Revan and Meetra Surik Run The Gauntlet

We can hardly "prove" anything in SW vs. debating. We can just establish that our model is more probable than not, which is enough. Nobody's building bridges on this information.

My point is: this brand of speculation is far more flimsily than the norm. Feats are completely thrown out of the window, as well accolades pretty much. It's basically built on pure power-scaling, and nothing more.

It's kind of weird that you call out Nova for not "definitely proving" anything, but then vaguely claim that Valk and Luke share a great deal of parity because Luke didn't reach his full potential, which is both a double standard and a bizarre non-sequitur.

Not really a double standard, as Nova agrees that Luke and Valkorion does indeed share parity. I was just applying the Tenebrous > Vader argument, to the Valkorion < Luke one.

Originally posted by carthage
ROT powerscaling only makes sense if we had any idea how powerful any of the of the other Banite Sith are.

We have enough feats for Bane, Zannah, Plagueis and Sidious; we have the endpoints and the number of sith in-between, so we can divide and estimate where Tenebrous would be.

He's almost certainly closer to Plagueis than he is to Bane, and even though you think Bane is weak, if he's Qui-Gon level I still don't think Tenebrous should be below Vader. That would leave too little room to squeeze in the other 27 or so.

We have no idea how powrrful they are but per demonstrations of their power we know Vader and Plagueis are leagues above them in the force. Vader also is still the chosen one and still had vastly better force feats than even his Younger self who decimated Dooku, quantifiably there isn't much of a basis to suggest Tenebrous can beat Vader when Vader can be easily suggested to have been superior to everyone from Bane onward given his showings and his accolades

Again, just because Tenebrous is an unknown doesn't mean he's weak. We need to make an educated guess, which is better than just assuming he's below Vader because Vader has more written about him.

I could point to Tenebrous's insights into midichlorians, which suggest some level of refinement over the Force. It isn't his fault that there wasn't really anybody to duel with.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
He doesn't necessarily have better accolades, he just has more - Tenebrous's accolade from the Rule of Two powerscaling is more powerful.

Composite showings have Sidious in Tarkin calling Vader unsurpassed by his predecessors, have Filoni calling Rebels Vader his peak I,e superior to the same Anakin that bested Dooku, all on top of Vader's accolades of being the most powerful Sith Lords in history in Legends. The aggregate of Vaders showings as a character place him above Tenebrous, even if you're not sure by how much. How familiar are you with Vader's more recent showings?

Originally posted by carthage
Composite showings have Sidious in Tarkin calling Vader unsurpassed by his predecessors,

That's canon Vader.

all on top of Vader's accolades of being the most powerful Sith Lords in history in Legends.

Sure, he's "one of the most powerful Sith Lords in history". So is Ventress. So is Malgus. So is Bane. And so is almost certainly Tenebrous, if he's a generation below Plagueis who was stated by the publisher's blurb to be the most powerful to his time.

But if Tenebrous is too far below Plagueis, then it's tough to do that through 1000 years without putting Bane at like a padawan's level.

The aggregate of Vaders showings as a character place him above Tenebrous, even if you're not sure by how much.

Where do you place Tenebrous, then?

Originally posted by SunRazer
You're obviously not following the discussion, because that's not my argument. Nowhere did I or Lucas say Vader's potential become 80% of his former potential (200% of Sidious'😉. I interpreted that quote as saying Vader's potential went from being 200% of Sidious' to 80% of Sidious'. It's pretty clear what Lucas said; we're just discussing what he means by it.

Whatever.

Even if it was 80% of Sidious' power, somebody has to define that (and then prove whatever they think 80% of Sidious' power is) before we can start using that in threads, and absolutely nobody's done that yet.

Tenebrous could be 45% of Sidious' power, 53%, 66%, 73% or 88% of Sidious' power. Heck, Vader could just be unlucky because Tenebrous turns out to be 81% of Sidious' power. We have no idea where anybody else is (percentage-wise) in relation to Sidious, so saying that Vader being 80% of Sidious puts him definitively above Tenebrous is a ***** of a leap of faith, and one that'll probably end with you falling into a ditch.

Razer is right that the 80% potential thing is worthless.

And just to drive it home, Lucas himself compares Vader more to Maul and Dooku than to Palpatine, so he's better off being scaled relative to them than to Palpatine. I believe many of you have Bane as more powerful than Maul/Dooku, or at least very close to them. Tenebrous is the beneficiary of nine centuries/thirty generations of improvements over Bane, which is unquestionably far above Maul and Dooku. That you so dogmatically believe that a character of that power class can't possibly be more powerful than Vader is ****ing laughable.

And some of the people who lowball Tenebrous in turn have the audacity to wank the Ancient Sith. 🙂

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
And some of the people who lowball Tenebrous in turn have the audacity to wank the Ancient Sith. 🙂

Kek

Originally posted by FreshestSlice
Oh. In that case, I agree with DC. That's some pure unadulterated cancer that you pulled out of your ass.

👆

Solid argument. I wonder how many times you've silently conceded that you don't know what 80% of Sidious' power is.

> Tenebrous. 🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂

I already explained that Nova; in greater detail to NewGuy in why I feel Tenebrous can't be more than 80% Palpatine's power; RotJ Palpatine > RotS Palpatine > TPM Palpatine > Peak Plagueis > Tenebrous.

There is no way Tenebrous can be above 80% Palpatine's power --- given the gap between the variation and characters above. You would be hard pressed to argue Tenebrous is 80% peak Plagueis' is power.

Fair point. 👆

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
I already explained that Nova in greater detail to NewGuy; RotJ Palpatine > RotS Palpatine > TPM Palpatine > Peak Plagueis > Tenebrous.

There is no way Tenebrous can be above 80% Palpatine's power --- given the gap between the variation and characters above. You would be hard pressed to argue Tenebrous is 80% peak Plagueis' is power.

You know you can just substitute Vader for Tenebrous in that inequality and your argument would be the same... 😬

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Fair point. 👆

Cancer.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
I already explained that Nova; in greater detail to NewGuy in why I feel Tenebrous can't be more than 80% Palpatine's power; RotJ Palpatine > RotS Palpatine > TPM Palpatine > Peak Plagueis > Tenebrous.

There is no way Tenebrous can be above 80% Palpatine's power --- given the gap between the variation and characters above. You would be hard pressed to argue Tenebrous is 80% peak Plagueis' is power.

Actually, if you look at the quote again, he's referring to Vader following Mustafar, so he's probably also referring to Sidious as of RotS. Unless, of course, you're going with the potential argument. Funny, because I raised that argument last night but I woke up this morning and forgot completely about it and started debating about RotJ Sidious.

Also, if Lucas never said Vader was 80% of Sidious, I could substitute Vader into Tenebrous and you'd agree with that scaling completely.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
You know you can just substitute Vader for Tenebrous in that inequality and your argument would be the same... 😬

Nah. your stance isn't cancer, but the argument you presented sure was. 🙂