is anything but invalid. Don't even go there. He specifies the locale for a reason, and mentions it twice. He does so for a reason. Let's not get into Nai's and your position about me proving a negative. It is ridiculous.
Then again, if my source is invalid, then that quote about, "the most powerful Sith Lord ever had returned" line can't be used. Watch your wording. 😉
I never said it was your obligation to correct Faunus' slip up. But it should be common curtesy.
Originally posted by Enyalus
My source is anything but invalid. Don't even go there. He specifies the locale for a reason, and mentions it twice. He does so for a reason. Let's not get into Nai's and your position about me proving a negative. It is ridiculous.
You said you incorrectly cited the Dark Side Sourcebook as the source for the statement regarding Palpatine's empowerment from Byss. Presumably, the DSSB doesn't mention such a thing. Ergo, it was an invalid source. No one said that the DESB was an invalid source.
Then again, if my source is invalid, then that quote about, "the most powerful Sith Lord ever had returned" line can't be used. Watch your wording. 😉
Thankfully, Palpatine is the only Sith Lord ever regard by any source to be the strongest in history. Statements that support him are not something in short supply. Furthermore, since Palpatine wasn't confirmed to be an actual Sith Lord since 1999 - 2003, I doubt that that line actually exists, hence why I don't use it.
As we can still see, I am a master of covering my ass. You are but a novice, grasshopper. In the words of Palpatine to the late Moff Kadir: "don't get arrogant, child."
😉
I never said it was your obligation to correct Faunus' slip up. But it should be common curtesy.
Given Faunus's current predicament and that his last few arguments have been grotesque failures, his current habit of not responding to select portions of the argument, and constant bitchiness, I'm suspending common courtesy with him, though I've still been at least as patient with him as he has been with me.
Originally posted by Gideon
You said you incorrectly cited the Dark Side Sourcebook as the source for the statement regarding Palpatine's empowerment from Byss. Presumably, the DSSB doesn't mention such a thing. Ergo, it was an invalid source. No one said that the DESB was an invalid source.
Oh, come now. I said I incorrectly cited it once. I didn't say I cited it incorrectly in this thread, and if you'll look at pages 20-27 you'll see that I always attributed it to the Dark Empire Sourcebook.
I didn't use the DSS as a source at all in my DE Sidious argument presented in this thread.
Originally posted by Enyalus
Oh, come now. I said I incorrectly cited it once. I didn't say I cited it incorrectly in this thread, and if you'll look at pages 20-27 you'll see that I always attributed it to the Dark Empire Sourcebook.I didn't use the DSS as a source at all in my DE Sidious argument presented in this thread.
Why you're trying to argue semantics with me, I'll never know. You mentioned your incorrect citation of the Dark Side Sourcebook when you corrected Faunus, and noted that it was a mistake you had already made, something you felt that the rest of us should have been and were aware of, but that we chose not to correct you. That is what I'm referring to.
Faunus mentioned the DSSB as the source for Palpatine's "empowerment" on Byss. Not the DESB. The DSSB is, presumably, an invalid source for this argument since it, presumably, does not mention Palpatine's "empowerment" on Byss.
I think you're confusing the issue entirely out of what it is worth. Again: I cover my ass.