Agreed. Bane has shown impressive feats in the EU, but people forget that Vader has too. Everyone thinks that Vader is weak to lightning, but I'm sure he learned a way to counter it like Obi-Wan did. Also, Vader takes a rediculous amount of lightning from Starkiller in TFUII and he didn't die, only fell to his knees.
Even if you guys wanted to use all the stuff from tfu and the other stuff that he couldnt do in the movies, at best you can argue that vader beats him in just one areA - TELKINESIS, BUT EVen that is doubtful and at very least bane will rival him. However, bane on the other hand has extreme speed feats, can use force storm, not to mention the sith sorcery he apparently uses in the third book. and this is when we cripple bane without orbaliskjs. So how does vader, who by comparison is basically a one trick pony, comapres in the lsightest?
Basically I have only ever seen TL feats from Vader and I think we can believe that Vader at very least rivals him in this area,while being much more impressive in others.
Drawing on TFU feats is a dead argument. If you want to exclude them because of their incompatibility with the films, we'll be doing that for all EU regardless of time period, given that a cogent argument cannot be provided for the discrepancy.
With respect to Bane vs. Vader, ares834 has pointed out that Vader's speed is nowhere near as lethargic as some might suggest, and there's no evidence that Bane would blitz a Force user of Vader's caliber.
That just means that there have been a fee Force Users throughout history that are more powerful than the Jedis in the films. Nothing wrong with that, TUF on the other hand has the same Jedis we see in the films doing stuff they could never do in the films.
And for the record even since the PT was released George has said that the slowness we see in the OT were accurate.
No. Not only is there no evidence to suggest Force users from preceding eras were stronger by virtue of chronological placement, the Bane books remark that the dark side was in fact weaker due to broad dissemination among a large group of Sith. Consequently, the fact that the Sith numbered two during the films and Palpatine's machinations pulled a shroud of the dark side over the galaxy, the expectation would be that the Sith of the film era would be stronger.
If you had some evidence to suggest greater midi-chlorian counts or something similar, I'd consider it. As it stands, you're seeking to confuse a stylistic discrepancy for an accurate reflection of the quality of Force users when there's nothing to suggest it.
The argument is rejected.
With respect to Lucas's decision, he would later add include comparatively fast cyborgs and old men in the prequels, obviously relegating his remark as an offhand one that has as much basis as his quip that Anakin's scar resulted from a slip in the bathtub as opposed to Ventress. Clearly it was reflective of a limitation in choreography.
A lot of Banes best feats cpome from when he was on planets where there werent any siths however, and plus following path of destruction the rule of two was nomore where he goes on to do some of his best feats.
Only eveidence i need is the Jedis and Siths of old performing much better feats than those from the movies.
As much as I do not condome Battlemasters insults to Darth Power she has a point when she points out that Vader is compeltely different type of cyborg to Grievous, and that his core is human, whereas Grievous is all robot. And second comment is clearly joke by george. And prove that old men being fastis not an exception but a rule, please.
Vader has also been trained by who many consider to be the most powerful Sith of all time. Bane was trained in an era that, as The Tempest pointed out, was actually weaker in the Dark Side. Palpatine and Vader brought the power of the Dark Side to it's highest in many mellenia. Vader made Kota look like a rag doll. The same Kota who was standing against the "all powerful" Starkiller. And Vader stalemated Starkiller for a while in the book. Vader also killed many Jedi in the EU alone. The 501st only showed up at the END of the Kessel trap! Vader Killed most of them alone. He regarded the 501st as if he didn't need their help and was surprised by their arrival.
Originally posted by Darth _Sadow1
Vader has also been trained by who many consider to be the most powerful Sith of all time. Bane was trained in an era that, as The Tempest pointed out, was actually weaker in the Dark Side. Palpatine and Vader brought the power of the Dark Side to it's highest in many mellenia. Vader made Kota look like a rag doll. The same Kota who was standing against the "all powerful" Starkiller. And Vader stalemated Starkiller for a while in the book. Vader also killed many Jedi in the EU alone. The 501st only showed up at the END of the Kessel trap! Vader Killed most of them alone. He regarded the 501st as if he didn't need their help and was surprised by their arrival.
Only a fool would think that Sidious at the times that he was Vaders master was the most powerful sith of all time. DE, possibly, but in the movies he was pretty weak. Have you even played the Kotor games? Nihilus would be the most powerful.
Nebaris
A lot of Banes best feats cpome from when he was on planets where there werent any siths however, and plus following path of destruction the rule of two was nomore where he goes on to do some of his best feats.
Irrelevant, the sentiment remains. Bane never ascribes the condition to be confined by geography, but that the dark side is weakened entirely by Kaan's Sith. Consequently, the feats of film!Sith should be in excess of the feats we see in Path of Destruction. The fact that they aren't, by strict viewing of the films, further illustrates that it is simply a stylistic choice.
Nebaris
Only eveidence i need is the Jedis and Siths of old performing much better feats than those from the movies.
Which is the result of a stylistic choice. Darth Maul, wounded, ragdolls a spaceship in TCW, which is in far excess of anything we see from any Jedi or Sith from the films. Yet we know from his upcoming battle with Sidious that, even with Savage Opress on his side, he's no match for his former Master.
Attempting to conflate style with quality is doomed to fail.
Nebaris
As much as I do not condome Battlemasters insults to Darth Power she has a point when she points out that Vader is compeltely different type of cyborg to Grievous, and that his core is human, whereas Grievous is all robot. And second comment is clearly joke by george.
The fact that Vader is a trained Force user and has access to an abundance of midi-chlorians whereas Grievous does not is further proof that Vader should be faster.
Nebaris
And prove that old men being fastis not an exception but a rule, please.
Certainly. Four elderly Force users have been portrayed in combat throughout the films: Dooku, Sidious, Yoda, and Obi-Wan. Of the four, only old!Obi-Wan has demonstrated lethargic reflexes and fighting prowess. Of the four, he is the only one shown fighting in the original trilogy.
Logically, it is a limitation of choreography, as the majority of elderly Force users in combat are portrayed to be highly adroit.
Nebaris
Or the Jedis were weaker.
I said Sith, not Jedi. The Bane trilogy establishes that the dark side is stronger when utilized by fewer Sith. Ergo, the Sith of the films should be at the very least comparable to Bane and Zannah, and well in excess of Kaan's mooks.
Again, the argument that older Force users are better is rejected.
In that case then you haves to accept that the presence of The Lost tribe of the Sith would mean that the Siths from the mvoies would also be under the same limittation.
More Jedis form the movies doing stuff in Eu they cannot do.
But Vader is similar to Yoda given that he has to expemd a lot fo Force energy just to mvoe his old body. Yoda is able to mvoe a sfats as he does because he is sitll much more poweul than vader, plus vaders robotic parts is bigger hidnrance.
Sidious was also slow, and plus, it could just eb that obi-wan is not as powerful as them.
Siths, jedis, whatever. If you want to reject Banes feats from planets where there werent any other siths, then you have to admit that the lost tribe of the sith would have greatly weaknned palpatine.Your choice bro?
Why are you misquoting me?
Few points worth considering about whether the older force users have higher midichlorian counts. Both Bane, and Revan, were suspected of beign the Sith'ari, which was sort of like the Sith Chosen One. Also, given that they were both invited to the House of the Ones of Mortis (in cut content, but is canon) it should show that they liekly had veyr high midichlorian counts. Given that vader lost most of his at Mustafar he was no longer anywhere neart as pwoerful as he could have been.Plus how do you explain people like Nihilus who does not use midichlorians?
Originally posted by TheOneOfMortis
In that case then you haves to accept that the presence of The Lost tribe of the Sith would mean that the Siths from the mvoies would also be under the same limittation.
Sure, but the limitation would be far less given the reduction of Kaan's Sith in addition to Palpatine's machinations drawing a shroud of the dark side over the galaxy, something Bane's era did not have.
Originally posted by TheOneOfMortis
More Jedis form the movies doing stuff in Eu they cannot do.
Which is another demonstration of stylistic variance that pervades the EU and further undermines your argument.
Originally posted by TheOneOfMortis
But Vader is similar to Yoda given that he has to expemd a lot fo Force energy just to mvoe his old body. Yoda is able to mvoe a sfats as he does because he is sitll much more poweul than vader, plus vaders robotic parts is bigger hidnrance.
There is no proof that Yoda is much more powerful than Vader.
Originally posted by TheOneOfMortis
Sidious was also slow, and plus, it could just eb that obi-wan is not as powerful as them.
Sidious moved with far greater speed during his battle with Yoda than he did during his battle with Mace, which is yet another example of stylistic variance within a single film (born from the fact that McDiarmid was doing the lion's share of the battle with Mace whereas a stunt performer donned the Emperor's robe for the clash with Yoda), which is one of the many nails in the coffin of your EU-supremacist argument.
Originally posted by TheOneOfMortis
Siths, jedis, whatever. If you want to reject Banes feats from planets where there werent any other siths, then you have to admit that the lost tribe of the sith would have greatly weaknned palpatine.Your choice bro?
You seem to think I have a problem with that. As you point out, Sidious's feats in the films are low key compared to the surrounding EU. The Lost Tribe's presence is serves as a broad factor for explaining that, but assuming my goal here were to cripple your argument and undermine EU!Bane's feats, then I succeeded.
Thus is the danger of arguing against the films. It's an uphill battle opponents are destined to lose every time.
Originally posted by TheOneOfMortis
Plus how do you explain people like Nihilus who does not use midichlorians?
Simple: Nihilus clearly doesn't exist. The films make it abundantly clear that life cannot exist void of midi-chlorians and only Jedi can remain after death. Nihilus, Vitiate, EU!Sidious, essence transfer, Freedon Nadd, Exar Kun, Marka Ragnos... we can all wave them goodbye.
Nope it is not bout how many there are but the fact that there are lots. Which is case through history, as there have always been at least one army of siths somewhere in the galaxy, from the original schism all the way to the lost trive of teh sith making their rpesence known.
Maybe Palaptine thought that it was just him and his apprentice but he was clearly WRONG. So by your own logic, Palaptine himself was affected by the same weakness that kann and his brotherhood were.
Of course you can admit that you is wrong and accept that as long as they are seperated by at leats a planet then they would not feel the effects, i which case Banes nbest feats of destroying the te,mple, polus the stuff other POD, were all done without that limitatyoon. Your choice.,
Ah my bad, always forget about Sidiouss' speed against Yoda, however that was only visible for seconds, and plus in a way it proves that Sidious was probably goign easy on Mace to turn Ani to the darkside.
So clearly Old Ben just wasn;t as powerful as the likes of Dooku or Sidious, and vader was compeltely different kind of cyrborg to grievous.
Plus you shiuld lso consider that throuygh inbreeding the Lost tribe of the Sith probably greowing in numbers over that epriod, so possibly may have been at their highest numbers around time of Sidious' reign. Which by your argument makes sidious one of the weakest siths in all of history. Zing brother. 😂