Darth Plagueis vs Vitiate - (POLL)

I'm interested in votes, not arguments. Vote!

The community already thinks Valk > Plagueis. Only fitting Vitiate gets the nod to, and he has my vote.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Glad to see Ant's thinking outside the box with these threads.

I voted draw under the basis that I'll probably adopt the stance of the majority here.

Plagueis wins. Blurbs are legally licensed material, and any opposition to including them is solely a product of personal incredulity.

Also unbalancing the Force >>> anything Vitiate has done.

No arguments.

NB4 Ant spams google hangouts with "Everyone! Vote for Vitiate!"

Originally posted by Ursumeles
No arguments.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Plagueis wins. Blurbs are legally licensed material, and any opposition to including them is solely a product of personal incredulity.

How do you explain the numerous inconsistencies, and downright incorrect statements in every other blurb, then? 😂

Anyway, taking the blurb at face value would mean Plagueis > Sidious since nothing indicates it was up to Plagueis time besides guys wishing so, so it doesn't intrude on your precious Sidious wank.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Plagueis wins. Blurbs are legally licensed material, and any opposition to including them is solely a product of personal incredulity.

Also unbalancing the Force >>> anything Vitiate has done.

Plus, Luceno made it clear that everything Plagueis did after the unbalancing, such as reaching immortality by recreating Midichlorians endlessly, was him delving even deeper into his study of the Force, and that he was growing all the more powerful for it.

Whereas the most profound accomplishments Vitiate has under his belt is flowery accolades, beating a heavily hindered Revan with difficulty, and literally just breaking lots of shit. Colour me more impressed by the former. I have no doubt Plagueis can break as much big shit as Vitiate, especially given his parity with Palpatine, who as we know, is Vitiate's Dad.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
I said I'm not interested in arguments, not that they can't be made. 😉

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
I'm interested in votes, not arguments. I´ll eat your cat(or your dog, your mum, whatever) if you make arguments. Vote!

@DS Look at the verb tense a little more carefully.

And you still can't come up with these supposedly inconsistent blurb statements. Your awful logic is therefore that you can nitpick some random Head to Head matchup and say because one source is weird, therefore you can dismiss any source you want for no reason (??).

Give it up.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
How do you explain the numerous inconsistencies, and downright incorrect statements in every other blurb, then? 😂

Anyway, taking the blurb at face value would mean Plagueis > Sidious since nothing indicates it was up to Plagueis time besides guys wishing so, so it doesn't intrude on your precious Sidious wank.

Look at the verb tense a little more carefully.

I have? Nothing says it was only indicating up to his time, lal. Nothing concretely at least.

And you still can't come up with these supposedly inconsistent blurb statements.

Have your read the blurbs of the Bane trilogy?

It said he *was* the most powerful who *had* ever lived. No contradiction with Sidious's accolades.

And Bane was the most powerful dark sider alive, barring entities. It's not a common English convention for such phrases to extend through time to dead people.

But your straw grasping could be extended to dismiss all novelizations because the RotJ one claims Lars is Obi Wan's brother, or to dismiss TOR because it contradicted itself multiple times, or to dismiss all of Star Wars because I can find one source that looks weird.

It said he *was* the most powerful who *had* ever lived.

😬
Learn to read babe, the quote clearly states:

It said he "the most powerful Sith Lord who ever lived", not "who had" was never apart of the blurb. "Was" being used because he was clearly no longer alive, and the question was only there for rhetorical/ hype effects, which is the main point of a blurb. Thus, it's open to either a all-time, or up to his time interpretations.

To dismiss the possibility entirely to fit your own agenda is dishonest man.

And Bane was the most powerful dark sider alive, barring entities.

Not even talking about that one, lal. I'm talking about the quote that says Bane is more powerful than the entire Brotherhood, or Zannah and Bane's final confrontation was decided by a lightsaber blow. Both are factually incorrect.

But your straw grasping could be extended to dismiss all novelizations because the RotJ one claims Lars is Obi Wan's brother, or to dismiss TOR because it contradicted itself multiple times, or to dismiss all of Star Wars because I can find one source that looks weird.

Oh, but I do dismiss quotes/accolades that are clearly contradicted; this Plagueis accolade, in my opinion, is one of those instances.

The blurb is pretty easy to rectify actually. Perhaps Plagueis was indeed the most powerful sith lord to have ever lived, but for open-combat purposes, he is still very much Vitiate's and especially Valkorion's inferior as demonstrated by outlandish feats of raw power.

Notice how the blurb alludes to a non-combat based ability in the second sentence. When talking to Anakin, Sidious doesn't praise Plagueis for being able to win any hypothetical matchup discussed by fans, but for his ability to create life and cheat death. Clearly, the writer of the blurb didn't write for the sake of settling disputes on a random versus forum. Ergo, for KMC versus forum purposes, the blurb is meaningless.

So because the Darth Bane blurbs are contradicting the lore, that automatically means Plagueis' are, too? 😂

There's nothing contradicting it. Sidious has accolades that retcon the Plagueis quote, making him the most powerful again, and saying Valkorion wins because of better feats is an argument from ignorance. I expected better of you, Deronn.

So because the Darth Bane blurbs are contradicting the lore, that automatically means Plagueis' are, too.

I think you're confusing my argument; my entire point is to point out the hyperbolic and marketing effort derived in blurbs as it clearly ignores canon to further the hype of the book. mmm

Truth be told, I can't prove whether blurbs are legit or not, but repeatedly contradictions throughout them can call them into question.

There's nothing contradicting it.

Umm, yes, there is. It basically ignores the core tenant of the RoT long established by canon, by ever deciding to make Plagueis "the most powerful Sith Lord to ever live". Sidious quote retconing it, is neither here nor there.

saying Valkorion wins because of better feats is an argument from ignorance.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
I think you're confusing my argument; my entire point is to point out the hyperbolic and marketing effort derived in blurbs as it clearly ignores canon to further the hype of the book. mmm

Truth be told, I can't prove whether blurbs are legit or not, but repeatedly contradictions throughout them can call them into question.

So you ignore them because they're made to make money?

Umm, yes, there is. It basically ignores the core tenant of the RoT long established by canon, by ever deciding to make Plagueis "the most powerful Sith Lord to ever live". Sidious quote retconing it, is neither here nor there.

The Banite line increased in power each generation, and the second to last member of that line also happened to be the most powerful of all Sith up to his time. Where is the contradiction?

Sidious has two statements from 2015, one declared him the most powerful of all, and the other declares him specifically more powerful than all the Banites, Plagueis included. Sidious doesn't fall under the jurisdiction of Plagueis' quote.

Don't recall me ever saying that but, put words in my mouth if you want, lal.

I recall you saying something like that, but it doesn't matter. Anyway, usually when people say X > Y, it is based on feats if they decide to dismiss accolades, lol.