Ranking Tenebrous

Originally posted by Syndicate
Fair enough. I'm simply giving a reason why Sidious would have said that without having truly meant it. It's true it can't be disproved but that's one of the reasons I use to back up my assertion that Sidious was just ego boosting. Along with actual comparitive showings of course.

He had no reason to ego boost in that instance, though, because, again, Anakin was already his apprentice, so he didn't have to earn his loyalty, unlike when the latter was a Jedi.

Originally posted by Syndicate
Like Kas'im being the best duelist in Galactic history in Bane's opinion.

The difference being that Bane logically had no way to make a comparison between Kas'im and other duelists, given his ignorance at the time, i.e. he was just a trainee. On the other hand, Sidious is well aware of the Sith before him, as well as many of their exploits, especially when it comes to more recent history, given that Plagueis would certainly have told him of his master.

True, you could be right, I'm just saying there's no way to disprove it. And there's really no other distinct way to compare Vader's power to Plagueis or tenebrous so that quote is the best we have. @NewGuy01

Originally posted by Nargaroth
He had no reason to ego boost in that instance, though, because, again, Anakin was already his apprentice, so he didn't have to earn his loyalty, unlike when the latter was a Jedi.

The difference being that Bane logically had no way to make a comparison between Kas'im and other duelists, given his ignorance at the time, i.e. he was just a trainee. On the other hand, Sidious is well aware of the Sith before him, as well as many of their exploits, especially when it comes to more recent history, given that Plagueis would certainly have told him of his master.

I'm not saying he couldn't logically know how powerful his predecessors were I'm simply showing you an example of a character being incorrect despite them thinking/stating it in an official novel.

Personally I go by showings/feats/logic and Anakin simply hasn't desmontrated parity let along superiority to later Sith in the Banite line thus the statement cannot be true.

Originally posted by Syndicate
I'm not saying he couldn't logically know how powerful his predecessors were I'm simply showing you an example of a character being incorrect despite them thinking/stating it in an official novel.

Personally I go by showings/feats/logic and Anakin simply hasn't desmontrated parity let along superiority to later Sith in the Banite line thus the statement cannot be true.

Ok, but that wasn't exactly a good example.

If we go by feats, Tenebrous isn't better than Bane, and 18 Bby Vader was more powerful than a guy who could pulverize Inquisitors, which at least rivals Plagueis' feat of nearly atomizing Maladian assassins. Regardless, the statement would be false only if Rots Vader's feats clearly demontrated his upper limits, and if his predecessors did better than him. Bearing in mind that Anakin as a Padawan was capable of moving a massive ship.

But in any other instance? Nah, unless of course feats are the only way to compare certain characters.

Bu logically given the purpose of the Banite line he would be. A mix of logic and feats is what we should use imo.

Sure but it doesn't rival a fight between Plagueis and TPM Sidious being up in the air or in Plagueis's favor according to the author or altering the wheather patters of the planet or shifting the balance of the Force.

RotS Vader doesn't really have upper limits as we saw in the Mortis arc in TCW. We have to assume his standard through his various feats and showings in a relatively standard state.

I'd have to disagree with your procedural but to each his own.

What feats do Plagueis and Tenebrous have that are superior to when Vader blows apart the Lylek's carapace (which is stronger than the armor of the Twi'lek soldiers), and reduces them to gore by pulverizing them, or when he pulls a freighter out of the sky and smashes it into the ground? Both of which were well before his prime.

Originally posted by Syndicate
Bu logically given the purpose of the Banite line he would be. A mix of logic and feats is what we should use imo.

Sure but it doesn't rival a fight between Plagueis and TPM Sidious being up in the air or in Plagueis's favor according to the author or altering the wheather patters of the planet or shifting the balance of the Force.

RotS Vader doesn't really have upper limits as we saw in the Mortis arc in TCW. We have to assume his standard through his various feats and showings in a relatively standard state.

I'd have to disagree with your procedural but to each his own.

Let's clarify that I never said Rots Vader is even equal to Plagueis, hence why I said the quote should apply to most of the Banite line. Btw, Plagueis corrupting a planet is a feat replicated by lesser Force users than Vader, and shifting the balance of the Force was done with the aid of Sidious, so that's not a fair comparison.

Of course I'm referring to normal upper limit, not to feats of potential, otherwise Vader would stomp everyone, lol. The point being, let's say that pre prime Tenebrous lifts 100 tons of rock with ease, whereas Vader lifted 60 tons with effort in his prime. Now, that would be one of the cases where feats contradict hype, and it would be reasonable to question such a quote, at least in the absence of other circumstances.

However, such circumstances don't exist here. I'm just saying Rots Vader is above most of the Banite line, nothing more. And if you want to go by feats, Palpatine's adepts were capable of creating Force storms (i.e. the most dangerous dark side technique), albeit with limited control, so I don't find it unreasonable to say that a far better trained Force user like Vader would rival Tenebrous after decades of training, even when assuming he wasn't supposed to surpass his master.

Also, bear in mind that 18 Bby Vader was above a guy who could pulverize Inquisitors, a feat that rivals Plagueis' atomization showing (albeit I'm not saying Vader, even in his prime, is above or even equal to the latter) and by this time his power was considerably below hid Rots self, meaning the latter could do much better, which imo lends credibility to the idea Rots Vader is above most of the Banite line.

Originally posted by Nargaroth
and by this time his power was considerably below hid Rots self

Well he trained the guy who trained the guy that was Sidious so he's alright. And he has red force lightning which is badass.

Originally posted by Nargaroth
Let's clarify that I never said Rots Vader is even equal to Plagueis, hence why I said the quote should apply to most of the Banite line. Btw, Plagueis corrupting a planet is a feat replicated by lesser Force users than Vader, and shifting the balance of the Force was done with the aid of Sidious, so that's not a fair comparison.

Of course I'm referring to normal upper limit, not to feats of potential, otherwise Vader would stomp everyone, lol. The point being, let's say that pre prime Tenebrous lifts 100 tons of rock with ease, whereas Vader lifted 60 tons with effort in his prime. Now, [B]that would be one of the cases where feats contradict hype, and it would be reasonable to question such a quote, at least in the absence of other circumstances.

However, such circumstances don't exist here. I'm just saying Rots Vader is above most of the Banite line, nothing more. And if you want to go by feats, Palpatine's adepts were capable of creating Force storms (i.e. the most dangerous dark side technique), albeit with limited control, so I don't find it unreasonable to say that a far better trained Force user like Vader would rival Tenebrous after decades of training, even when assuming he wasn't supposed to surpass his master.

Also, bear in mind that 18 Bby Vader was above a guy who could pulverize Inquisitors, a feat that rivals Plagueis' atomization showing (albeit I'm not saying Vader, even in his prime, is above or even equal to the latter) and by this time his power was considerably below hid Rots self, meaning the latter could do much better, which imo lends credibility to the idea Rots Vader is above most of the Banite line. [/B]

It seemed to be what you were implying. Which force users are you referring to? True enough but accomplishing a feat like that even with aid shows a great deal of power in my view.

Fair enough but Vader's hype is that he has the potential to have 80% of RotS Sidious's power and Anakin's hype while sufficient to place him above if he had unlocked his full potential doesn't really mean much since he didn't accomplish comparable feats when in a standard state.

Well we don't know that for sure as we don't what the disparity between each generation of the banite line was. Adepts could create force storms? Can I get the quote/scan for that? Also regardless of the adepts capabilities it doesn't have much to do with Vader's. Vader wasn't capable of producing force energy without external amps due to his cybernetics and plenty of acolytes had abilities that Vader did not though Vader was of course more powerful then them overall.

Who are you referring to? Also what places Vader below his RotS self?

Tenebrous is hardly top 15 material.

Originally posted by Syndicate
Fair enough but Vader's hype is that he has the potential to have 80% of RotS Sidious's power and Anakin's hype while sufficient to place him above if he had unlocked his full potential doesn't really mean much since he didn't accomplish comparable feats when in a standard state.

That some people rank Tenebrous so lowly implies that there's a huge gap between him and Plagueis, which I find strange, but to each their own, I suppose.

Originally posted by Rebel95
He wasn't stated to have the potential of 80% of Sidious, he WAS 80%. In fact, Sidious himself believed that if Vader let go of his past and fully embraced the dark side, he would regain his potential. He believed Vader's restrictions were mental, not physical.

And Lucas outright contradicts that statement so it doesn't matter.