Originally posted by Kyrie Illunis
You are a liar (and a coward)!The Kaiburr Crystal has appeared in numerous sources, most notably Splinter of the Mind's Eye (which also happens to be its first appearence). According to Glentract Luke kept one half inside his lightsaber and Sidious carried the other half on a pendant (which he later recovered during the Dark Empire saga).
Also, Splinter of the Mind's Eye is c-level canon.
Addendum: The Dark Empire sourcebook and the Dark Empire endnotes all support Palpatine's claim that he is able to conjure the storms with a simple act of will.
And my name is not "Quintus".
Given there are three different types of force storms now, IE:
1. The wormholes Palpatine summons
2. Literal 'storms' in the atmosphere
3. Really, really powerful force lightning bursts
Where are we getting that Nadd knew the first there? Because nothing indicates that. And databook stats are traditionally not even looked at in canon.
Originally posted by Lightsnake
Given there are three different types of force storms now, IE:
1. The wormholes Palpatine summons
2. Literal 'storms' in the atmosphere
3. Really, really powerful force lightning burstsWhere are we getting that Nadd knew the first there? Because nothing indicates that. And databook stats are traditionally not even looked at in canon.
Look at the description, it's quite clearly the same one that Palpatine uses:
**cannot post the link, it's the second image on the first page of this thread and can be found in Weltall's second post**
And it's not a gameplay stat; it's telling you what abilities he possesses in his arsenal while maintaining a storyline context.
Originally posted by Quintus
Addendum: The Dark Empire sourcebook and the Dark Empire endnotes all support Palpatine's claim that he is able to conjure the storms with a simple act of will.
Could you post some specifics? Palpatine himself describes the technique in great detail in the sources that you mention and as he describes it an organised procedure involving the direction of Force energies around the body is required while maintaining a controlled level of anger in its creation ([~]), rather than simply "willing" it into existence.
This, Nebaris, illustrates precisely why no one has bothered to really debate you for years.
Nebaris
Could you post some specifics? Palpatine himself describes the technique
You, employing double standards
If we were to take Palpatine's words at face value and ignore the fact that his statements are subject to hyperbole, dishonesty, or human error (the last one being an admittedly safe assumption in this case, but the former ones not).
You've used this tactic persistently (with little effect) for the entirety of your tenure here. On the one hand, you refuse to take Palpatine's words at face value, regardless off the fact that the words come from his entry into the Telos Holocron. On the other hand, you assume the same man's words to be factual when they're taken from the very same source.
The reason why, of course, is obvious. You accept sources that can be twisted to facilitate your argument while ignoring the rest.
That is why no one regards your conclusions in debates to be valid or factual. Why no one here really regards Darth Bane to be more powerful than the likes of Luke Skywalker; why no one accepts your arguments about the Xenogears saga and Japanese fetish to be accurate. It's not an insult, just an observation.
See through you, we can.
Nebaris
[...]in great detail in the sources that you mention and as he describes it an organised procedure involving the direction of Force energies around the body is required while maintaining a controlled level of anger in its creation ([~]), rather than simply "willing" it into existence.
That Palpatine mentions the philosophical and emotional requisites to summoning Force Storms does not mean that it is a controlled procedure or, to borrow your annoyingly reused phrase, "ritualistic in nature." Palpatine summoning the spirits of ancient Sith Lords and creating ripples in the Force as seen in Sithisis? That's a ritual. Darth Bane being the focal point of a storm of energy that ravaged Ruusan? That's a ritual. Luke Skywalker's telepathic call to the entirety of the Jedi Order? That's a ritual.
A Force Storm, which can be triggered "by mere thought or inclination" is not a ritual nor a controlled procedure. The very same could be said of conjuring Sith lightning, which requires immense anger and willpower.
The human error excuse does not cut it nor does it persuade anyone here of its merit. You've yet to prove your case and instead rely on double standards and fallacies to push your own agenda.
The real tragedy here is whether or not you actually believe what you're spouting.
I'm going to choose to ignore the numerous and ridiculous misdirective strategies, with a quick reminder that Xenogears' position as the greatest piece of fiction ever written -- with its only rivals being six other works that were developed by some of the same storytellers and designers -- doesn't have to be agreed upon to remain factually correct.
Originally posted by Kyrie Illunis
Could you post some specifics? Palpatine himself describes the technique in great detail in the sources that you mention and as he describes it an organised procedure involving the direction of Force energies around the body is required while maintaining a controlled level of anger in its creation ([~]), rather than simply "willing" it into existence.
Where abouts exactly did I take Palpatine's words entirely factually? I asked for specifics, largely because Palpatine's words aren't automatically to be taken at face value, and that I currently don't possess information at hand that can conclusively explain the facts. The reason I brought it up was that its source[s] w[as/ere] the same one[s] that Quintus brought up, and it's doubtful that the same source(s) would give two contradictory accounts of Sidious' use of the ability (even if one account were to have been coming from the omniscient narrator and the other from Palpatine).
You, on the other hand, were treating Palpatine's account of the ability as confirmation that he could summon it in such a way.
So, no double standards.
If we were to take Palpatine's words at face value and ignore the fact that his statements are subject to hyperbole, dishonesty, or human error (the last one being an admittedly safe assumption in this case, but the former ones not).
If this is what you were referring to with the human error excuse, I was simply listing all of the conditions that would naturally cast doubt on character dialogue; I even go out of my way to say that Palpatine's words not being subject to human error in this case would be an admittedly safe assumption (given that he'd clearly be in a position to verify how quickly and easily he could create a Force Storm). The primary conditions that would cast doubt on such an account is that Palpatine's words are entirely subject to dishonesty and hyperbole, but regardless, the point is that third party accounts are not infallible and as such not to be treated as uncontestable fact.
Originally posted by Gideon
That Palpatine mentions the philosophical and emotional requisites to summoning Force Storms does not mean that it is a controlled procedure
Of course not, it's that he mentions an elaborate physical requiste in the form of a precise and controlled motion of energies while maintaining a precise and controlled emotional state that qualifies it as a controlled procedure.
You've yet to prove your case and instead rely on double standards and fallacies to push your own agenda.
I'm actually now genuinely curious as to what fallacies I have been commiting as I must have missed something. Could you point out and name at least one of them?
Originally posted by Kyrie Illunis
I'm going to choose to ignore the numerous and ridiculous misdirective strategies, with a quick reminder that Xenogears' position as the greatest piece of fiction ever written -- with its only rivals being six other works that were developed by some of the same storytellers and designers -- doesn't have to be agreed upon to remain factually correct.
You are claiming, that something completely subjective (worth of a storyline) can be determined to be objectively true?
I personally think the storyline of Planescape: Torment is more entertaining than the storyline of Xenogears.
Is my opinion objectively correct? No, it isn't and neither is your fetish for JRPGs.
And by the way, your assertion that I must be a remarkably passive person because I find the storylines of WRPGs to be more compelling is one of the weakest arguments I've ever seen.
Strawman, much?
It's that you'd have to be an inhumanly passive person to be able to feel completely in control of your character given the limited nature of choice based mechanics. The argument was that WVGRPGs attempts to adapt choice based gameplay into video games makes for a poor roleplaying function given the limited nature of video games. Please, it was all made quite clear.
I personally think the storyline of Planescape: Torment is more entertaining than the storyline of Xenogears.
Well then clearly you've been blessed with absolutely dreadful taste.
The fact of the matter is that by all objective measures, Xenogears's storyline absolutely annihilates Planescape: Torment's; it's far deeper and incredibly more complex, and people that actually have good taste in these matters will recognise its far superior quality and implementation of music, far more captivating setting, better cast of characters, and superior style of storytelling.