DE Sidious -vs- The Emperor (Lord Vitiate)

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

Those were perfect clones. Palpatine's clones weren't perfect.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

No, you need to do some digging in this matter.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

Thanks for confirming my intended point. In the nutshell, quality of a clone matters. And Sidious only needed hands to unleash his powers; not his whole body.

And um yeah? Sidious only needed his hands to unleash his powers? So are you arguing that his or Vitiates vast reserves of force powers only comes from their hands?

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

Now imagine, if the whole clone body is engulfed by an extremely potent Force Lightning (described as a swirling storm of pure dark side energies), bombarding it, burning it and working to rip it from inside out. This is the point.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

You are not looking at the picture properly. Palpatine, himself stated that his clones are vulnerable to impact of dark side energies.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

So you wanna play with me in this manner? I can return the favor in extremely worse fashion. My advice; don't.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

Key point: Offensive applications based on pure dark side energies.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

Apples and Oranges. Not even worth replying.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

I knew that you will come up with this kind of interpretation.

"Unfortunately, because the clones are one step removed from the natural life process itself, they are much more vulnerable to the effects of the dark side, and age at an extremely accelerated rate. The only logical solution is to grow many more clones at the same time as backups."

Aging is a separate issue with Palpatine's clones. More notable drawback is that these clones were highly vulnerable to impact of dark side energies.
[b]

Palpatine and the DSSB itself states that the effects of the dark side are the sole things responsible for palpatines aging clone bodies. The more power he exerts, the more it adds to his deterioration.

He isn't as vulnerable to the point as you put it, or his own massive scale force powers would have ripped him to shreds on the spot.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
[B]
You have a point here. However, Vitiate's powers are potent enough to push even masters of Tutaminis to breaking point in seconds. Do the math.
[b]

And Sidious powers are powerful enough to engulf entire planets while rip the fabrics of space and time with ease, whats your point? Both are extremely powerful individuals.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
[B]
Force push is a telekinetic ability. Nothing else.

Some examples of pure dark side energies based powers are Force Lightning, Force Drain and Force Storm.
[b]

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

Kaminoan scientists were famous for creating high quality clones in the whole Galaxy. However, situation changed after the defeat of The Galactic Empire. Resurrected Palpatine wanted a Kaminoan scientist Ko Sai to make clones for him. Unfortunately for him, she committed suicide.[b]

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
[B]
What makes you think that Force Harmony technique wouldn't have worked otherwise?

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

Also, Palpatine had summoned a Force Storm before on Coruscant as far as I remember.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Depends upon how good an individual is able to conceal and/or overshadow the fake-ness of the phantoms/illusions. Vitiate's command of the Force is no joke.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

Hero of Tython, regardless of being immensely powerful and talented, was striking Vitiate's phantoms/illusions during the duel. This suggests that Vitiate successfully concealed and/or overshadowed their fake-ness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuyAfEgYAMo

It starts at 11:50.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Dropped by Best Buy and stumbled across The Old Republic Explorer's Guide, which says that Dromund Kaas "bristles with a strong Dark Side presence that seemingly permeates every rock, vine, and raindrop across the planet."

So does Korriban, and Lehon in PoD. That doesn't make them dark side nexuses.

In DE audio book it was lightning Luke used against Emperor, not Force push:

"LUKE: You forget -- I am a Jedi Master now. And I KNOW something about the Dark Side!

Sound: Luke unleashes his OWN Force lightning on the Emperor. The old (young) man crashes against the wall.
"

Sidious has been cited in multiple sources as the most powerful Sith to have ever existed. I was always under the impression that DE Sidious was an incarnation of Sidious as powerful or more powerful than ROTS Sidious. And the New Essential Chronology stated that "Yoda could not hope to defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history," and that was referring to ROTS Sidious.

Originally posted by -kV-
Sidious has been cited in multiple sources as the most powerful Sith to have ever existed. I was always under the impression that DE Sidious was an incarnation of Sidious as powerful or more powerful than ROTS Sidious. And the New Essential Chronology stated that "Yoda could not hope to defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history," and that was referring to ROTS Sidious.

Those "multiple sources" are "three" to begin with. All are statements from in-universe characters. Two of them don't even refer to Sidious force abilities (alone). And that brings the number of reliable sources proclaiming Sidious is the most powerful (in terms of Force powers) to precisely "zero". And that is already ignoring the fact that all three sources were written, before the invention of Vitiate, making them pretty useless for this very discussion, regardless whether you want to interprete them in favor for Sidious or not.

If you want to listen to the "Official Star Wars Fact File", the "most powerful and dangerous of the Sith Lords" was Exar Kun. You better ignore that information, though. Because if you should ever acknowledge that idea, Gideon will turn up and tell you why the "Official Star Wars Fact File" is wrong when it comes to facts regarding Star Wars.

There are other candidates around for that title, but I guess there is already enough to discuss in this thread here.

Nai
Those "multiple sources" are "three" to begin with.

That would qualifies as multiple, bro.

Nai
All are statements from in-universe characters. Two of them don't even refer to Sidious force abilities (alone). And that brings the number of reliable sources proclaiming Sidious is the most powerful (in terms of Force powers) to precisely "zero". And that is already ignoring the fact that all three sources were written, before the invention of Vitiate, making them pretty useless for this very discussion, regardless whether you want to interprete them in favor for Sidious or not.

Precisely, and we only use statements from in-universe characters when it favors DookuRagnosanyone Nai likesVitiate.

Nai
If you want to listen to the "[b]Official Star Wars Fact File", the "most powerful and dangerous of the Sith Lords" was Exar Kun. You better ignore that information, though. Because if you should ever acknowledge that idea, Gideon will turn up and tell you why the "Official Star Wars Fact File" is wrong when it comes to facts regarding Star Wars.[/b]

Sounds like you and Gideon should get a room. If I might recommend a song for you to play as he penetrates your anal cavity in the soft light of the motel room? You could even whisper the lyrics into his ear as you climax beneath him. I have it on good faith that he would really appreciate that.

A lot.

YouTube video

Originally posted by Nai
Those "multiple sources" are "three" to begin with. All are statements from in-universe characters. Two of them don't even refer to Sidious force abilities (alone). And that brings the number of reliable sources proclaiming Sidious is the most powerful (in terms of Force powers) to precisely "zero". And that is already ignoring the fact that all three sources were written, before the invention of Vitiate, making them pretty useless for this very discussion, regardless whether you want to interprete them in favor for Sidious or not.

If you want to listen to the "[b]Official Star Wars Fact File", the "most powerful and dangerous of the Sith Lords" was Exar Kun. You better ignore that information, though. Because if you should ever acknowledge that idea, Gideon will turn up and tell you why the "Official Star Wars Fact File" is wrong when it comes to facts regarding Star Wars.

There are other candidates around for that title, but I guess there is already enough to discuss in this thread here. [/B]

Multiple is anything above one, so yes, four sources = multiple sources, and they all state that Sidious is the most powerful.

How are the sources "unreliable"?

How is:
"Yoda went after Palpatine in the empty Senate chamber, but could not defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history," unreliable?

The "most powerful" is an all-encompassing description of Sidious's ability regarding both Force & lightsaber; it's not singling out one element. That's just a sentence from the New Essential Chronology- it's not a statement by Yoda for what I know.

Likewise,

"The Rebels were turning out to be more troublesome than many had expected. The Emperor had known it would be thus, of course; the resistance had not been a surprise to him. The Emperor was completely in concert with the dark side of the Force. He was the most powerful Sith to have ever existed." - Death Star

It doesn't seem the Rebels are making this claim, but rather the narrator. Again, not from an in-universe character.

Anyway, you're right about the Fact File. Although I believe the Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia (which was released later) stated something like, "Exar Kun, once the most powerful and dangerous of the Dark Lords of the Sith." That could be interpreted that he was the most powerful until the rise of later, stronger Sith Lords...

Regardless, I'm not in any mood to argue about the validity of sources, though.

You're right that all these sources were written before Vitiate's existence. Does that mean we ignore them? For the purposes of this thread, I think we should put them aside to debate how Sidious could defeat Vitiate. IN MY OPINION, though, if GL canon and numerous book canon state Sidious is the most powerful, and nothing new contradicts those statements, then I hold those to be true over opinion.

The chronology is written from an in-universe perspective: Voren Na'al and the New Republic Historical Council. The other is from Vader's perspective, from the third person limited viewpoint.

Originally posted by -kV-
Anyway, you're right about the Fact File. Although I believe the Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia (which was released later) stated something like, "Exar Kun, once the most powerful and dangerous of the Dark Lords of the Sith." That could be interpreted that he was the most powerful until the rise of later, stronger Sith Lords...

Funny enough, the quote from the Encyclopedia was offered to the forum by Gideon himself.

Ah, in that case, I concede that it wasn't written from an in-universe perspective. Although, I fail to see why a Jedi Council well-versed in history would be unreliable to make such claims.

Really, haha, that is funny. I was on hiatus from KMC during that time. It seemed a lot of stuff happened then from what I have heard.

Originally posted by -kV-
Ah, in that case, I concede that it wasn't written from an in-universe perspective. Although, I fail to see why a Jedi Council well-versed in history would be unreliable to make such claims.

It was a council of historians, not Jedi Knights.

The problem isn't so much that they're absolutely unreliable as it is that one can't be certain if it's true.

I've read somewhere that the in-universe perspective is a tool used by EU authors to more easily scapegoat continuity errors (they can blame it on poor research or missing records).

The problem is when Naisome people are willing to use in-universe sources when it favors their argument and not at other times.

Originally posted by -kV-
Really, haha, that is funny. I was on hiatus from KMC during that time. It seemed a lot of stuff happened then from what I have heard.

I wouldn't know, I only registered this year. haermm

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Precisely, and we only use statements from in-universe characters when it favors DookuRagnosanyone Nai likesVitiate.

No. Even then, we can question those quotes, instead of blindly putting our believes into them. I'm a great fan of analysis performed that way. But if certain individuals make a habit of taking everything within written fiction literal, its fun to watch them worm out of the dead ends they manouvered themselves into with their singlemindedness, when confronting them with quotes that they don't like.

Sounds like you and Gideon should get a room. If I might recommend a song for you to play as he penetrates your anal cavity in the soft light of the motel room? You could even whisper the lyrics into his ear as you climax beneath him. I have it on good faith that he would really appreciate that.

Probably a good idea. But given that Gideon is a huge Journey fan, he's apparently better suited to the recieving part than myself, since that band does clearly write music for girls. Of course, one also needs to consider his personal history with spending time inside other chocolate starfishs, which suggests that he is prone to shove his ferrus cranus in there, rather than his private parts. That doesn't sound like an erotic experience I would enjoy, especially since my final food exit is accustomed to hosting more intelligent visitors - approaching from within.

Back to the topic:

How is:
"Yoda went after Palpatine in the empty Senate chamber, but could not defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history," unreliable?

The "most powerful" is an all-encompassing description of Sidious's ability regarding both Force & lightsaber; it's not singling out one element. That's just a sentence from the New Essential Chronology- it's not a statement by Yoda for what I know.

The New Essential Chronology is written fromt he perspective of an in-universe historian. And while Gideon has attempted to establish the idea, that the context of this comment is a fight, so "power" must refer to Sidious lightsaber and force abilities, he has been pretty much wrong with that contention.
"Context" is a term referring to everything influencing a situation of communication. That situation of communication is not a fight of Sidious and Yoda, but a historian talking about historical events that have happened 60 years in the past. As a result, said historian would be familiar with the events that occured after that confrontation, including Sidious rise to Galactic Rule, including his political and military power.
And now, the role of the historian is the thing that decides the content of the term "power" here. As a scientist, the historian would just pass on data, that can be validated, which is utterly impossible for Sidious force abilities or lightsaber skill in comparison to all other Sith Lords in history. Even so, if only because of the fact, that most of said Sith Lords are completely unknown. So the statement, even if accurate, most likely refers to things that can be validated: military power and political influence.

"The Rebels were turning out to be more troublesome than many had expected. The Emperor had known it would be thus, of course; the resistance had not been a surprise to him. The Emperor was completely in concert with the dark side of the Force. He was the most powerful Sith to have ever existed." - Death Star

It doesn't seem the Rebels are making this claim, but rather the narrator. Again, not from an in-universe character.

The narrator makes clear, that the statement is part of the inner musings of Darth Vader, as Gideon has already demonstrated in his essay.

You're right that all these sources were written before Vitiate's existence. Does that mean we ignore them?

Certainly not. But we should ask, if certain statements contained within those sources can still be accurate, if we know, that they don't take recent events within the expanded universe into consideration.

IN MY OPINION, though, if GL canon and numerous book canon state Sidious is the most powerful, and nothing new contradicts those statements, then I hold those to be true over opinion.

Ultimately, even the contents of those books and even GLs own mind is nothing but opinion. The Star Wars universe, according to some of the persons responsible for its content, is designed in a way to allow such discussions among fans. Since that is the case, we can't be certain about a lot of things, because their is always a way to question them.

Of course, human beings strive for what can be referred to as "certain knowledge". We want some order that can't be questioned, perhabs in form of a hierarchy of Sith Lords with one being on top, that is quaranteed to take down all others. But the SW universe is actively designed in a fashion were we can't have that. And, even ignoring that, it's constantly expanding and evolving, with its history being changed, rewritten and, in parts, completely deleted.

Nai
No. Even then, we can question those quotes, instead of blindly putting our believes into them.

This must be a "do as I say, not as I do" sorta thing, right? Because your vision is about as keen as Stevie Wonder's.

Nai
I'm a great fan of analysis performed that way.

One would think, if that were true, you'd have found a way to practice it over the years. Hilariously, a cursory glance at your post history reveals that you're only ever interested in questioning sources pertaining to a single character.

When Ragnos, Dooku, and now Vitiate are in play? You interpret them as the gospel.

Nai
But if certain individuals make a habit of taking everything within written fiction literal, its fun to watch them worm out of the dead ends they manouvered themselves into with their singlemindedness, when confronting them with quotes that they don't like.

Are you roleplaying as me, here?

Nai
Probably a good idea. But given that Gideon is a huge Journey fan, he's apparently better suited to the recieving part than myself, since that band does clearly write music for girls. Of course, one also needs to consider his personal history with spending time inside other chocolate starfishs, which suggests that he is prone to shove his ferrus cranus in there, rather than his private parts. That doesn't sound like an erotic experience I would enjoy, especially since my final food exit is accustomed to hosting more intelligent visitors - approaching from within.

...I'm glad you finally admitted to receiving. They say it's better to give than to receive, of course, but it sounds like you wouldn't know about that. haermm

Nai
nd while Gideon has attempted to establish the idea, that the context of this comment is a fight, so "power" must refer to Sidious lightsaber and force abilities, he has been pretty much wrong with that contention.

Indeed. Why would power refer to combat prowess when the contest in question is a fight? Wouldn't make any sense at all, really. Yoda fled the fight by virtue of Sidious's command of Republic legislative procedure and rhetorical prowess.

👆

Nai
Ultimately, even the contents of those books and even GLs own mind is nothing but opinion.

Except, of course, when it undermines a character youone doesn't like.

Indeed. Why would power refer to combat prowess when the contest in question is a fight? Wouldn't make any sense at all, really. Yoda fled the fight by virtue of Sidious's command of Republic legislative procedure and rhetorical prowess.

Originally posted by jadams3928
Sarcasm and the historians' meaning aside, that's precisely why Yoda fled after he fell from the Rotunda.

Sidious's command of Republic legislative procedure and rhetorical prowess were intact and well known to Yoda before the fight even began. The proximate cause for Yoda's retreat was because of a disadvantageous position in the fight.

The disadvantage being the contingent of storm troopers and a lack of lightsaber.

Originally posted by jadams3928
The disadvantage being the contingent of storm troopers

According to...?

Originally posted by jadams3928
and a lack of lightsaber.

Remind me, did he lose it in a political debate or a fight to the death?

If by "lose" you mean "fell off the podium", then you're correct. But if we're playing that game, he technically dominated that fight, symbolized by Sidious' O-Face.

Originally posted by jadams3928
If by "lose" you mean "fell off the podium", then you're correct.

facepalm

I said "lose it" (i.e. the lightsaber).

Originally posted by jadams3928
But if we're playing that game, he technically dominated that fight, symbolized by Sidious' O-Face.

haermm

No, we aren't playing a game. You're currently riding Nai's nuts on a retarded issue because he happens to share your views on another.

Pick another topic to cement your unholy allegiance. Because crediting Yoda's retreat with Sidious's political skills is indefensibly stupid.

Nai: Even though I joined KMC back in 12/05 and have changed my name multiple times, I was on hiatus for several years, including the time when Gideon posted his legendary/notorious essay. I have seen that thread, but haven't actually read through the 12 pages. So when you refer to Gideon, I'm assuming he said similar points in that paper.

Originally posted by Nai
The New Essential Chronology is written fromt he perspective of an in-universe historian. And while Gideon has attempted to establish the idea, that the context of this comment is a fight, so "power" must refer to Sidious lightsaber and force abilities, he has been pretty much wrong with that contention.
"Context" is a term referring to everything influencing a situation of communication. That situation of communication is not a fight of Sidious and Yoda, but a historian talking about historical events that have happened 60 years in the past. As a result, said historian would be familiar with the events that occured after that confrontation, including Sidious rise to Galactic Rule, including his political and military power.
And now, the role of the historian is the thing that decides the content of the term "power" here. As a scientist, the historian would just pass on data, that can be validated, which is utterly impossible for Sidious force abilities or lightsaber skill in comparison to all other Sith Lords in history. Even so, if only because of the fact, that most of said Sith Lords are completely unknown. So the statement, even if accurate, most likely refers to things that can be validated: military power and political influence.

I can see what you are trying to say, but I feel you are over-analyzing the sentence. While the background of many Sith, let alone their abilities, are completely unknown, many powerful figures are known. The exploits, including descriptions of Force mastery and lightsaber prowess, of individuals such as Exar Kun, Revan, Vitiate, and Sidious would definitely be well recognized throughout the annals of history. I think it is safe to say that historians would be able to correctly describe Sidious as the most powerful Sith Lord out of all known in the Order.

Secondly, putting aside his sarcasm, I have to agree with Tempest. The 'fight' between Sidious and Yoda was direct combat, not any engagement over some theater of war or the hall of the Galactic Senate. They are saying that Grandmaster Yoda, for all his skill in the lightsaber and expertise in the Force, could not overcome the Sith considered to be the "most powerful" overall in Force/lightsaber combat. Simply put, having "most powerful" refer to "military power" or "political influence" in that sentence doesn't make any sense - it would be out of context and wouldn't add anything.

The narrator makes clear, that the statement is part of the inner musings of Darth Vader, as Gideon has already demonstrated in his essay.

Do you doubt Vader?

Certainly not. But we should ask, if certain statements contained within those sources can still be accurate, if we know, that they don't take recent events within the expanded universe into consideration.

Ultimately, even the contents of those books and even GLs own mind is nothing but opinion. The Star Wars universe, according to some of the persons responsible for its content, is designed in a way to allow such discussions among fans. Since that is the case, we can't be certain about a lot of things, because their is always a way to question them.

Of course, human beings strive for what can be referred to as "certain knowledge". We want some order that can't be questioned, perhabs in form of a hierarchy of Sith Lords with one being on top, that is quaranteed to take down all others. But the SW universe is actively designed in a fashion were we can't have that. And, even ignoring that, it's constantly expanding and evolving, with its history being changed, rewritten and, in parts, completely deleted.

This is your opinion of how sources should be interpreted, ergo I will not argue against any of this (and I agree with some it as well).

Originally posted by Nai
The New Essential Chronology is written fromt he perspective of an in-universe historian. And while Gideon has attempted to establish the idea, that the context of this comment is a fight, so "power" must refer to Sidious lightsaber and force abilities, he has been pretty much wrong with that contention.
"Context" is a term referring to everything influencing a situation of communication. That situation of communication is not a fight of Sidious and Yoda, but a historian talking about historical events that have happened 60 years in the past. As a result, said historian would be familiar with the events that occured after that confrontation, including Sidious rise to Galactic Rule, including his political and military power.
And now, the role of the historian is the thing that decides the content of the term "power" here. As a scientist, the historian would just pass on data, that can be validated, which is utterly impossible for Sidious force abilities or lightsaber skill in comparison to all other Sith Lords in history. Even so, if only because of the fact, that most of said Sith Lords are completely unknown. So the statement, even if accurate, most likely refers to things that can be validated: military power and political influence.

So what you're saying the historian meant was: "Yoda went after Palpatine in the empty Senate chamber, but could not defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in historyonly sith lord who ruled the galaxy"

Is that what you're saying?