Sith Force Tournament

Because he wasn't one born with the power to do so? If Bane didn't want to take over the galaxy, then he's a poor Sith as the entire doctrine revolves around 'subjugate the Galaxy to your will.'
Fact is, Bane couldn't. He didn't have the power to do so and opted for a line that would produce one who did

Lmao. It was *your* point that Bane could of made the political gains Palpatine did if he *wanted to*. The truth of the matter is, Bane lacked the political skill of Palpatine.

Besides the whole him being the imbalance's very source?

You keep dancing around the real issue. How is Palpatine being the source of the imbalance proof that it was his raw power? All sources indicate that Palpatine caused the imbalance merely by existing. Its the nature of the dark side.

Nothing to suggest it...save they didn't take over, Palpatine did. And what, double standards and your fallible third party now? We know Palpatine was the cause of the imbalance and the clouding and I'll let Gideon deal with that.

Ragnos didnt want to take over the entire galaxy, he was content with the power that he already had. Revan nearly did take over the galaxy, and through a military conquest no less. The only thing that stopped him was Malaks betrayal, and that was a matter of circumstance.

Yoda saying that the dark side clouds everything is simply an observation of the nature of the force. Such a statement would be far less fallible than comparing the power of individuals many thousands of years apart. And your going to pawn your argument on Gideon now because you lack proof of your own claims? Kay.

When he's holding back, Sirak whoops his ass. When he fully embraces the Dark Side, he becomes stronger than anyone else in the Brotherhood.

Bane won his second duel with Sirak because he received secret training from Kas'im.

Vader: The Ultimate Guide. Gideon posted it at Project Holocron.
And no, I won't be providing you the scan as I have no scanner and I just learned of it thanks to the folks at TFN
Vader, the Ultimate Guide, page 19. In the detailing of Anakin's biography and the Sith timeline.

Ah, now I see why you neglected to give me the exact quote.

"Vader imagined the power that could be his if he crushed Palpatine and established his own rule over the Empire. But first, he would need his own apprentice. By himself, he could not hope to defeat the most powerful Sith Lord the galaxy had ever known."

Vader imagined. This is clear proof that the line of thought belonged to Vaders POV and not necessarily the narrator.

The Republic was weak because he made it so with the clone Wars. By the time of Bane, the Republic had nearly fallen apart before Bane was even trained

The Republic was already corrupt, with people like Nute Gunray and the Trade Federation in power. And though your right that Palpatine made the Republic weaker by causing the Separatist wars, this is again due to his political skill. He was also in the right place at the right time, I dont recall an army of clone troopers being available in Banes time, do you?

Because it's referring merely to 5000 ABY. He WAS the most powerful, NOW he is dead and two travellers arrive....the context is clear: Marka was the most powerful of the Ancients and now he's dead. This wouldn't apply to 5000 years later

I went through this with you before. The narrator said that Ragnos was the most powerful of the most powerful. He didnt say that Ragnos was the most powerful of the ancient Sith, or that Ragnos was only the most powerful in his own timeframe. Since the narrator is not part of the timeline, the past and the future would of have no meaning in regards to the validity of his statements.

Now it *would* be my burden to prove that the narrator wasnt working under omniscient narrator limited, but my agenda here at the moment is to debunk Sidious being the most powerful.

Oh, dear, I'm afraid it is.
He was powerful enough to linger for 5000 years, was fully connected to his tomb and Korriban, possessing the body of a relatively powerful Force user, using his power personal, powerful weapon on a world that empowers him.
And he loses. Not to a master or a knight, but a barely trained PADAWAN

You ignored my points that show Ragnos was nowhere near his prime. And Tavion was not relatively powerful, she was a novice.

His death left 'tembling images' in the Force? Prove it.

And prove nobody tried to usurp it on his death bed. While you're at it, prove how he died. Prove it wasn't sudden.

Dont be ridiculous LS. That nobody usurped his rule on his death bed is obvious due to the fact that they *didnt*. Ludo and Sadow were fighting over supremacy after Ragnos had died. If either one of them had killed Ragnos, they would of been the clear DLoTS.

There is much more evidence that Palpatine>Ragnos.
Ragnos is very powerful, but he has NO backing that he can stand to Palpatine, Bane or Kun.

According to your invalid opinion.

Ragnos himself says the empire is in a Golden Age. Ruin's New Sith empire was directly stated to have surpassed that empire, given that Empire was like five times the size of it.

The actual name of the comic is the Golden age of the Sith. Not the golden age of the Sith empire. Its pretty damn clear the author meant that it was the golden age of the Sith as an ideal. That Ruins empire would of surpassed the size of Ragnos empire is further proof of my point.

Awwww, sorry, but that's not all the backing Yoda has. Not only that, but it's not from yoda's POV: It's Yoda coming to a realization and the narration naming him the most powerful.
And guess what? Yoda still has more canonical backing than anyone else. Sorry.
And yeah, in the prime of the Jedi, when most of them were just Niman users, the tops won't be the best.
Think before you post.

Nope. The line of thought is indeed from Yodas POV, all this has been established before.

And the majority of the Jedi in the PT using Niman, the 'diplomatic form', is proof against you not the other way around.
Think before you post.

Scans on comics that are freely available online?
The NEC is just as valid as anything you present because the author is clearly an extremely educated individual with information on Ragnos, Kun, Sadow, Nadd, Bane, PLAGUEIS of all people and many other Sith. He still names Palpatine is the most powerful after detailing this.

No not really. I dont pretend that third party quotes are absolute proof that my favorites are more powerful than Sidious. The in universe historian who wrote the NEC was no doubt knowledgeable, though he wasnt there personally and he is still fallible no matter what you argue.

Originally posted by Jbill311
From Shatterpoint:

Hope this helps.

It does. Thanks...that's how I thought it worked. But I don't know what's wrong with me - I have Shatterpoint - I should pay closer attention. lol

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
No not really. I dont pretend that third party quotes are absolute proof that my favorites are more powerful than Sidious. The in universe historian who wrote the NEC was no doubt knowledgeable, though he wasnt there personally and he is still fallible no matter what you argue.

Truthiness.

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
Lmao. It was *your* point that Bane could of made the political gains Palpatine did if he *wanted to*. The truth of the matter is, Bane lacked the political skill of Palpatine.

Since the narrator is not part of the timeline, the past and the future would of have no meaning in regards to the validity of his statements.

Now it *would* be my burden to prove that the narrator wasnt working under omniscient narrator limited, but my agenda here at the moment is to debunk Sidious being the most powerful.

You ignored my points that show Ragnos was nowhere near his prime. And Tavion was not relatively powerful, she was a novice.

Dont be ridiculous LS. That nobody usurped his rule on his death bed is obvious due to the fact that they *didnt*.

Ludo and Sadow were fighting over supremacy after Ragnos had died. If either one of them had killed Ragnos, they would of been the clear DLoTS.

According to your invalid opinion.

The actual name of the comic is the Golden age of the Sith. Not the golden age of the Sith empire.

Its pretty damn clear the author meant that it was the golden age of the Sith as an ideal.

That Ruins empire would of surpassed the size of Ragnos empire is further proof of my point.

At its height during the New Sith Wars, it was even greater than the old Sith Empires of Naga Sadow and Darth Revan; following the Battle of Mizra and during the Republic Dark Age, it encompassed a great percentage of the known galaxy.

Nope. The line of thought is indeed from Yodas POV, all this has been established before.

And the majority of the Jedi in the PT using Niman, the 'diplomatic form', is proof against you not the other way around.
Think before you post.

No not really. I dont pretend that third party quotes are absolute proof that my favorites are more powerful than Sidious.

The in universe historian who wrote the NEC was no doubt knowledgeable, though he wasnt there personally and he is still fallible no matter what you argue. [/B]

Ugh, Jesus Christ. I leave for a Heroes marathon and you all post the friggin' Bible. Please people, be considerate. 😉

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
Yes Bane no doubt had some intellect and manipulative abilities, though there is the matter of degree. Can you provide some evidence that would directly show that Banes intellectual prowess could match Sidious, who is most likely the best politician in the entire mythos?

Darth Bane managed to manipulate the entirety of the Brotherhood, including the kraven but brilliant Kaan, as well as establish a vast network of spies and informants across the galaxy. I mean, really, Great Vengeance, what do you want, here? Palpatine and Bane have been both established to be geniuses according to the canon, but the fact that Palpatine manipulated events to ascend to Emperor of the galaxy is conclusive proof that he is smarter than Bane? If you thought arguing relative power levels was difficult, arguing relative intellect between two established geniuses is even more difficult. For example, is Palpatine smarter than Raith Sienar, the prodigiously gifted engineer? Palpatine used Sienar like a pawn for decades, but has never demonstrated incredible engineering ability. Is Palpatine smarter than Grand Admirals Thrawn or Demetrius Zaarin? Marka Ragnos? He succeeded in ways that outstrip the likes of any of those mentioned, and if you're keen on gauging them by success (which you are only keen on doing to try to bring the Emperor down a notch), then Ragnos is a moron in comparison.

Yes the dark side clouds the judgment of the Jedi, but that isnt necessarily due to Palpatines mastery of the force. Its the nature of the dark side to do this, “The dark side clouds everything. Impossible to see the future is.”

To attribute the shroud that had fallen over the Jedi's eyes to the dark side alone is ridiculous. The shroud had fallen, explicitly, during Attack of the Clones -- corroborating the Complete Visual Dictionary's statements about Palpatine's power "growing" -- with ill effects seen before The Phantom Menace. To attribute this to the dark side is a fallacy, as the dark side has always been present, yet the shroud was not.

Who would win in combat is the more relevent issue. Hence this forum is called, the versus forum.

That is not the issue. In fact, as I recall, you were keen on making it an issue of power regarding Ragnos and Masters Tinn, Kolar, and Fisto, were you not? Based on statements and 'feats', it can be inferred that Ragnos is the more powerful Force sensitive, but you can't conclusively prove (or come close at all, really) that he could defeat those three in lightsaber combat.

Raw power is a strong indicator though and I'll grant that it is usually enough to determine who would win in a duel. As for Palpatine though, he hasnt shown that much raw power at all during his conquest of the galaxy. Surely we can establish that the majority of the work was done by clone troopers or other factions and that Palpatine succeeded in his plan mostly by manipulation and political skill. He didnt walk in to the Senate and dominate their minds into submission....he won their support and trust with his schemes of pitting the Separatists against the Republic while he was controlling both sides.

But as previously explained, Darth Bane has demonstrated a comparable intellect and affinity for manipulation. And Palpatine did not conquer the galaxy strictly and only through political means. But he didn't conquer the galaxy. According to the sources, he was incapable of embracing the dark side fully or returning the Sith from hiding.

Bane wouldnt of had access to Count Dooku either, who along with Anakin were both more powerful than anyone Bane would have access to. I agree that they may have not been absolutely necessary, but they certainly helped.

He had Zannah, Great Vengeance. Please don't shade truths, or this will be a remarkably brief argument. Count Dooku nor Anakin Skywalker were necessary to Palpatine's plan.

No one is arguing that Darth Bane was a good guy, but Palpatine takes evil to a whole other level.

This is subjective. Nowhere is it established that Bane was nicer or "less evil" than Palpatine, even though I'm sure we'd all agree that he was.

And yes Bane never conquered the galaxy, but again that doesnt necessarily mean Palpatine was more powerful. Political skill would be far more valuable in that endeavour, and Palpatine was a great politician. That Bane had the same level of intellect as Palpatine is yet to be established. Also there are other factors, the republic may not have been as ripe to be taken over during Banes era.

Bane's intellect in comparison with the Emperor's has been established. He also arranged for the creation of a vast syndicate of contacts and informants and manipulated his fellow Dark Lords of the Sith. As far as corruption and the Republic are concerned, Palpatine facilitated much of the problems that occured within the Senate and the galaxy, and the statement refers to power. Nowhere does it state that Palpatine conquered the galaxy because he happened to be at the right place in the right time. That's a dead argument.

And with respect...you dont seem to have a solid understanding of what the burden of proof means. We arent necessarily arguing that Bane is more powerful than Sidious, we only have contentions with the arguments you are using to prove Sidious is more powerful than Bane. When a question of the validity of your argument is raised, it is your burden to prove or else your argument invalidates itself. We dont need to *prove* that your points are wrong in the absence of proof from your side of the argument.

Advent posted that she felt that Sidious wasn't superior to Bane and the Ancient Sith. She made the mistake of revealing her agenda and if she wishes to contest the sources, it is her burden to prove. She is brilliant and a truly superior logician, but she's never going to make it through this one.

The GL statement only designates Anakin as the most powerful of the ROTS period. I would also like the source on where GL said that the prequel trilogy was the prime of the Jedi, using his exact words. Im not necessarily calling you a liar but I want to be sure you arent using your own interpretations of what he said instead of what he actually said.

I will get you your source.

A statement from Windu is fallible, especially when the statement concerns the entire history of the Jedi. Anakin may or may not have *deserved* master, but the quote you used as proof designates that he was the most powerful knight, not the most powerful of the masters. And since nearly all of the most powerful Jedi of the order were masters, this quote is inadequate proof.

You were implying that it didn't apply to Masters. As previously stated, though, through thought and deed, Anakin was a better fighter and more powerful than the vast majority of the ranked Jedi Masters in the galaxy at the time. That isn't up for debate.

Great Vengeance, respond to my post.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Oh, NO! A Sith master being BETRAYED at a fatal moment! Who'd EVER have seen THAT coming?!

Palpatine. Vader. Death Star. Railing. One-handed.

/end

Considering at that point, he was out of his mind with anger, devoting himself to Battle Meditation as well and had every reason to believe Vader was whipped.
But yes, he screwed up. So did Revan. Difference? Who has battle precog?

Originally posted by Lightsnake
Considering at that point, he was out of his mind with anger, devoting himself to Battle Meditation as well and had every reason to believe Vader was whipped.
But yes, he screwed up. So did Revan. Difference? Who has battle precog?

It just seemed like you were holding that against Revan (I drew that conclusion because of the sarcasm you used). And wanted to point out that just about every Sith genius poised to conquer the galaxy or maintain control of the galaxy (including Palpatine) has had that happen to them.

Seems like a very old and cliched recycling of a storyline if you ask me. Why can't someone get beat fair and square for once? lol

EDIT: I could see something like that going down.

Sith Lord (talking to an old Sith Spirit): So, you almost took over the galaxy. Where did you go wrong?

Sith Spirit: Well...I kind of...um. The Republic had ships. A lot of them. And they were really good.

Sith Lord: So wait...you weren't betrayed? You didn't attack with inferior numbers? No Jedi screwed up your battle meditation?

Sith Spirit: ....*small voice* No. They sort of just...beat me.

Sith Lord: Wow. You suck. Bye.

Caedus got owned, legitimately, though.

Caedus is less of a "real" Sith than Krayt. Figures that he'd suck that badly at taking over the galaxy. He shouldn't count. [/bias and unwarranted hate]

Was this the thread Gideon was being obnoxious on? I DON'T KNOW.

Gideon, go find it so I can do bad things to you.

Originally posted by Faunus
Was this the thread Gideon was being obnoxious on? I DON'T KNOW.

There's a thread where Gideon isn't being obnoxious? 😈

That's not exactly the case, though, is it? We've already established that Palpatine and Darth Bane both share two great advantages: incredible intellects and the fact that they can maneuver undetected. Bane could have gotten himself elected, don't you think? He had a wealthy and influential alter ego, much like Darth Sidious.

Bane can't do what Sidious did becuase he lacks the ability to hide his force signiture. If he walked up to the jedi temple, they'd know who and what he was and would send out about 200 jedi to butcher him.
Mabye the power that Sidious was born with was the ability to move around with his force sig hidden, like Zannah was able to use the speels etc, he too possessed similar knowledge.

And the power, too. Notice Bane wasn't the one with the power born to achieve anything for them?

And now that you have been chased all the way around the argument, you go back to the beginning. You havent proven anything, Im not going to go through the same arguments all over again. You believe that Sidious is stronger than Bane because Bane didnt take over the galaxy, I pointed out that Bane hasnt been shown to have political skill on the level of Palpatine and you cannot refute it. I dont even need to prove the point you see, the fact that you cant come anywhere close to eliminating the possibility invalidates your convoluted argument that Bane not taking over the galaxy means he was weaker. The end.

Please explain how this has nothing to do with the Dark Side power, thanks.

Do explain how it does have something to do with actual power, thanks. The burden of proof is on you, it was your point.

So he's a failure as a Sith, then? Ok.

Oh, NO! A Sith master being BETRAYED at a fatal moment! Who'd EVER have seen THAT coming?!

Irrelevent misdirection.

No, I'm going to give it to him because he has the quotes I don't.

And how does this translate to you being able to back up your own claims?

Whereas you've got double standards, continuously say something with no support...Yoda's quotes on the 'nature of the Dark Side' in an ambiguous context>>>All.

Im not using double standards. I already explained that Yodas quote was simply an observation on the nature of the force, not nearly as fallible as comparing individual power levels over thousands of years. But if you want to be that anal about it, the Yoda quote isnt even necessary because you havent come close to proving that Sidious clouding the force is due to raw power or mastery and its your point to prove.

And Kas'im even tells him that he's holding back from the Dark Side and until he stops that, more training is worthless

You attributed Banes victory over Sirak to embracing the dark side, I showed you that you were wrong, lets not get off track here. And you cant be serious, after being so anal about the Yoda quote which was a simple observation of the nature of the force, you expect me to accept a vague quote from Kas'im that is clearly biased as Kas'im *wants* Bane to turn to the dark side?

I knew you'd worm your way around it?

This isn't from Vader's POV.
None of it is. It describes his feelings and the scenario. This is an overview of the entire thing, nOT from Vader's POV. If the NEC says "Anakin feared Padme would die" is that from his POV or just telling us how he feels?It's the former. The entire thing is a sourcebook view, describing the Sith and finally telling us HOW VADER FEELs. How the **** can it be from Vader's POV when there ARE NO POVS?! It ISN'T A WRITTEN SCENE! It is not written from an in universe perspective!
Can you ****ing get this or are you too absolutely biased and stupid?

'HOW VADER FEELS' isnt valid proof of Sidious being the strongest Sith. Yes LS, it is indeed from Vaders POV because of the key word *imagined*. The narrator is able to omnisciently explain how the character feels though it isnt necessarily correct because the line of thought belongs to the character and not the narrator.

"RIGHT PLACE RIGHT TIIIIIIME!" </people with no knowledge of the subject>
Who helped the Trade Federation to power? Oh yeah. Who had the Clone Army created? OH YEAH! What's weaker: Corrupt Republic, or crumbling Republic recovering from massive war? Oh yeah

The Trade Federation was already in power. Hence the statement they made in TPM that they shouldnt of made their deal with Palpatine. Prove that the technology for creating a clone army existed in Banes time period.

And guess what? You're just as wrong as ever!

Oh, do shut up AND STOP BEING AN IDIOT
It says RIGHT ****ING AFTER that 'Now he is dead and events will unfold.' This means it applies ONLY to then. It is a quote NOT mentioning of all time. IT says Ragnos WAS the most powerful and NOW he is dead.
Am I using words that are too big for your mind? Am I speaking a language other than English? Are you totally incapable of reading anything or just admitting when you're wrong?
It says that NOW Ragnos is dead and he WAS the most powerful...but wait, travellers are arriving! Could it be that quote WON'T APPLY to later times and doesn't mean a ****ing thing when we stop taking into account the Ancient Empire? Is this clear enough for you now?

yeah, which is why he immediately goes on to detail that he's only talking about that present time....if Marka WAS the most powerful and NOW he is dead, kindly detail how that applies to anything in the future?
No wonder Gideon loses patience with you so much.

Disproven. Already.
Primarily because you're an overly biased fool

LS, look at the paragraph again. The most powerful of the most powerful quote isnt even directly connected to the other things the narrator says. Its self contained by two periods. Not that it matters, the narrator speaking of some relevent events in the present doesnt necessarily limit the narrators praise of a certain character to that time period. Think before you respond to this, Im just about done refuting the same arguments over and over again.

No, she wasn't. She was a full Dark Jedi years earlier and has spent years studying at Ragnos's feet.
And Ragnos was nowhere near his prime? He had a Sith Sword that sucks the force out of people, a decently powerful body for his power and Korriban empowering him.
Proof ragnos wasn't at his prime, too. NOW

She studied under Ragnos? Really? Despite the fact that he wasnt brought up from the dead until after he was infused with the energies of the staff? With the game being nearly over by then?

And do I really need to reiterate my argument *again*? Heres a copy and paste. "And how did Ragnos get his ass kicked on Korriban? He had lost his body parts which effects force power greatly as confirmed in the case of Anakin, possessed Tavion who is a weakling on her own, and his ghost has been decaying for 5000 years. That argument isnt going to fly, sorry. "

Yeah, it's not like Odan is having dreams of the Empire itself, as everything else says he did. Nope, it's just RAGNOS!

Odan says that he feels the force trembling. In the background we see Ragnos' spirit. Seems pretty damn conclusive to me.

Prove. How. He. Died. Or. Shut. Up.
For all you know, he didn't HAVE a deathbed
Prove how Ragnos died.
Ok. Shut up.

And how he died is relevent how? Whether if it was natural, or from a heart attack it was clearly not due to somone killing him. Otherwise the new DLoTS would be clear.

Because they're the only Sith to that point? Can you get any dumber?

How are they the only Sith to that point? Did you forget about your own point, Darth Ruins empire?

Prove it. Ragnos himself says "Look at our EMPIRE..." before describing it as a Golden Age.
Why would ruling a backwater corner of the galaxy be more of a golden age as opposed to ruling most of the galaxy?

That Ruin>Ragnos? Ruin's Empire is directly stated to have surpassed the Ancient Empire of old.
Get. Over. It.

At its height during the New Sith Wars, it was even greater than the old Sith Empires of Naga Sadow and Darth Revan; following the Battle of Mizra and during the Republic Dark Age, it encompassed a great percentage of the known galaxy.

Actually Ragnos doesnt. He talks about how great the empire is, and *then* in a seperate quote he says that this is the Golden age of the Sith.

And nice double standards. Your questioning why the author would designate Ragnos' empire as the Golden age of the Sith, yet did Lucas define his terms when he said that the PT was the prime of the Jedi?

By you being a biased idiot, perhaps. To anyone else? No.
It's the narrator describing Yoda such. All yoda realizes is he can't win.

The whole passage is based on Yodas knowledge from Yodas POV.

"It came when the avatar of light resolved into the lineage of the Jedi; when the lineage of the Jedi refined into one single Jedi. It came when Yoda found himself alone against the dark. In that lightning-speared tornado of feet and fists and blades and bashing machines, his vision finally pierced the darkness that had clouded the Force.

Finally, he saw the truth.

This truth: that he, the avatar of light, Supreme Master of the Jedi Order, the fiercest, most implacable, most devastatingly powerful foe the darkness had ever known... just-didn't-have it.

He'd never had it. He had lost before he started. He had lost before he was born."

*YODA found himself alone against the dark*
*HIS vision finally pieced the darkness that had clouded the Force.*
*Finally, HE saw the truth.*
*This truth: that HE, the avatar of light, Supreme Master of the Jedi Order, the fiercest, most implacable, most devastatingly powerful foe the darkness had ever known... just-didn't-have it.*

It's proof that since the majority of them weren't skilled, the 'Prime' being the greatest must come from the leaders. You judge an era by its best

So your argument is that since most of the PT Jedi werent that strong the best of them must overcompensate to make the statement true? This is some of the most convoluted reasoning Ive ever encountered. And you havent even properly defined what the prime of the Jedi even means, your argument is going nowhere.

Guess what?
His opinion>>>>>Yours.
Couple that with all the absolute canon, and oh dear, you look rather stupid don't you?

He is still fallible. You havent given any absolute canon. Oh dear, you look rather stupid dont you?

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
And now that you have been chased all the way around the argument, you go back to the beginning. You havent proven anything, Im not going to go through the same arguments all over again. You believe that Sidious is stronger than Bane because Bane didnt take over the galaxy, I pointed out that Bane hasnt been shown to have political skill on the level of Palpatine and you cannot refute it. I dont even need to prove the point you see, the fact that you cant come anywhere close to eliminating the possibility invalidates your convoluted argument that Bane not taking over the galaxy means he was weaker. The end.

And you cant be serious, after being so anal about the Yoda quote which was a simple observation of the nature of the force, you expect me to accept a vague quote from Kas'im that is clearly biased as Kas'im *wants* Bane to turn to the dark side?

'HOW VADER FEELS' isnt valid proof of Sidious being the strongest Sith. Yes LS, it is indeed from Vaders POV because of the key word *imagined*. The narrator is able to omnisciently explain how the character feels though it isnt necessarily correct because the line of thought belongs to the character and not the narrator.

The Trade Federation was already in power. Hence the statement they made in TPM that they shouldnt of made their deal with Palpatine. Prove that the technology for creating a clone army existed in Banes time period.

LS, look at the paragraph again. The most powerful of the most powerful quote isnt even directly connected to the other things the narrator says. Its self contained by two periods. Not that it matters, the narrator speaking of some relevent events in the present doesnt necessarily limit the narrators praise of a certain character to that time period. Think before you respond to this, Im just about done refuting the same arguments over and over again.

She studied under Ragnos? Really? Despite the fact that he wasnt brought up from the dead until after he was infused with the energies of the staff? With the game being nearly over by then?

And do I really need to reiterate my argument *again*? Heres a copy and paste. "And how did Ragnos get his ass kicked on Korriban? He had lost his body parts which effects force power greatly as confirmed in the case of Anakin, possessed Tavion who is a weakling on her own, and his ghost has been decaying for 5000 years. That argument isnt going to fly, sorry. " [/B]

He still lost. WOWSERS!

Go on, make an actual argument for Ragnos being above Palpatine. The Ancients as a whole were weaklings of no significant ability. Palpatine had all their knowledge, knowledge of the Jedi and a million worlds besides plus everything that had been created since. His displays of power surpass anything Marky has shown.

Logically speaking, Palpatine owns Pinky-boy.

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
Odan says that he feels the force trembling. In the background we see Ragnos' spirit. Seems pretty damn conclusive to me.

"It came when the avatar of light resolved into the lineage of the Jedi; when the lineage of the Jedi refined into one single Jedi. It came when Yoda found himself alone against the dark. In that lightning-speared tornado of feet and fists and blades and bashing machines, his vision finally pierced the darkness that had clouded the Force.

Finally, he saw the truth.

This truth: that he, the avatar of light, Supreme Master of the Jedi Order, the fiercest, most implacable, most devastatingly powerful foe the darkness had ever known... just-didn't-have it.

He'd never had it. He had lost before he started. He had lost before he was born."

*[B]YODA found himself alone against the dark*
*HIS vision finally pieced the darkness that had clouded the Force.*
*Finally, HE saw the truth.*
*This truth: that HE, the avatar of light, Supreme Master of the Jedi Order, the fiercest, most implacable, most devastatingly powerful foe the darkness had ever known... just-didn't-have it.*

Seems he has some grounds...

So your argument is that since most of the PT Jedi werent that strong the best of them must overcompensate to make the statement true? This is some of the most convoluted reasoning Ive ever encountered. And you havent even properly defined what the prime of the Jedi even means, your argument is going nowhere.

He is still fallible. You havent given any absolute canon. Oh dear, you look rather stupid dont you? [/B]

@Gideon

Darth Bane managed to manipulate the entirety of the Brotherhood, including the kraven but brilliant Kaan, as well as establish a vast network of spies and informants across the galaxy. I mean, really, Great Vengeance, what do you want, here? Palpatine and Bane have been both established to be geniuses according to the canon, but the fact that Palpatine manipulated events to ascend to Emperor of the galaxy is conclusive proof that he is smarter than Bane? If you thought arguing relative power levels was difficult, arguing relative intellect between two established geniuses is even more difficult. For example, is Palpatine smarter than Raith Sienar, the prodigiously gifted engineer? Palpatine used Sienar like a pawn for decades, but has never demonstrated incredible engineering ability. Is Palpatine smarter than Grand Admirals Thrawn or Demetrius Zaarin? Marka Ragnos? He succeeded in ways that outstrip the likes of any of those mentioned, and if you're keen on gauging them by success (which you are only keen on doing to try to bring the Emperor down a notch), then Ragnos is a moron in comparison.

With respect, you should of thought of the difficulty in comparing intellects before you started the argument that Sidious > Bane because he could dominate the galaxy and Bane couldnt. That Bane didnt have the intellect of Sidious, one of the best if not the best politician in the mythos, is a clear and distinct possibility. Its your job to refute it if you want to prove your argument that Sidious taking over the galaxy is proof of him being more powerful.

To attribute the shroud that had fallen over the Jedi's eyes to the dark side alone is ridiculous. The shroud had fallen, explicitly, during Attack of the Clones -- corroborating the Complete Visual Dictionary's statements about Palpatine's power "growing" -- with ill effects seen before The Phantom Menace. To attribute this to the dark side is a fallacy, as the dark side has always been present, yet the shroud was not.

Yes the dark side has existed but Palpatine is a manifestation of the dark side. It would seem reasonable to think that his existence would cause the clouding, and Yodas quote supports that. Do you have anything that attributes the power directly to Palpatines mastery? And also you should remember that Zannah was capable of the same cloaking ability that Palpatine had.

That is not the issue. In fact, as I recall, you were keen on making it an issue of power regarding Ragnos and Masters Tinn, Kolar, and Fisto, were you not? Based on statements and 'feats', it can be inferred that Ragnos is the more powerful Force sensitive, but you can't conclusively prove (or come close at all, really) that he could defeat those three in lightsaber combat.

And likewise you cant come close at all to proving that they would defeat Ragnos in combat. I already granted though that power is a strong indicator of who would win in a fight, and if you can show that Palpatine is most powerful than I would concede. But I havent seen evidence of that so far.

But as previously explained, Darth Bane has demonstrated a comparable intellect and affinity for manipulation. And Palpatine did not conquer the galaxy strictly and only through political means. But he didn't conquer the galaxy. According to the sources, he was incapable of embracing the dark side fully or returning the Sith from hiding.

Bane had some ability in this yes. To the same degree? Very questionable. Palpatine may have embraced the dark side more than Bane, but I dont see how this translates to power.

He had Zannah, Great Vengeance. Please don't shade truths, or this will be a remarkably brief argument. Count Dooku nor Anakin Skywalker were necessary to Palpatine's plan.

I'll agree to your logic here.

This is subjective. Nowhere is it established that Bane was nicer or "less evil" than Palpatine, even though I'm sure we'd all agree that he was.

Your right that it is subjective. But lets not lose track of the real issue, its your point that Palpatine embracing the dark side more fully than Bane means he was more powerful, and that the quote refered to a moral issue is a distinct possiblity. Your right that I cannot prove Sidious was more evil than Bane, but you would be even more hard pressed to prove Bane was as evil as Sidious.

Bane's intellect in comparison with the Emperor's has been established. He also arranged for the creation of a vast syndicate of contacts and informants and manipulated his fellow Dark Lords of the Sith. As far as corruption and the Republic are concerned, Palpatine facilitated much of the problems that occured within the Senate and the galaxy, and the statement refers to power. Nowhere does it state that Palpatine conquered the galaxy because he happened to be at the right place in the right time. That's a dead argument.

Banes intellect has not been established to be as high as Sidious. He did nothing on the scale Sidious did. As far as being in the right place at the right time, how would clone troopers have been available in Banes time when its very questionable whether the technology was even available back then?

Advent posted that she felt that Sidious wasn't superior to Bane and the Ancient Sith. She made the mistake of revealing her agenda and if she wishes to contest the sources, it is her burden to prove. She is brilliant and a truly superior logician, but she's never going to make it through this one.

She had opinions, as I do also. I dont recall her putting her opinions into an official stance.

You were implying that it didn't apply to Masters. As previously stated, though, through thought and deed, Anakin was a better fighter and more powerful than the vast majority of the ranked Jedi Masters in the galaxy at the time. That isn't up for debate.

Anakin may have been more powerful than many of the masters in his own time period. However I think you will agree that to say Anakin was the most powerful Knight ever, then to take that quote and say Anakin was the most powerful Master ever, is fallible logic.

Originally posted by Darth Exodus
Bane can't do what Sidious did becuase he lacks the ability to hide his force signiture. If he walked up to the jedi temple, they'd know who and what he was and would send out about 200 jedi to butcher him.
Mabye the power that Sidious was born with was the ability to move around with his force sig hidden, like Zannah was able to use the speels etc, he too possessed similar knowledge.

No.

Why must you three continue to pile on ridiculous excuse after ridiculous excuse to try to nullify the statement? First, Sidious wasn't born with the ability to cloak himself within the Force. Second, it is a Force technique -- that one must learn -- called Quey'tek. Third, Count Dooku, a brilliant speaker and strategist in his own right, has demonstrated mastery of Quey'tek as well.