Originally posted by ILS
No, it says that Bane in his prime was the most powerful Sith up to that time. So, whenever Bane was at his peak, is when he was the most powerful.
And to be honest, the habit to always summon the "this dude was/is one of the/the strongest bamf in history" is the most hateful aspect of Star Wars.
"Hey, dude, what we can do to make this character interesting?" "Hu? Let's say he's one of the most powerful evahh!!!."
Originally posted by ILS
No, it says that Bane in his prime was the most powerful Sith up to that time. So, whenever Bane was at his peak, is when he was the most powerful.
Where does it say him in his prime? It says he used said unprecedented power to change the Sith forever, which is obviously referring to the institution of the Rule of Two. That means it's PoD Bane.
Originally posted by SunRazerThat's a pretty ridiculous interpretation given that the Rule of Two hadn't been successfully implemented yet. It was a working idea. I would consider the Sith Order "changed" when the RoT actually lives up to it's purpose and Zannah offs Bane.
Where does it say him in his prime? It says he used said unprecedented power to change the Sith forever, which is obviously referring to the institution of the Rule of Two. That means it's PoD Bane.
More to the point, it says that, at some point, whenever that is, Bane acquires more knowledge and mastery of Sith techniques, pause, and power, than any Sith who came before him. It doesn't say when, it just says that that is what he did, and that because he was able to do that, he was able to put the Rule of Two in place.
Creating fake contexts for the quotes, and insisting it's referring to Bane at any one time is just another excuse.
Originally posted by ILS
That's a pretty ridiculous interpretation given that the Rule of Two hadn't been successfully implemented yet. It was a working idea. I would consider the Sith Order "changed" when the RoT actually lives up to it's purpose and Zannah offs Bane.More to the point, it says that, at some point, whenever that is, Bane acquires more knowledge and mastery of Sith techniques, pause, and power, than any Sith who came before him. It doesn't say when, it just says that that is what he did, and that because he was able to do that, he was able to put the Rule of Two in place.
Creating fake contexts for the quotes, and insisting it's referring to Bane at any one time is just another excuse.
It says Bane changed the Sith forever. That can't refer to anything other than the destruction of the old Sith Order and the institution of the Rule of Two. Zannah offing Bane did nothing to "change the Sith forever".
That's some ridiculous stretching going on there. It's painfully obvious what the quote's referring to.
Originally posted by SunRazerYou can destroy the Old Sith, but nothing has changed until the new Sith are up and running. How you can act as if the Sith Order has "changed forever" during a time where:
It says Bane changed the Sith forever. That can't refer to anything other than the destruction of the old Sith Order and the institution of the Rule of Two. Zannah offing Bane did nothing to "change the Sith forever".That's some ridiculous stretching going on there. It's painfully obvious what the quote's referring to.
-Bane only has the Rule of Two as an idea in his head
-Bane has not even met Zannah yet
-Bane still has very basic knowledge of the Sith
-Zannah is in no position to fulfil the Rule of Two's criteria that she surpasses her master and furthers the Order
...totally blows me away, because I'm sure you have an IQ above 50. Thus, I'll assume you just don't like the quote.
The quote only makes sense if you do not try and invent context for it. It isn't referring to Bane at any fixed time, only his deeds, which include:
-Becoming the most knowledgeable, masterful and powerful Sith ever
-Changing the Sith paradigm to the Rule of Two
Originally posted by ILS
You can destroy the Old Sith, but nothing has changed until the new Sith are up and running. How you can act as if the Sith Order has "changed forever" during a time where:-Bane only has the Rule of Two as an idea in his head
-Bane has not even met Zannah yet
-Bane still has very basic knowledge of the Sith
-Zannah is in no position to fulfil the Rule of Two's criteria that she surpasses her master and furthers the Order...totally blows me away, because I'm sure you have an IQ above 50. Thus, I'll assume you just don't like the quote.
The quote only makes sense if you do not try and invent context for it. It isn't referring to Bane at any fixed time, only his deeds, which include:
-Becoming the most knowledgeable, masterful and powerful Sith ever
-Changing the Sith paradigm to the Rule of Two
The Rule of Two has always been an idea, lol. It's just a matter of putting that idea into practice, which Bane does at the end of PoD/beginning of RoT. Bane does meet Zannah at the end of PoD/beginning of RoT, and Zannah surpassing her Master isn't an instance of Bane himself changing the Sith Order. Bane taking Zannah as an apprentice, as it happens at the end of PoD, is "getting the new Order up and running". It's the birth of the Rule of Two, of the Banite Sith.
I'm talking about Bane giving Kaan the Thought Bomb to destroy the Brotherhood, which allows him to establish the Banite Order. After all, does the quote not say that he used the knowledge and power he gained to change the Sith forever? How is Zannah killing Bane an instance of Bane using his knowledge and power to change the Sith forever?
Not to mention the word "change" instantly eliminates Zannah offing Bane as the instance in question. Zannah killing Bane cements the Rule of Two and the Banite Sith Order - it doesn't change the Sith Order, and it's certainly not a change set in motion by Bane's knowledge or power. The final events of PoD change the Sith by destroying an Empire-based system and instating an order where there are only two Sith. That's the change, and Bane uses his knowledge of the Thought Bomb to destroy the Brotherhood (or rather, gets them to destroy themselves). It fits the quote's criteria perfectly. Whatever you're suggesting doesn't fit the criteria in the slightest.
Your argument makes absolutely no sense. Thus, I'll assume you just like the quote and want to pedal it for your own purposes. 🙂