Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

Started by Rogue Gladiator7 pages

Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

(Hello, I'm new here. Long time SW fan.)

Ever since the Revan novel came out, there has been raging amongst the internet about the awe-inspiring capabilities of Lord Vitiate. Here is a gauntlet to test exactly how powerful he really is, in relation to the SW mythos.

Full rest. The battle takes place in the Senate Pod chamber.

1. Anakin (III)
2. Darth Tyrannus
3. Exar Kun
4. Darth Bane (Rule of Two novel)
5. Darth Caedus
6. Darth Sidious (III)
7. Darth Sidious (Dark Empire clone)
8. Luke Skywalker (New Jedi Order)
9. Luke Skywalker (Legacy of the Force)
10. Abeloth
11. Clears

Personally, I would say that Vitiate is defeated at six. Why? Because Sidious is still canonically the most powerful sith lord of all time. You could break suspension of disbelief and say that those sources were written before Vitiate was conceived, but that would not explain the Plageus quote on the back of the hardcover, which lists Plageuis as the "most powerful sith lord who ever lived". The obvious rationalization between this quotation and those attributing the same to Palpatine would be that Plageuis was the most powerful sith before Sidious. Meaning that Palpatine would be at one, and Plageuis at two, for the most powerful sith in the mythos.

Additionally, many of Vitiate's allegedly amazing feats are...overhyped.

Spoiler:
Nyriss admits that his enslave-hundreds-of-sith-at-once feat is an unverifiable legend. After all, if he enslaved and annihilated all life on the planet, which indeed did happen, how does anybody know of it? For all we know, he could have wiped the sith out from orbit, and then have performed the ritual. Additionally, he was disarmed by the Exile. Yes, he was taken by surprise, but Scourge notes that Meetra could have easily enough killed Vitiate, had she not instintually protected Revan instead.
Of course, against I-can-destroy-fleets-with-teraton-level-shields-and-ravage-planets Wankatine, there is really no comparison. But this is merely IMHO.

Anakin, if in teh ZoNe, can take him down. 😮‍💨

Originally posted by axel_jovan
Anakin, if in teh ZoNe, can take him down. 😮‍💨

But if Anakin were in teh ZoNe, he would be above Dooku, correct?

Yes. He's also likely above Kun. Unless he has his amulets.

Re: Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Personally, I would say that Vitiate is defeated at six. Why? Because Sidious is still canonically the most powerful sith lord of all time. You could break suspension of disbelief and say that those sources were written before Vitiate was conceived, but that would not explain the Plageus quote on the back of the hardcover, which lists Plageuis as the "most powerful sith lord who ever lived". The obvious rationalization between this quotation and those attributing the same to Palpatine would be that Plageuis was the most powerful sith before Sidious. Meaning that Palpatine would be at one, and Plageuis at two, for the most powerful sith in the mythos.

You are playing with hyperboles. Their is no definite answer for the claim of the strongest Sith Lord any more and neither is your assertion valid.

Most powerful ever DOES NOT means most powerful up to a point. Common sense.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Additionally, many of Vitiate's allegedly amazing feats are...overhyped. Nyriss admits that his enslave-hundreds-of-sith-at-once feat is an unverifiable legend.

No, you need to read the novel. She made that statement earlier. It is only applicable to the story of Vitiate' rise to power. But do keep in mind that Vitiate did killed Lord Dramath and was recognized as the ruler of Nathema by Marka Ragnos himself.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
After all, if he enslaved and annihilated all life on the planet, which indeed did happen, how does anybody know of it?

Because some individuals investigated that planet afterwards. Meetra Surik also did so after the events of KoTOR II.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
For all we know, he could have wiped the sith out from orbit, and then have performed the ritual.

He destroyed all life on Nathema. End of story.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Additionally, he was disarmed by the Exile. Yes, he was taken by surprise, but Scourge notes that Meetra could have easily enough killed Vitiate, had she not instintually protected Revan instead.

You cannot consider this as an argument. Vitiate was preoccupied with Revan at that moment.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Of course, against I-can-destroy-fleets-with-teraton-level-shields-and-ravage-planets Wankatine, there is really no comparison. But this is merely IMHO.

Vitiate is immortal and capable of unleashing the full power of the dark side. He is among the TOP.

Originally posted by axel_jovan
Anakin, if in teh ZoNe, can take him down. 😮‍💨

Not possible. Anakin will not get a chance to initiate a lightsaber duel. He is done with in this contest.

Re: Re: Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

Yes. He's also likely above Kun. Unless he has his amulets.

Presumably, you are referring to Anakin, if you are responding to me. Uh, BTW, my response was an attempt on sarcasm, on my part. Obviously, Super Saiyan Anakin would be above Dooku because...he looks cooler. Hence, his placement below Dooku implies that he is not "in teh zone". He would also be above not only Kun, but possibly Yoda, given that he handed Dooku his ass far faster than Yoda [almost] did.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
You are playing with hyperboles. Their is no definite answer for the claim of the strongest Sith Lord any more and neither is your assertion valid.

No, really, it isn't. To say one of the most powerful simply defines the person as incredibly powerful. THE most powerful is quite too blunt of a statement here.


Most powerful ever DOES NOT means most powerful up to a point. Common sense.

No, it isn't "common sense". Your statement assumes that the narrator is not only 3rd person omniscient, but that the PoV is beyond time, looking back on all of SW past, present and future. An assumption that has little basis, and, if we go by it, creates a clear contradiction between it and various sources attributing the same to Sidious. Going by my interpretation, there is no contradiction.

No, you need to read the novel. She made that statement earlier. It is only applicable to the story of Vitiate' rise to power.

My god...

Yes, you are right. She made the statement in the middle of her story because Scourge interrupted and questioned its validity. It does not imply that the part of her story after the completely arbitrary point that she made her disclaimer is magically 100% fact. Had Scourge made his comment at the end of the story, she would have said the same thing. You might as well argue that a TV disclaimer that "this tale is a work of fiction" only applies to the title screen that came before it.

Her same reasoning for admitting that it is not verifiable; that there are no witnesses, is just as valid, if not moreso, in the latter portion of her tale.

Keep in mind that Vitiate did killed Lord Dramath and was recognized as the ruler of Nathema by Marka Ragnos himself.

I kept that in mind, and dismissed it because it was completely irrelevant. Nathema was stated to have been a rather unimportant planet anyway, and this "feat" is completely unquantifiable.

Because some individuals investigated that planet afterwards. Meetra Surik also did so after the events of KoTOR II.

He destroyed all life on Nathema. End of story.

Yes, but how is the question. Nowhere can the "he dominated their minds through his own raw power!" statement ever be verified, because the only witnesses are dead. There is no possible way that Nyriss could have learned of this factually.


You cannot consider this as an argument. Vitiate was preoccupied with Revan at that moment.

Of course. I stated this myself. But he well knew that there was more than one assassin out to get him, so a lack of battlefield awareness does not speak well about his combat experience.

Vitiate is immortal

Completely irrelevant. He is immortal to aging (and even then, this isn't absolute, probably, given that he "slowly" feeds off of a finite set of stolen Force energy), but unless if the battle lasts for decades, I don't see your point here.

and capable of unleashing the full power of the dark side. He is among the TOP.

WTF is this? "capable of unleashing the full power of the dark side"? 🤣

Am I getting trolled here?

I'm liking this new guy.

Anyway, I'd say he stops at 6.

Re: Re: Re: Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
No, really, it isn't. To say one of the most powerful simply defines the person as incredibly powerful. THE most powerful is quite too blunt of a statement here.

Yes, you are. Their is no definite answer for the claim of the most powerful Sith Lord any more. The 'most powerful ever' label can be valid for only one individual and not for several. Since more then one individual have been labelled as such, therefore, my point is valid.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
No, it isn't "common sense". Your statement assumes that the narrator is not only 3rd person omniscient, but that the PoV is beyond time, looking back on all of SW past, present and future. An assumption that has little basis, and, if we go by it, creates a clear contradiction between it and various sources attributing the same to Sidious. Going by my interpretation, there is no contradiction.

Do some digging on the meaning of the word ever.

If it was stated that Plagueis is the most powerful Sith Lord up to his time, then your assertion would have been valid. However, the author used a hyperbolic statement to describe his position.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
My god...

Yes, you are right. She made the statement in the middle of her story because Scourge interrupted and questioned its validity. It does not imply that the part of her story after the completely arbitrary point that she made her disclaimer is magically 100% fact. Had Scourge made his comment at the end of the story, she would have said the same thing. You might as well argue that a TV disclaimer that "this tale is a work of fiction" only applies to the title screen that came before it.

Her same reasoning for admitting that it is not verifiable; that there are no witnesses, is just as valid, if not moreso, in the latter portion of her tale.


Parts of her story have been verified through other sources within the novel. This is sufficient evidence. And being a member of the Dark Council, she is privileged with knowledge that others wouldn't be unless they are Dark Council members themselves and have investigated Nathema.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
I kept that in mind, and dismissed it because it was completely irrelevant. Nathema was stated to have been a rather unimportant planet anyway, and this "feat" is completely unquantifiable.

You cannot dismiss it, genius.

Because Revan also confirmed that Vitiate killed Lord Dramath;

"His name was Lord Dramath the Second. A thousand years ago his father, the original Lord Dramath, ruled over a planet called Medriaas. He was overthrown by another Sith named Lord Vitiate, who renamed the planet Nathema. With his father’s death, the younger Lord Dramath fled. He hid on Rekkiad with a handful of loyal followers, and when he died they buried him here with the datacron." (Source: SWTOR - Revan)

In addition, Marka Ragnos granted the title of Lord Vitiate to Tenebrae (the original name of the Sith Emperor).

OWNED.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Yes, but how is the question. Nowhere can the "he dominated their minds through his own raw power!" statement ever be verified, because the only witnesses are dead. There is no possible way that Nyriss could have learned of this factually.

Their is no way to dismiss it either. Nyriss was close to Vitiate. She wasn't a fool.

Also, Vitiate has demonstrated plenty of mind dominating feats during KoTOR period.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Of course. I stated this myself. But he well knew that there was more than one assassin out to get him, so a lack of battlefield awareness does not speak well about his combat experience.

Well, Sidious was taken down by a blaster fire from Han Solo. Doesn't bodes well for him either. Get the point?

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Completely irrelevant. He is immortal to aging (and even then, this isn't absolute, probably, given that he "slowly" feeds off of a finite set of stolen Force energy), but unless if the battle lasts for decades, I don't see your point here.

He has plenty of power to complement his immortality as well. He did not lasted so long by just talk.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
WTF is this? "capable of unleashing the full power of the dark side"? 🤣

Am I getting trolled here?


No, you are being exposed;

A tremor rippled through the air as the Emperor unleashed the full power of the Force against the defenseless droid. (Source: SWTOR - Revan)

Originally posted by ares834
I'm liking this new guy.

If on the basis of his intellect, then bad choice.

Originally posted by ares834
Anyway, I'd say he stops at 6.

No, Vitiate clears this stage.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Yes, you are. Their is no definite answer for the claim of the most powerful Sith Lord any more. The 'most powerful ever' label can be valid for only one individual and not for several. Since more then one individual have been labelled as such, therefore, my point is valid.

No, your point involves the dismissal of several OOU sources because they contradict one another. Mine contains no contradictions. No dismissal of canon is needed. The best theory fits with the facts. Next.

Do some digging on the meaning of the word ever.

If it was stated that Plagueis is the most powerful Sith Lord up to his time, then your assertion would have been valid. However, the author used a hyperbolic statement to describe his position.

Ah. So when Kas'im was suggested to be the most skilled swordsman ever in PoD, this obviously means that he is better than Yoda and Skywalker. Got it.

And we should certainly sue AT&T for claiming in one of their commercials that their phones are their fastest ever. Or Jeep, for calling one of their products the most rewarded of its class in history. After all, we know that this claim equates to past, present and future!


Parts of her story have been verified through other sources within the novel. This is more then enough evidence. And being a member of the Dark Council, she is privileged with knowledge that others wouldn't be unless they are Dark Council members themselves and have investigated Nathema.

[I'll ignore your clear goalpost shift.]

And yet she states that Vitiate does not want his secret to be revealed. And that she discovered it herself. Translation: Vitiate told no-one. Nyriss discovered it herself, and then heard about Vitiate's life story from somewhere other than Vitiate himself.

Pg 131, Hardcover version, Star Wars: Revan

The Emperor erased Nathema from the history books and the astrogation charts to hide all evidence of his crimes.

...The journey is long, and we must be certain that the Emperor never finds out. Traveling to Nathema is punishable by death. [Nyriss speaking]

Obviously, Vitiate just openly shared Nathema's story with the Dark Council...yet made traveling to it punishable by death, including by members of the Council. If you actually read the book, you clearly didn't understand it.

You cannot dismiss it, genius.

Because Revan also confirmed that Vitiate killed Lord Dramath;

"His name was Lord Dramath the Second. A thousand years ago his father, the original Lord Dramath, ruled over a planet called Medriaas. He was overthrown by another Sith named Lord Vitiate, who renamed the planet Nathema. With his father’s death, the younger Lord Dramath fled. He hid on Rekkiad with a handful of loyal followers, and when he died they buried him here with the datacron." (Source: SWTOR - Revan)

In addition, Marka Ragnos granted the title of Lord Vitiate to Tenebrae (the original name of the Sith Emperor).

OWNED.

...

Let's examine my statement again:


I kept that in mind, and dismissed it because it was completely irrelevant. Nathema was stated to have been a rather unimportant planet anyway, and this "feat" is completely unquantifiable.

Now, either you are being brutally dishonest, or your grasp of the English language is horribly lacking. Let's presume that Vitiate did actually kill Dramath (likely, although I fail to see how Revan would know any more than Nyriss on this), and that he did get named ruler of Nathema by Ragnos (certain). It's still irrelevant. He killed a no-name sith and was made ruler of an explicitly stated unimportant planet. Palpatine killed three celebrated swordsmen of the Order in seconds, and was the first sith Emperor to rule over the entire galaxy. Random sith vs powerful Jedi, and later (partially) Yoda. Ruler of Nathema vs ruler of the galaxy.

Pg 155:

Remember, he was not the Emperor back then. He was merely Lord Vitiate, ruler of a single planet of no particular importance.

You're just digging your own grave here.


Their is no way to dismiss it either. Nyriss was close to Vitiate. She wasn't a fool.

What, you think she sat down with Vitiate to drink some tea while he revealed his greatest secret? Like, the on that Nyriss stated Vitiate did not want anyone knowing?

Additionally, your argument is a strawman. It cannot be confirmed nor dismissed, unless if more information becomes known, at the moment. That was my point. If it cannot be confirmed, it cannot be used as evidence. Point.


Also, Vitiate has demonstrated plenty of mind dominating feats during KoTOR period.

OHMEGOD! He has demonstrated "plenty of mind dominating feats during KoTOR period"! I concede the debate. You win.


Well, Sidious was taken down by a blaster fire from Han Solo. Doesn't bodes well for him either. Get the point?

Sidious was dying in Empire's End. IIRC, he wasn't aware of Solo's presence, either (although I may be wrong on this). Vitiate had his lightsaber drawn.

He has plenty of power to complement his immortality as well. He did not lasted so long by just talk.

Of course he does. But now you're backtracking from making a completely irrelevant statement just to juice up the guy's resume.


No, you are being exposed;

A tremor rippled through the air as the Emperor unleashed the full power of the Force against the defenseless droid. (Source: SWTOR - Revan)

Oh my god! He unleashed the full power of the Force "against the defenseless droid"! And Revan waz teh heart o teh Force, and Obi Wan was a vessel of teh Force!

By the way, have you wondered where that quote likely got its inspiration from? Watch the confrontation between Palpatine and Yoda again. When Sidious first blasts Yoda at the beginning, listen carefully to what he is saying.


If on the basis of his intellect, then bad choice.

No, Vitiate clears this stage.

Somebody help me here. Either you are an idiotic douche, or you're trolling me, in which case you're still an idiotic douche.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

I wouldn't say that Vitiate's powers were over-hyped, if we approach it logically, it all makes sense.

He was born on Sith planet with strong darkside presence, it allowed him to develop much earlier. At the same time he was Force gifted with consuming life energy of others like Nihilus and mind influence, which is lethal mix of talents that gave him power beyond his potential.

The Stih Lords he called for ritual were heartbroken and scared making it much easier to bend their will. Palpatin was able to twist mind even of the Chosen one, so it is not something overly incredible.
Those Sith were actually helping him to perform ritual thinking that it was for their benefit.
For thousand years he lived on Dromund Kaas. The very planet was consumed by darkness that belonged to him, so it is another reason for him to be so much stronger.

Again he was able to mind dominate Revan and Malak because they were already too exposed to darkside.

I doubt that he would win Kun as he, also, was heavily imbued beyond his potential and on top of that could use lightsaber.
Caedus has versatility to defeat him.
I think he would win Sidious prior to Mace fight but after order 66 with exhilaration of victory Palpatine became much stronger. Luke is out of question, he was designed to fight overpowered foes.
Don't see him standing any chance without lightsaber against Abeloth.

Ragnos solos.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
No, your point involves the dismissal of several OOU sources because they contradict one another. Mine contains no contradictions. No dismissal of canon is needed. The best theory fits with the facts. Next.

What is the fact? Your opinion? I don't think so.

And canonical contradictions are not new in case of Star Wars mythos. My point is that you shouldn't rely upon hyperboles too much.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Ah. So when Kas'im was suggested to be the most skilled swordsman ever in PoD, this obviously means that he is better than Yoda and Skywalker. Got it.

Again, their is no definite answer for this case. Some canonical sources promote Luke as the greatest swordsman in the whole Star Wars mythos.

IMO, Kas'im was the most skilled swordsman in his time and can be considered as among the most skilled in the whole mythos (Logical deduction on the basis of canonical information at hand.)

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
And we should certainly sue AT&T for claiming in one of their commercials that their phones are their fastest ever. Or Jeep, for calling one of their products the most rewarded of its class in history. After all, we know that this claim equates to past, present and future!

Marketing hypes, unless proven.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
And yet she states that Vitiate does not want his secret to be revealed. And that she discovered it herself. Translation: Vitiate told no-one.

Because knowledge of Vitiate' actions on Nathema might have alienated his followers, if openly known.

Here;

Scourge finally understood why Nyriss and the others wanted to take the Emperor down. Destroying your enemies—even destroying a planet—was understandable. But this wasn’t simple destruction. It was annihilation; obliteration. The very fabric of the Force had been shredded. Anyone capable of turning an entire planet into a nihilistic abomination had to be completely mad. (Source: SWTOR - Revan)

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
...

Let's examine my statement again:

Now, either you are being brutally dishonest, or your grasp of the English language is horribly lacking. Let's presume that Vitiate did actually kill Dramath (likely, although I fail to see how Revan would know any more than Nyriss on this), and that he did get named ruler of Nathema by Ragnos (certain).


Are you implying that both Revan and Nyriss are wrong now? 🙄

Revan also investigated Nathema and had access to datacron of son of Dramath, who was buried on Rekkiad.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
It's still irrelevant. He killed a no-name sith and was made ruler of an explicitly stated unimportant planet.

It is not irrelevant. Revan' findings support Nyriss' story on rise of Vitiate to power on Nathema. Vitiate killed Lord Dramath in the process.

And 'unimportant planet' is not a valid argument, genius. Nathema is important for debate on Vitiate.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Palpatine killed three celebrated swordsmen of the Order in seconds, and was the first sith Emperor to rule over the entire galaxy. Random sith vs powerful Jedi, and later (partially) Yoda. Ruler of Nathema vs ruler of the galaxy.

I am not comparing Dramath with any other individual. I am talking about validity of Nyriss' story.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
You're just digging your own grave here.

Yeah right. 🙄

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
What, you think she sat down with Vitiate to drink some tea while he revealed his greatest secret? Like, the on that Nyriss stated Vitiate did not want anyone knowing?

She investigated Nathema, genius.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Additionally, your argument is a strawman. It cannot be confirmed nor dismissed, unless if more information becomes known, at the moment. That was my point. If it cannot be confirmed, it cannot be used as evidence. Point.

Then don't openly dismiss it, genius. Try to keep an open mind.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
OHMEGOD! He has demonstrated "plenty of mind dominating feats during KoTOR period"! I concede the debate. You win.

You lost before you even began.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Sidious was dying in Empire's End. IIRC, he wasn't aware of Solo's presence, either (although I may be wrong on this). Vitiate had his lightsaber drawn.

Sidious was still in fighting condition. My point is that don't use 'surprise factor' as an argument.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Of course he does. But now you're backtracking from making a completely irrelevant statement just to juice up the guy's resume.

I am not backtracking from anything. Immortality is not a joke; it reflects on Vitiate' power in the grand picture. You need a brain to comprehend this.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Oh my god! He unleashed the full power of the Force "against the defenseless droid"! And Revan waz teh heart o teh Force, and Obi Wan was a vessel of teh Force!

By the way, have you wondered where that quote likely got its inspiration from? Watch the confrontation between Palpatine and Yoda again. When Sidious first blasts Yoda at the beginning, listen carefully to what he is saying.


I don't care about where Drew got this inspiration from. You need to differentiate between opinion of a character about himself and the 3rd party narration.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Somebody help me here. Either you are an idiotic douche, or you're trolling me, in which case you're still an idiotic douche.

You are being exposed. Don't cry, please.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
What is the fact? Your opinion? I don't think so.

No, it's called Occam's Razor, combined with the fundamental principle that the best theory is the one that best fits with the facts. Really, I'm not making this idea up.


And canonical contradictions are nothing new in case of Star Wars mythos. My point is that you shouldn't rely upon hyperboles too much.

So when wikipedia lists Everest as the tallest land mountain in the world, it's obviously hyperbole. Because blatant statements as to somebody being the most powerful are obviously "hyperbole". And this "hyperbole" was used in the same manner by various different authors in various different sources.

Yet obviously, "unleashed the full power of the dark side" is completely literal.

Again, their is no definite answer for this case. Some sources promote Luke as the greatest swordsman in the whole Star Wars mythos.

No, none actually confirm this. But various, canon, some OOU sources confirm Sidious to be the "most powerful sith who ever lived". Fact. Canon.


IMO, Kas'im was the most skilled swordsman in his time and can be considered as among the most skilled in the whole mythos (Logical deduction on the basis of canonical information at hand.)

Point being that the statement involving Kas'im was clearly not referring to, say, Jedi that lived a thousand years after him.

Marketing hypes, unless proven.

Oh, many Jeeps are indeed the most decorated in their class ever. Of course, using your definition of "ever", this would be incorrect, as it would mean "the most decorated jeep past, present and future". By the second definition (read: of the rest of the world), it would simply mean up until the PoV of the narrator. Which in this case is an advertiser with no knowledge of the future.

Because Vitiate' actions on Nathema would have alienated his followers, if openly known. And the very reason that some members of the Dark Counil (during time of Revan) were plotting against Vitiate was what he did on Nathema.

...that's my entire point. Vitiate did not tell Nyriss of his actions, and therefore the fact that she was on the Dark Council and told secrets from the Emperor is, once again, an irrelevant fact on your part.

Revan also investigated Nathema and had access to datacron of son of Dramath, who was buried on Rekkiad.

It is not irrelevant. Revan' findings support Nyriss' story on rise of Vitiate to power on Nathema. Vitiate killed Lord Dramath in the process.

And unimportant planet is not a valid argument, genius.

I am not comparing Dramath with any other individual. I am talking about validity of Nyriss' story.

Ah, so a single portion of the story being correct must mean that the entire story is. Because Achilles possibly did exist, that must have meant that he was dipped in a magical river in the underworld.

Yeah right. 🙄

She investigated Nathema, genius.

So then what exactly was the relevance to mentioning that Nyriss was given information by the Emperor that none others receive, being on the Dark Council? If that information does not include information on Nathema, which it does not, then you just blurted out an irrelevant point.


Then don't openly dismiss it, genius. Try to keep an open mind.

Nowhere do I openly dismiss it. You're the one who regarded it as fact. Next.

You lost before you even began.

I was attempting to sarcastically convey my point, but clearly such means are ineffective with you. Let's examine your statement:


Also, Vitiate has demonstrated plenty of mind dominating feats during KoTOR period.

So all you state here is that he has demonstrated "plenty of mind dominating feats during KoTOR period". At no point do you explain what they are and how they are above Palpatine's.

So let me actually do your own work for you. Vitiate dominated the minds of pre KOTOR Revan and Malak without stirring from his chair. Impressive, probably the most impressive mind-control feat in the mythos. Although, IIRC, Palpatine almost succeeded in dominating Marek a similar way, had it not been for Kota. Yet nothing indicates that Vitiate could mind dominate Palpatine, who turned an entire planet into a barren, dark side infested planet, clouded the minds of ten thousand Jedi and contained such an influence on the minds of the imperial fleet, the fleet at Endor collapsed and went crazy after he died.

Sidious was still in fighting condition. My point is that don't use 'moment of surprise' as an argument.

Sure I can. Sidious was dying as of Empire's End.

Additionally, Vitiate also launched lightning bolts at Revan, who batted one back at him, and it hit him in the chest. Apparently, he didn't have the reflexes to dodge his own attack.


I am not backtracking from anything. Immortality is not a joke; it reflects on Vitiate' power in the grand picture. You need a brain to comprehend this.

Feel free to elaborate on how exactly it "reflects on Vitiate's power in the grand picture". Like, you know, how powerful it will make him compared to Palpatine. Because

Spoiler:
Scourge also became immortal at the end of the novel; does this make him stronger than Palpatine?

I don't care about where Drew got this inspiration from. You need to differentiate between opinion of a character about himself and that of the author about a character.

My god, once again, your ability to read into subtle hints is hilariously bad. Sidious says to Yoda:

Your arrogance blinds you Master Yoda. Now you will experience the full power of the dark side.

So Sidious can do the obviously very literal, and very quantifiable "full power of the dark side" power.

You are being exposed. Don't cry, please. [/B]

🤣

I hate to be the Larry David and curb your enthusiasm, but your opponent is deeply, irretrievably rooted in his belief that Nyriss's account of Vitiate's origin myth is absolutely unassailable and completely accurate. Against such conviction, logic cannot prevail.

Though I commend you for your well reasoned arguments and persistence.

**With a caveat to that, I have to take issue with your faith in the quote from the Darth Plagueis back cover. I would caution you against relying overly on back covers and publisher's summaries, which are surprisingly dubious sources of information and aren't exactly part of the source's content.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

I agree, commendable job new guy.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
No, you are being exposed;

A tremor rippled through the air as the Emperor [B]unleashed the full power of the Force against the defenseless droid. (Source: SWTOR - Revan)[/B]

A-are you actually suggesting that we take this quote literally? That Vitiate is concentrating the Full Power, i.e. the entire might, of the Force aganst a freaking droid?

God god man! Thats crazy even for you!

Originally posted by Herbert Spencer
I hate to be the Larry David and curb your enthusiasm, but your opponent is deeply, irretrievably rooted in his belief that Nyriss's account of Vitiate's origin myth is absolutely unassailable and completely accurate. Against such conviction, logic cannot prevail.

My point is that Nyriss is currently the best source we have for background account of Vitiate. Whether it is 100% true or not is another topic. However, parts of her story have been supported by other sources; investigation of Nathema by other characters and their findings.

Therefore, it is not wise to outright dismiss the account of Nyriss. It is logical fallacy unless a canonical source comes out and overrules Nyriss' account. We have to work with what we have got.

Originally posted by Herbert Spencer
Though I commend you for your well reasoned arguments and persistence.

Yeah! Very well reasoned, indeed. Most of his comments are based on absolute dismissal of Nyriss' narrations. 🙄

Originally posted by Nephthys
I agree, commendable job new guy.

His arguments appeal to only those who are PT/OT and later era fanboys. 😉

Originally posted by Nephthys
A-are you actually suggesting that we take this quote literally? That Vitiate is concentrating the Full Power, i.e. the entire might, of the Force aganst a freaking droid?

God god man! Thats crazy even for you!


The intended message of this statement is that Vitiate is immensely powerful in the Force. Just take this statement in this sense.

Theres a reason why we don't treat hyperbole as solid proof or any kind of proof at all really, because its very hard to gauge in scale. What does 'unleashing the full power of the Force' actually mean? Nothing really. Its just a fanciful way of saying that the attack was 'powerful.' Great.

In other words, that you champion Vitiates hyperbole while dismissing Sidious being the Most Powerful Ever for being hyperbole is laughably two-faced of you.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lord Vitiate vs Gauntlet

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
No, it's called Occam's Razor, combined with the fundamental principle that the best theory is the one that best fits with the facts. Really, I'm not making this idea up.

Best theory? You are taking a hyperbolic statement very seriously. Star Wars and LOGIC don't complement each other very often. It is science fiction. Take it as such.

Now what has plagueis done that puts him above Vitiate? Any amazing combat feats?

Just watch the ownage Vitiate extends to 4 powerful Jedi simultaneously;

YouTube video

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
So when wikipedia lists Everest as the tallest land mountain in the world, it's obviously hyperbole. Because blatant statements as to somebody being the most powerful are obviously "hyperbole". And this "hyperbole" was used in the same manner by various different authors in various different sources.

Genius, Everest is CONFIRMED as tallest mountain in the world. This is the difference. Their is no hyperbole in this statement.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Yet obviously, "unleashed the full power of the dark side" is completely literal.

It gives you some 'reality check' about Vitiate' command of the Force.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
No, none actually confirm this. But various, canon, some OOU sources confirm Sidious to be the "most powerful sith who ever lived". Fact. Canon.

Listen genius, all of those sources are OLD. Plagueis novel is relatively new and he is claimed to be as such as well - hmm! I get the picture. So which source we should trust?

Why do you think that their is no OFFICIAL ranking of Jedi and Sith on the OFFICIAL Star Wars website?

In SW-TCE; Yoda is still stated to be the strongest Jedi even when updated information of Luke is in it (up to LOTF period, I believe). Should we all accept that Yoda > Luke?

Their was a time, when Sidious got the label of the strongest Sith Lord ever. However, now more are getting similar labels - this is not even funny.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Point being that the statement involving Kas'im was clearly not referring to, say, Jedi that lived a thousand years after him.

Then choice of words are wrong or hyperbolic, as I am pointing out.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Oh, many Jeeps are indeed the most decorated in their class ever. Of course, using your definition of "ever", this would be incorrect, as it would mean "the most decorated jeep past, present and future". By the second definition (read: of the rest of the world), it would simply mean up until the PoV of the narrator. Which in this case is an advertiser with no knowledge of the future.

Yes, POV of the narrator is the thing here. POV can differ from person to person. While POV of narrator has merit; we have to focus on the BIG PICTURE by ourselves.

Do you believe that when authors are writing novels, they take a good look at other materials? They don't usually. This is why we have contradictions in Star Wars mythos.

It should be made mandatory that if an author is writing a Star Wars novel, he or she should check all relevant materials properly. Unfortunately, this does not happens usually.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
...that's my entire point. Vitiate did not tell Nyriss of his actions, and therefore the fact that she was on the Dark Council and told secrets from the Emperor is, once again, an irrelevant fact on your part.

But Nyriss investigated Nathema. She can't dig out some information on her own? This is where you are wrong.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Ah, so a single portion of the story being correct must mean that the entire story is. Because Achilles possibly did exist, that must have meant that he was dipped in a magical river in the underworld.

Not single but several parts of the account given by Nyriss have been validated by other sources.

For example:

- Marka Ragnos granted the title of Lord Vitiate to Tenebrae.
- Tenebrae became the ruler of Nathema.
- Revan' findings confirm that Vitiate killed Lord Dramath during his rise to power.
- Meetra Surik' investigation confirms that Tenebrae did invite many Sith Lords to Nathema.

And you know the rest.

So if several parts of the account are being validated, then what is the issue here? Yes, not every bit of the account is confirmed but nonetheless, we have some information from Nyriss to consider (as she got that information from somewhere). It is logical fallacy to outright reject/dismiss her account.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
So then what exactly was the relevance to mentioning that Nyriss was given information by the Emperor that none others receive, being on the Dark Council? If that information does not include information on Nathema, which it does not, then you just blurted out an irrelevant point.

We don't know exactly what information Vitiate shared with Dark Council members. However, Nyriss investigated his past on her own. Being a member of the Dark Council, she would have access to sources that other individuals wouldn't unless they are members of the Dark Council too. Get the memo?

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Nowhere do I openly dismiss it. You're the one who regarded it as fact. Next.

This;

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
I kept that in mind, and dismissed it because it was completely irrelevant. Nathema was stated to have been a rather unimportant planet anyway, and this "feat" is completely unquantifiable.

You are clearly dismissing supportive material of Nyriss account - even if it only confirms a part of it.

And you have also dismissed the 'entire account' as unverified legend;

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Yes, you are right. She made the statement in the middle of her story because Scourge interrupted and questioned its validity. It does not imply that the part of her story after the completely arbitrary point that she made her disclaimer is magically 100% fact. Had Scourge made his comment at the end of the story, she would have said the same thing. You might as well argue that a TV disclaimer that "this tale is a work of fiction" only applies to the title screen that came before it.

Her same reasoning for admitting that it is not verifiable; that there are no witnesses, is just as valid, if not moreso, in the latter portion of her tale.

This is what I find troublesome. Parts of her account have been verified through other sources. Their is equal likelihood that the remaining part of her account is also true. Nyriss is not sure but she shares what she knows. (Us) readers are not in the position to dismiss her account outright, when we can notice that parts of her account have been verified and we don't have any other source that contradicts or overrules Nyriss' findings as a whole. Get the point?

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
I was attempting to sarcastically convey my point, but clearly such means are ineffective with you. Let's examine your statement:


Also, Vitiate has demonstrated plenty of mind dominating feats during KoTOR period.

So all you state here is that he has demonstrated "plenty of mind dominating feats during KoTOR period". At no point do you explain what they are and how they are above Palpatine's.


I have my share of lengthy debates on this subject.

Sidious has never demonstrated the capability to turn a powerful opponent in to his mental slave during combat situation. Period.

In contrast, Vitiate has.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
So let me actually do your own work for you. Vitiate dominated the minds of pre KOTOR Revan and Malak without stirring from his chair. Impressive, probably the most impressive mind-control feat in the mythos. Although, IIRC, Palpatine almost succeeded in dominating Marek a similar way, had it not been for Kota.

No, Sidious did not mind dominate Marek.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Yet nothing indicates that Vitiate could mind dominate Palpatine, who turned an entire planet into a barren, dark side infested planet, clouded the minds of ten thousand Jedi and contained such an influence on the minds of the imperial fleet, the fleet at Endor collapsed and went crazy after he died.

Sidious certainly has great command of mind tricks. On sheer scale, he may trump all others. However, his mind dominating capabilities have been mostly effective against weak individuals and not so on strong individuals.

Here is another evidence of Vitiate' mind domination:

YouTube video

Warren Sedoru is one of the 4 Jedi and that Vitiate overwhelmed with his powers (first video provided above). Vitiate mind dominated all of them in the process as well.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Sure I can. Sidious was dying as of Empire's End.

Sidious was not dying. His cloned body was decaying and he was still strong enough to fight. Their is difference. And even in weakened state, getting owned by Han Solo does not bodes well for the supposedly all-powerful Sith. Once again! Don't use surprise factor as an argument.

If this is the case then you should know that Vitiate can create illusions of combatants with the Force. He can fool his opponents by doing so and take advantage. Get the point?

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Additionally, Vitiate also launched lightning bolts at Revan, who batted one back at him, and it hit him in the chest. Apparently, he didn't have the reflexes to dodge his own attack.

Sidious got kicked by Mace Windu during his duel and lost his balance. Very sad for the supposedly lightning fast Sith who cannot even avoid a kick. Don't give lame arguments.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
Feel free to elaborate on how exactly it "reflects on Vitiate's power in the grand picture". Like, you know, how powerful it will make him compared to Palpatine. Because
Spoiler:
Scourge also became immortal at the end of the novel; does this make him stronger than Palpatine?

Vitiate made Scourge immortal. Also, Vitiate will not die even when his physical body is destroyed unless his essense itself is contained.

Originally posted by Rogue Gladiator
My god, once again, your ability to read into subtle hints is hilariously bad. Sidious says to Yoda:

Your arrogance blinds you Master Yoda. Now you will experience the full power of the dark side.

So Sidious can do the obviously very literal, and very quantifiable "full power of the dark side" power.

🤣


Genius, that is Sidious' personal opinion.

In contrast, similar assertion for Vitiate is from author' POV, which has more merit.