Originally posted by DarthAnt66
@Sunrazer: That would just place the Son above ROTS Palpatine though, not ROTJ and DE.
The EU databank considers information from all of the EU, so RotJ Palpatine is included.
As I said, I'm not sure if any source calls DE Palpatine a Sith, so you might be able to make some far-fetched argument about him being excluded from the Son's quote and then somehow argue that he's above the Son. I won't be making such a claim, though.
Originally posted by darthbane77
I don't think the TOR Encyclopedia is an in-universe style source, meaning the quotes in there stating Vitiate as the most powerful Sith in history should apply. To my knowledge anyway.
The TOR Encyclopedia has a note at the beginning saying that it's in-universe. You should be able to tell anyway given that they write as if they're unsure of future events at some points.
Originally posted by DarthAnt66Hm? I don't recall any GOAT Palpatine quotes until AotC (besides scaling from DP). [/B]
The quote you found from 2012 stating that TPM Palpatine is the most powerful Sith Master to ever live. Vanilla SWTOR was released in 2011, so even by some people's ridiculous self-imposed statute of limitations, TPM Palpatine > vanilla SWTOR Vitiate.
But of course, quotes do not have a statute of limitations. They can't be defied until they're explicitly retconned.
Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Just dreadful.You get an A for effort, though.
@Nova:
Which one?
The one that says he's the most powerful Dark Lord up to and of his time. Obviously, novel Vitiate is about 40 years after, but I doubt that's enough to compensate for that difference.
If you want to get technical, Kun's only certifiably more powerful than ~ novel Vitiate, although it's highly likely that Kun is more powerful than novel Vitiate as well.
Originally posted by DarthAnt66
I thought that was from AotC? mmm
That was from Darth Maul: Sith Apprentice according to you. And it mentions Maul's servitude to Palpatine in present tense, so we can assume that it's referring to Palpatine as of Maul's servitude to him, or at least around that time (ergo, EoTPM).
Originally posted by SunRazer
The one that says he's the most powerful Dark Lord up to and of his time. Obviously, novel Vitiate is about 40 years after, but I doubt that's enough to compensate for that difference.If you want to get technical, Kun's only certifiably more powerful than ~ novel Vitiate, although it's highly likely that Kun is more powerful than novel Vitiate as well.
As I said, technically Kun is only more powerful than 3996 BBY Vitiate. 40 years may or may not be enough to compensate for that. I personally don't believe it to be so, but either way, novel Vitiate is never directly stated to be more powerful than Kun. It's equally the result of personal imagination.
Originally posted by SunRazer
The one that says he's the most powerful Dark Lord up to and of his time. Obviously, novel Vitiate is about 40 years after, but I doubt that's enough to compensate for that difference.If you want to get technical, Kun's only certifiably more powerful than ~ novel Vitiate, although it's highly likely that Kun is more powerful than novel Vitiate as well.
So, nothing confirming Exar is more powerful than Vitiate, as of the Revan novel?
Gotcha.
Right. I already conceded later on that nothing directly proves that Kun > novel Vitiate, only ~ novel Vitiate if we want to be technical. I was referring to Vitiate as of the novel by approximation, not by exact date.
You're missing the point. The point is that novel Vitiate is not conclusively stated to be more powerful than Kun, and quite to the contrary, it's entirely plausible, and if anything likely, that Kun is more powerful than novel Vitiate.
But since you're more interested in keeping count of people's concessions to you than the actual point, let me get down on my knees for you.
The point is conceded.
That enough? 🙂
Originally posted by SunRazer
Right. I already conceded later on that nothing directly proves that Kun > novel Vitiate, only ~ novel Vitiate if we want to be technical. I was referring to Vitiate as of the novel by approximation, not by exact date.You're missing the point. The point is that novel Vitiate is not conclusively stated to be more powerful than Kun, and quite to the contrary, it's entirely plausible, and if anything likely, that Kun is more powerful than novel Vitiate.
But since you're more interested in keeping count of people's concessions to you than the actual point, let me get down on my knees for you.
The point is conceded.
That enough? 🙂
*A guy with sufficient strength to fodderize Darth Traya level opponents.
I wouldn't bet on that.