Re: Re: Making Sidious canonically the most powerful Siths ever is silly
Originally posted by Nai
Who made Sidious the "canonically most powerful Sith" again, with a clear reference, that this statement includes characters from "Legends"? He is most certainly - at least currently - the most powerful Sith Lord in Disney canon, but that is pretty much irrelevant in terms of the Expanded Universe as it is.
Re: Making Sidious canonically the most powerful Siths ever is silly
Originally posted by Dark-Kenshin
I know it's done because he's an "original" character, but it greatly limits writer creativity and really makes one scratch their head when their appear to be some comparative feats from other characters that calls his dominion into question. Same goes for Luke and Yoda. How about just acknowledging that these characters are unquantifiably pretty powerful and leaving interpretations as to who is the most powerful up to the fans?
Well said. It is so refreshing to see people on this site with actual common sense.
Yes it is silly and I'll tell you why. In an action-based series the opposition is supposed to continually get more powerful so that our heroes continue to be challenged even as they become more experienced and capable. Saying "nobody is allowed to be better than Palpatine" is like saying them main villain in Season 1 is the best/most powerful.
See the problem?
Originally posted by The Ellimist
Otherwise the Chosen One prophecy doesn't make any sense, nor does the Rule of Two really.
Neither of which were present in the Original Trilogy.
Oi. Thanks Ellimist for giving me a chance to completely counter that notion.
Originally posted by The Ellimist
Vader imagined the power that could be his if he crushed Palpatine and established his own rule over the Empire. But first, he would need his own apprentice. By himself, he could not hope to defeat the most powerful Sith Lord the galaxy had ever known.-Vader: The Ultimate Guide
That the quote starts with "Vader imagined..." makes it pretty clear, that this is a representation of the thoughts of the Sith Lord. Character statements aren't "facts", I'm afraid. Furthermore does the fact that Vader thinks about "power that could be his" in case of Sidious death pretty much rule out the idea, that he was making a reference to force powers only - unless Star Wars is part of the "Highlander" series now.
Yoda went after Palpatine in the empty Senate chamber, but could not defeat the most powerful Sith Lord in history.-The New Essential Chronology
And another character statement coming from the historian Voran Na'al, the in-universe author of the Chronology.
Furthermore, it is once again questionable, if "powerful" is a reference to Sidious force abilities only. The statement comes from a historian, who not only lacks proficiency in the Force, but is also a scientist. As such, he would obviously not make a reference to Sidious force powers in that fashion, when clearly lacking data for comparison (read: information regarding the force abilities of other Sith Lords) when he wants to type down facts. And there, Sidious is definitely the most powerful Sith, when we take military power and political influence into consideration, which would be more likely part of the research a historian conducts.
Beyond the vision of the Jedi Knights, somewhere within the darkness, the greatest master of evil ever to use Sith power bides his time. As his strength grows, his plans begin to shape the course of the galaxy, and his snares await the unsuspecting.-The Complete Visual Dictionary
The Visual Dictionary, as is pretty obvious by its very title, does just concern itself with the Visuals aka the movies. Since it doesn't take anything beyond the movies into consideration, Sidious pretty much lacks competition for that title in that particular source.
Even Ulic Qel-Droma would be envious of Palpatine. He had succeeded where all others had failed in taming the Dark Side.-Dark Empire Sourcebook
And sometimes, context is just important. This is a representation of Palpatine's own musings regarding his power, which is pretty obvious, if you do not quote the source out of context. Here it is in his entire glory (Dark Empire Sourcebook, p.37):
The first sentence makes it clear, that we are with Sidious convictions here, which are rather far from reality, which is pretty obvious when you take a look at the last sentence. Sometimes it is better to read for yourself instead of letting others (read: Gideon) feed you their nonsense "interpretations" (read: manipulation through omission) of stuff from the source material.
All of these were published prior to the Disney canon implementation, so they all constitute a part of Legends.
Yup. And none of them include facts that make Sidious "the most powerful Sith Lord". Just the interpretations of in-universe characters on one handside and one source that ignores the EU entirely on the other. Nice try, though.
That the quote starts with "Vader imagined..." makes it pretty clear, that this is a representation of the thoughts of the Sith Lord. Character statements aren't "facts", I'm afraid. Furthermore does the fact that Vader thinks about "power that could be his" in case of Sidious death pretty much rule out the idea, that he was making a reference to force powers only - unless Star Wars is part of the "Highlander" series now.
Those are actually interesting points, Nai, certainly much superior to Beefy's - but you dropped the ball with the Visual Dictionary. Whether or not you think it "only concerns itself with the movies", it's still a part of Legends, prior to the Disney split, and therefore exists within the same continuity as Exar Kun, Naga Sadow, etc. The fact that it doesn't mention them by name is irrelevant - it mentions them implicitly via that statement.
If it really were somehow only referencing some third canon, neither Disney canon nor Legends, where only the six movies exist, why would it be making a claim to Sidious's historical significance at all? There was, as of the in-universe chronology of that quote, only one actual contender (Darth Maul), so it would have been meaningless to fancy about Sidious being the greatest ever if everything that happened before TPM were off-limits to the narrator. Since the narrator is making such a claim, it clearly has that sort of "authority".
To suggest otherwise is like saying that the RotS novelization can't reference events from AotC because it's supposed to only concern itself with Revenge of the Sith. mmm
Originally posted by The Ellimist
Those are actually interesting points, Nai, certainly much superior to Beefy's - but you dropped the ball with the Visual Dictionary. Whether or not you think it "only concerns itself with the movies", it's still a part of Legends, prior to the Disney split, and therefore exists within the same continuity as Exar Kun, Naga Sadow, etc. The fact that it doesn't mention them by name is irrelevant - it mentions them implicitly via that statement.If it really were somehow only referencing some third canon, neither Disney canon nor Legends, where only the six movies exist, why would it be making a claim to Sidious's historical significance at all? There was, as of the in-universe chronology of that quote, only one actual contender (Darth Maul), so it would have been meaningless to fancy about Sidious being the greatest ever if everything that happened before TPM were off-limits to the narrator. Since the narrator is making such a claim, it clearly has that sort of "authority".
To suggest otherwise is like saying that the RotS novelization can't reference events from AotC because it's supposed to only concern itself with Revenge of the Sith. mmm
Are you really that dense?
Let me quote from the introduction of "Star Wars: The Visual Dictionary" which is the second part of the source in question (with some additions):
"High-quality annotated photographs, supported by stills from the movie, explain every important feature of the characters, creatures, costumes, droids, an equipment found in the Star Wars trilogy, the most popular movies of all time."
"The result is a unique and fascinating reference work, that reveals the characters and creatures of the Star Wars movies as the have never been seen before!"
Emphasis mine.
When a source does explicitly limit the items of observation to the movies and the stuff that is directly influencing the movies, then one can't interprete statements in that source as "universal" in a sense that they include the entire EU that was, once again, explicitly removed from consideration by the source. Everything else would be total nonsense.
Furthermore you're quite wrong with your conclusions. The movies do acknowledge Darth Plagueis directly, as do they acknowledge the Rule of Two Sith Order started by Darth Bane (and of course Bane himself), with both Bane and the order being mentioned in the Visual Dictionary as well. So they have at least 1,000 years of Sith Lords to compare Sidious to.
You may also want to notice that "the greatest master ever to use Sith powers" also doesn't translate into "most powerful Sith Lord", but that's just a sidenote.
@Beniboybling
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Within the scope of the old EU continuity there does actually exist what is called "Film Only continuity", but as the name suggests that consists of the films only - the Visual Dictionary is part of the EU/Film + EU continuity.
The Visual Dictionary only considers things that are in the films or directly influence the films. Everything else is excluded from the observation. Which means the entirety of the Ancient Sith, TOR era characters and post-movie era Sith.
One could also just summarize, that whatever isn't directly mentioned in the Visual Dictionary was not taken into consideration when making the Visual Dictionary.
You're not getting it friend, whether or not it's referring exclusively to the movie era is irrelevant; it's still EU material, and it's still part of the old continuity.
Therefore when it says when Palpatine is the most powerful dark sider in history that claim does not exist in a vacuum. It refers to all of history as it exists in the continuity to which it is part of, not just the parts of history that are mentioned. Which yes includes your precious ancient Sith. 👆
Originally posted by Nai
Are you really that dense?
Let me quote from the introduction of "Star Wars: The Visual Dictionary" which is the second part of the source in question (with some additions):"High-quality annotated photographs, supported by stills from the movie, explain every important feature of the characters, creatures, costumes, droids, an equipment found in the Star Wars trilogy, the most popular movies of all time."
"The result is a unique and fascinating reference work, that reveals the characters and creatures of the Star Wars movies as the have never been seen before!"
Emphasis mine.
When a source does explicitly limit the items of observation to the movies and the stuff that is directly influencing the movies, then one can't interprete statements in that source as "universal" in a sense that they include the entire EU that was, once again, explicitly removed from consideration by the source. Everything else would be total nonsense.
🙄
If a history textbook that advertises itself as a recount of 19th century European history proclaims that the British Empire was the largest in human history, this statement extends its domain to, well, all of history. The back cover saying "provides a descriptive account of all of European history from Napoleon through the Industrial Revolution", for example, would have two possible interpretations:
1. The book is focused on talking about the mentioned events, but is not magically excluded from comparing them to past history.
2. The book posits an alternative universe where nothing before the 19th century exists.
More sane minds would choose the first option, but then again, the first option wouldn't create the suitable analogy to satisfy Nai's Exar Kun masturbation. Which is more important, reason or Nai's fantasies? mmm
The pre-Disney Star Wars continuity is one continuous story. The quotes that you reference merely state the obvious - that the Visual Dictionary concerns itself with describing characters from the trilogies. This is ok, because those characters in the trilogies exist in the same universe as said EU characters. Duh. They do not "remove the EU from consideration", they just say that they're going to focus on the movies. Just like the history textbook. This is a more reasonable and parsimonious interpretation with the suspension of disbelief framework than postulating an alternate reality.
You may also want to notice that "the greatest master ever to use Sith powers" also doesn't translate into "most powerful Sith Lord", but that's just a sidenote.
It's the most reasonable and straightforward interpretation, and isn't taken in a vacuum - it happens to match the opinion of several in-universe sources, some I would argue to be out-of-universe (like the Vader Visual Guide, but whatever), and some of which are explicitly out-of-universe in the most literal sense, such as the Insider quote, or to a lesser extent, the back cover of the Plagueis novel. Coincidence? It almost seems like the ancient sith spirits who thought Palpatine was the greatest ever, Darth Vader, that historian, and various others were onto something, and that they happen to align with the most obvious interpretation of the Visual Dictionary's statement counts as strong corroboration of such. You have now been reduced to pulling off ever more elaborate mental gymnastics to suggest otherwise.
Moreover, if we want to follow your own policy of positing psychic divinations of authorial intent, I somehow doubt that the writers of the New Essential Chronology, Vader Visual Guide, etc. were really thinking "well Sidious isn't actually the most powerful sith lord ever, we're really just trying to make a note about unreliable narrators by making Vader, this historian, the ancient sith spirits Nai wanks to, and a bunch of other people delusional"
Originally posted by Beniboybling
You're not getting it friend, whether or not it's referring exclusively to the movie era is irrelevant; it's still EU material, and it's still part of the old continuity.Therefore when it says when Palpatine is the most powerful dark sider in history that claim does not exist in a vacuum. It refers to all of history as it exists in the continuity to which it is part of, not just the parts of history that are mentioned. Which yes includes your precious ancient Sith. 👆
Really?
So I, as an author of a source, proclaim that I will just look at the movies. I write my source, just having looked at the movies an related material. Then I make a statement that, from the material I've reviewed (read: the movies and related material), Sidious is the "greatest master of evil".
Then you come and say: "Hey. I don't care what he looked at. Of course he must have included the entire EU in his point of view, because this source is part of the EU." And that makes sense in your universe?
Originally posted by Nai
Oi. Thanks Ellimist for giving me a chance to completely counter that notion.That the quote starts with "Vader imagined..." makes it pretty clear, that this is a representation of the thoughts of the Sith Lord. Character statements aren't "facts", I'm afraid. Furthermore does the fact that Vader thinks about "power that could be his" in case of Sidious death pretty much rule out the idea, that he was making a reference to force powers only - unless Star Wars is part of the "Highlander" series now.
And another character statement coming from the historian Voran Na'al, the in-universe author of the Chronology.
Furthermore, it is once again questionable, if "powerful" is a reference to Sidious force abilities only. The statement comes from a historian, who not only lacks proficiency in the Force, but is also a scientist. As such, he would obviously not make a reference to Sidious force powers in that fashion, when clearly lacking data for comparison (read: information regarding the force abilities of other Sith Lords) when he wants to type down facts. And there, Sidious is definitely the most powerful Sith, when we take military power and political influence into consideration, which would be more likely part of the research a historian conducts.
The Visual Dictionary, as is pretty obvious by its very title, does just concern itself with the Visuals aka the movies. Since it doesn't take anything beyond the movies into consideration, Sidious pretty much lacks competition for that title in that particular source.
And sometimes, context is just important. This is a representation of Palpatine's own musings regarding his power, which is pretty obvious, if you do not quote the source out of context. Here it is in his entire glory (Dark Empire Sourcebook, p.37):
The first sentence makes it clear, that we are with Sidious convictions here, which are rather far from reality, which is pretty obvious when you take a look at the last sentence. Sometimes it is better to read for yourself instead of letting others (read: Gideon) feed you their nonsense "interpretations" (read: manipulation through omission) of stuff from the source material.
Yup. And none of them include facts that make Sidious "the most powerful Sith Lord". Just the interpretations of in-universe characters on one handside and one source that ignores the EU entirely on the other. Nice try, though.
Originally posted by The Ellimist
🙄If a history textbook that advertises itself as a recount of 19th century European history proclaims that the British Empire was the largest in human history, this statement extends its domain to, well, all of history. The back cover saying "provides a descriptive account of all of European history from Napoleon through the Industrial Revolution", for example, would have two possible interpretations:
1. The book is focused on talking about the mentioned events, but is not magically excluded from comparing them to past history.
2. The book posits an alternative universe where nothing before the 19th century exists.
More sane minds would choose the first option, but then again, the first option wouldn't create the suitable analogy to satisfy Nai's Exar Kun masturbation. Which is more important, reason or Nai's fantasies? mmm
The pre-Disney Star Wars continuity is one continuous story. The quotes that you reference merely state the obvious - that the Visual Dictionary concerns itself with describing characters from the trilogies. This is ok, because those characters in the trilogies exist in the same universe as said EU characters. Duh. They do not "remove the EU from consideration", they just say that they're going to focus on the movies. Just like the history textbook. This is a more reasonable and parsimonious interpretation with the suspension of disbelief framework than postulating an alternate reality.
False analogy (as usual).
The point is, that by limiting the item of consideration to the movies, the author first excludes the EU from his thoughts. We can, therefore, not determine, what part of it he did consider when casting his judgement. The only save assumption is, that he was thinking about the history represented in or in direct link with the movies. The only exceptions would be things that are mentioned within the source.
You, falsely, assume, that the author of the source has universal knowledge of the SW universe, all "masters of evil" therein and their respective power levels. Whether or not this is the case is everyones guess. What we know is, that definitely is, that - going by the release date of the source - SW:ToR was probably excluded entirely from that judgement, including all the new information contained within.
And, ultimately, this is still just the interpretation of the author and not some "fact". So: Who cares? If I think that Vitiate, Kun, Caedus or Krayth are more powerful than Sidious, you have simply no way of proving me wrong.
It's the most reasonable and straightforward interpretation, and isn't taken in a vacuum - it happens to match the opinion of several in-universe sources, some I would argue to be out-of-universe (like the Vader Visual Guide, but whatever), and some of which are explicitly out-of-universe in the most literal sense, such as the Insider quote, or to a lesser extent, the back cover of the Plagueis novel. Coincidence? It almost seems like the ancient sith spirits who thought Palpatine was the greatest ever, Darth Vader, that historian, and various others were onto something, and that they happen to align with the most obvious interpretation of the Visual Dictionary's statement counts as strong corroboration of such. You have now been reduced to pulling off ever more elaborate mental gymnastics to suggest otherwise.
1)
There is no "out-of-universe" source. And if there was one, we would once more be dealing with the interpreations and ideas of a single author. Boring.
2)
What Ancient Sith spirits are you talking about? The ones that discussed wether or not give DE Sidious information? 😂 Sadow's spirit, who considered him "barely worthy" of accessing his knowledge?
3)
It's nice that you attempt to prove your point with "numbers" of quotes, which is laughable. Especially since contradictionary quotes exists for other individuals that are not bound to individuals (save for authors) casting judgements, namely the TOR Encyclopedia labeling Vitiate the most powerful Sith ever on various occassions and the Official Star Wars Fact File giving the title to Exar Kun.
4)
Since it always comes down to interpretation and opinion, I'm reduced to thinking whatever I want to think with nobody being able to - read that - prove me wrong. Gosh. Isn't fiction nice? 😂
Moreover, if we want to follow your own policy of positing psychic divinations of authorial intent, I somehow doubt that the writers of the New Essential Chronology, Vader Visual Guide, etc. were really thinking "well Sidious isn't actually the most powerful sith lord ever, we're really just trying to make a note about unreliable narrators by making Vader, this historian, the ancient sith spirits Nai wanks to, and a bunch of other people delusional" [/B]
I wonder how you - and Tempest - always accuse me of "diviniations of authorial intent", when I explicitly exclude it from mattering. The only people who are in desperate need for "authorial intent" is your lot. See. You need authors who are infallible SW nerds, that know every single detail about the SW universe and the relative powerlevels of all Sith Lords within, in order to cast accurate judgement regarding that specific topic.
That this runs, explicitly against LFL house rules apparently doesn't matter. As Leland Chee once pointed out: "We continuity people don't deal in absolutes." So there just remains the question why you want to do so. If you need certainty in regard to such laughable topics, you're a simple mind and that you want to establish it against LFL policy is a joke. 😉