FOTJ Luke Skywalker vs DE Darth Sidious

Oh sorry. In that light it just didn't make sense that you brought up the quote at all...

The quote provided by the sourcebook is contestable. We could say it was most likely written as an RPG element, but we don't know for certain; the passage could have been far more specific in that regard. I used it to illustrate Palpatine's ambiguous nature (like that needs any further evidence anyway) and indeterminate level of power. For all we know, Sidious could also travel through time with his Force storms given what transpired with Darth Rivan, or artificially augmented the level of midichlorians in his clone bodies to achieve a greater connection to the Force--although I do not wish to contest these things at the current time as they are mere conjecture.

As a matter of fact, most things appearing in one source have been mentioned by another, so there wouldn't be much of a problem with that line of thought. And it's rather hard to believe that a database lacks... The statistics for it (in 2006) were: * Sources: 1,180 * Images: 9,503 * Characters: 8,742 * Planets: 3,419 * Aliens: 756 * Creatures: 1,255 * Vehicles: 2,716 * Weapons: 1,130 * Groups: 1,641 That are more than 20000 articles where Wookipedia, I give you that, has four times as much, which includes many one liners just referencing another article.

Wrong. There wasn't something like "Sadow's holocron". Sadow left some knowledge in Adas holocron which remained in Sith space (on Ashas Rae more specifically) when Sadow escaped to Yavin 4. Sadow did continue his experiments in Sith Alchemy while exiled, apparently for decades or possible even centuries, with all additional knowledge he gained there not being stored in the holocron.

Originally posted by Borbarad
That's maybe because you were actually stupid enough to compare mocking people to killing people, which led me to assume that you're either 10 years old or make Forrest Gump look like a rocket scientist - with both of said ideas leading to the consideration that every second talking to you is a waste of time. Did I make myself clear?

It's called an analogy.

Originally posted by Borbarad
[B]

Actually, you can find the real reason for me not further responding to you in the paragraph I just typed above. Provided that I'm talking to you, I will make it clear just once again: I consider every second of talking to you a pointless waste of time and I will not engage in such activities, if I have anything better to do. Like, just as example, attempting to teach my goldfish some algebra or how to fly, which - let me put an emphasis on this point once more - would still make more sense than participating in any kind of discussion with yourself.

I hope you got it now because, quite frankly, I'm not willing to paint you a nicely colored picture in order to make you understand.

I'm not the one that said that Sidious would "get smoked in seconds" by any ancient sith.

Hewhoknowsall
@Nai:

So an ad hominem > what you're doing, because an ad hominem is actually talking about the validy of an argument through a semi-valid way, whereas you're throwing out a random insult just for the fun of it, just like how many Sith Lords in Star Wars murder people just for the fun of it.

Eminence, I agree, that is the worst definition of an ad-hominem i've ever seen.

Sorry, I didn't mean that was the entire definition of an ad hominem; it was the part of the definition that differed from what Nai was doing, which Nai himself agreed with.

How 'bout we just do this.

Objection! Wikipedia is not a valid source!

Originally posted by Elok Quintly
Objection! Wikipedia is not a valid source!

This is not the college classroom.

Originally posted by Autokrat
This is not the college classroom.

Originally posted by Elok Quintly
Well, nice to know that we're being somewhat cordial now. I initially brought up the quote not because I'm an irrational Sidious fanboy, but because I believe--similar to Gideon's reasoning--that a true match between Luke and Sidious is an absurd engagement between two characters that are virtual Force deities. They possess powers and knowledge in excess of any other, and this renders both characters "God Mode Sues". Consequently, I also believe determining a clear victor in a hypothetical conflict is nigh-impossible given each characters' propensity for deus ex machinas and plot-induced abilities (or lack thereof). And yes, I am aware these forums and other forums like this make use of feats to establish proof.

See. The problem I have with putting Sidious and Luke on the same level is the fact that Lucas clearly mentioned that Luke has by far more force potential than Sidious which - consequently - regardless of techniques learned or knowledge archieved, should lead to a connection to the force that should enable him to conquer anybody else.

Let me just point to the RotS novel: The end of the duel between Anakin and Dooku is descriped in a fashion, that simply makes Anakin decide how to win and suddenly, all of Dooku's (superior) experience, lightsaber skill and force mastery is effectively nullified by a fraction of Anakin's potential being unleashed. From that perspective, I find it rather hilarious to assume, that there is anybody able to stop Luke if he does use his power. Apparently the "black hole in the center of the Galaxy" is not able to archive that - so why would a force storm do it?

The point here is - pretty much - that Luke, much like Anakin, doesn't have perfect control over his potential (yet), but is still able to use it far better than his farther. So if somebody as good as Dooku wasn't able to stop Anakin after 13 years of Jedi training - how is anybody going to stop Luke after four decades in which he refined his abilities?

Sidious might be one of the most powerful and knowledgeable characters in the mythos - but Luke is technically a walking plot-device that has to be kept at bay by the authors by all kinds of (basically illogical) manouvering. If you don't agree with that, you would have to find a logical way to explain the differences between "what Luke should be" or his "godlike showings" and the instances in which he can't defeat a single droideka.

The quote provided by the sourcebook is contestable. We could say it was most likely written as an RPG element, but we don't know for certain; the passage could have been far more specific in that regard. I used it to illustrate Palpatine's ambiguous nature (like that needs any further evidence anyway) and indeterminate level of power. For all we know, Sidious could also travel through time with his Force storms given what transpired with Darth Rivan, or artificially augmented the level of midichlorians in his clone bodies to achieve a greater connection to the Force--although I do not wish to contest these things at the current time as they are mere conjecture.

As I said before: To me, the statement is meaningless, because it's just some speculation put in a text. When I write a sentence like "It is believed that Alexander the Great was the greatest tactician in history", there might be reason (even clear evidence) for somebody to hold that belief but it may still be entirely false. And ambigiousity doesn't get one anywhere in a debate or in an attempt to determine the knowledge / power / skill held by a certain individual.

We don't know the amount of detail that goes into these entries, however. There has to be some reason why the continuity buffs that write the essential guides would seek knowledge from Wookieepedia.

Well. The holocron database is just used as a instance to control if some work to be released contradicts established canon. I doubt that Leland Chee grants the authors access to the holocron, which includes stuff like production notes written by Lucas himself. And given the Chee's own blog, the information in the holocron appears to be rather detailed in nature.

I'm afraid you are the one that is incorrect. Naga Sadow did create his own holocron, and it is first mentioned in Jedi vs. Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force. Palpatine owns it.

I'm quite afraid, but I think that you are mistaken.
The passage in the Essential Guide to the Force has Sidious saying that he "came across" the knowledge of Sadow in "a holocron" that Sidious has found. Yet the Telos holocron lists Sadow as Gatekeeper and the passage following the words of Sidious has Naga Sadow as author. So Sadow didn't have to construct his own holocron to leave knowledge behind.

That still doesn't affect what I said about the knowledge transfer from Sadow to Sidious. If Sadow had left the knowledge behind while already on Yavin 4, it wouldn't have survived the attack of the Jedi on Exar Kun. So he must have left it behind earlier, which does mean that whatever he learned through his studies on Yavin 4 can't be contained. And it also doesn't change the fact that Sidious couldn't grasp how much of his actual knowledge Sadow left behind.

See. The problem I have with putting Sidious and Luke on the same level is the fact that Lucas clearly mentioned that Luke has by far more force potential than Sidious which - consequently - regardless of techniques learned or knowledge archieved, should lead to a connection to the force that should enable him to conquer anybody else.

but Luke is technically a walking plot-device that has to be kept at bay by the authors by all kinds of (basically illogical) manouvering.

As I said before: To me, the statement is meaningless, because it's just some speculation put in a text. When I write a sentence like "It is believed that Alexander the Great was the greatest tactician in history", there might be reason (even clear evidence) for somebody to hold that belief but it may still be entirely false. And ambigiousity doesn't get one anywhere in a debate or in an attempt to determine the knowledge / power / skill held by a certain individual.

Well. The holocron database is just used as a instance to control if some work to be released contradicts established canon. I doubt that Leland Chee grants the authors access to the holocron, which includes stuff like production notes written by Lucas himself. And given the Chee's own blog, the information in the holocron appears to be rather detailed in nature.

I'm quite afraid, but I think that you are mistaken.
The passage in the Essential Guide to the Force has Sidious saying that he "came across" the knowledge of Sadow in "a holocron" that Sidious has found. Yet the Telos holocron lists Sadow as Gatekeeper and the passage following the words of Sidious has Naga Sadow as author. So Sadow didn't have to construct his own holocron to leave knowledge behind.

That still doesn't affect what I said about the knowledge transfer from Sadow to Sidious. If Sadow had left the knowledge behind while already on Yavin 4, it wouldn't have survived the attack of the Jedi on Exar Kun. So he must have left it behind earlier, which does mean that whatever he learned through his studies on Yavin 4 can't be contained. And it also doesn't change the fact that Sidious couldn't grasp how much of his actual knowledge Sadow left behind.

Ah, but Naga Sadow was too generous with his knowledge. Far more generous than I. Also, despite his powers, he was ultimately undone by his own impatience to expand the Sith Empire. After his death, Sadow's secrets were gained by Freedon Nadd, who passed them on to Exar Kun. Because none of them came to a glorious end, I think it's best that I guard Sadow's teachings a bit longer. However, I am tempted to incorporate some of his findings into my own book, The Creation of Monsters.

This passage insinuates that the same teachings left behind to Freedon Nadd and Exar Kun are within Palpatine's possession. It is not unreasonable to assume that Palpatine, being the thorough archaelogist that he is, has uncovered all existing records of Sadow's findings.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall

I'm not the one that said that Sidious would "get smoked in seconds" by any ancient sith.

Notice how, when I pull out my best arguments, you suddenly stop responding.

That's not really a comeback, that's attacking someone for something they said years ago, when most of the source material we use now wasn't available.

Originally posted by truejedi
That's not really a comeback, that's attacking someone for something they said years ago, when most of the source material we use now wasn't available.

The source material we had years ago about the ancient sith was equal to or LESS than that of today (unless if a lot of it got retconned), so they'd be equal or even MORE unknowns, so it would be even more ridiculous to call them capable of "smoking Sidious in seconds".

we know a lot more about Sidious, and the current Sith, is my point. I believe they took Kreia at her words then, but you are still holding it against them,and using it, as thought it strengthens your own argument (which it DOES NOT) 5 years later.

Originally posted by truejedi
we know a lot more about Sidious, and the current Sith, is my point. I believe they took Kreia at her words then, but you are still holding it against them,and using it, as thought it strengthens your own argument (which it DOES NOT) 5 years later.

So then why doesn't Nai just admit it? He in our PM's continues to stand by his unsupported opinion. I myself admit that I've made mistakes in some of my older debates, and Nai should be willing to do that as well.

Because a lot of star wars comes down to opinion anyway. If he is of the opinion that Kreia was correct, and the source books can be explained away, he is free to do so. gee whiz. This doesn't help your current argument whatsoever. Bringing it up is pointless.

Originally posted by truejedi
Because a lot of star wars comes down to opinion anyway. If he is of the opinion that Kreia was correct, and the source books can be explained away, he is free to do so. gee whiz. This doesn't help your current argument whatsoever. Bringing it up is pointless.

Well, he didn't use Kreia's comments as evidence, and Kreia never said anything remotely implying that Ragnos could "smoke Sidious in seconds"; heck, I'm not sure if she ever mentioned Ragnos.

Anyhow, Luke takes all except for possibly 2 and 5.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Well, he didn't use Kreia's comments as evidence, and Kreia never said anything remotely implying that Ragnos could "smoke Sidious in seconds"; heck, I'm not sure if she ever mentioned Ragnos.

Anyhow, Luke takes all except for possibly 2 and 5.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Stop attacking people for what they said years ago just so you can be right. You don't seem to be someone who condones arguments that are focused around attacking one's opponent's credibility and character. So stop resorting to it. If you want our respect, debate with cold, hard facts. Forget talking about what Nai used to say, or what used to be considered canon. Talk about what's being said NOW.

First of all, what is it with this "condones arguments..."? You took my statement from before COMPLETELY out of context. You should see what context a sentence is in, because otherwise they can have very different meanings. That is one of the most common forms of propaganda. Oh, and I am talking about NOW, because Nai and I were having a debate on Sidious vs Ragnos, and even NOW, using evidence available NOW, still supports Ragnos. And I do always debate using cold, hard facts. I don't remember an argument that I had other than perhaps some of my earlier ones (none of which were in the SW vs forum) in which I didn't have a solid point.

ANYHOW, Luke takes all except possibly 2 and 5.