Exar Kun vs Novel Viitate

Sorry, but The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia was written before Vitiate was introduced in Revan.

Originally posted by AncientPower
Which he might well lose, unless fifty years is really that much of a deal in a power growth encompassing 1,100 years.

Need I remind everyone that his lightning was too much for Revan's tutaminis?

Were it sabers, I would've agreed.

Sry; thought you were pitting Exar against 4000 BBY Vitiate.

Doesn't that quote about Kun>Vitiate only apply to Vitiate as of the Great Sith War?

Originally posted by nfactor1995
Doesn't that quote about Kun>Vitiate only apply to Vitiate as of the Great Sith War?

Yes, but Kun grew afterwards, and Vitiate couldn't have grown that much, considering it took him over 1000 years to become as strong as he was. A growth spurt as radical as to render Exar's quote and additional growth completely null would be a massive outlier, and is unsupported regardless.

Sorry; you're wrong. Even the folks in the Empire who knew of Exar Kun's existence didn't consider him a god (or at least as powerful as the Sith Emperor). Vitiate didn't even exist at the time.

Without the lens of Exar-wank, Vitiate either dominates his mind or fries him to death.

At the time those quotes were published.

Yeh, it doesn't work that way. Unless Vitiate gets quotes that directly contradict it, which he doesn't. He gets confirmed to be > All prior Sith after Nathema. But gets nothing else bar SWTOR Encyclopedia which is dated three centuries after.

This isn't the Fact Files bar a singular quote and furthermore, your logic also suggests any Sidious 'most powerful' quote-or equivalent-predating Vitiate is non-applicable.

I don't care what a few Sith cronies in SWTOR think, some of them also thought the Emperor was really Revan. 😬

Huh. I guess Mace > novel Revan, then.

👆

Re-read my post, this isn't DeAgostini. Only one of the quotes is subject to your logic.

AP, How bouts Novel vitiate>/=Ulic in power?

By the time he was finally defeated, Ulic Qel-Droma had become a formidable Dark Lord of the Sith, second only to his partner Exar Kun.
- The Dark Side Sourcebook

Does this hold any water?

Well technically Qel-Droma isn't a Dark Lord because Kun was the Dark Lord, but you could argue it if you really wanted to.

Originally posted by AncientPower
Well technically Qel-Droma isn't a Dark Lord because Kun was the Dark Lord, but you could argue it if you really wanted to.

Your argument does not track, This even states that Ulic was a dark lord in the text itself.

" Ulic Qel-Droma had become a formidable Dark Lord of the Sith"

Kun was the reigning Dark Lord, and Ulic was his apprentice, the entry is simply incorrect. They're both Sith Lords sure, but they certainly weren't mere partners. It was a master-apprentice relationship. Marka Ragnos bestowed Kun with the mantle, labelling Ulic his apprentice.

Nah, multiple sources refer to Maul and Vader each as a Dark Lord of the Sith despite the existence of Sidious. The term is occasionally interchangeable with Sith Lord.

After a long duel, Qel-Droma and Exar Kun joined forces; Exar Kun as the undisputed Dark Lord of the Sith, Qel-Droma as his apprentice.

- Star Wars: The Old Republic - The Exar Kun War

That doesn't address what I said lol. Some sources use the term Dark Lord of the Sith interchangeably with Sith Lord even when one's a Master and the other's an apprentice.

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/23266068.jpg

Either way, if you want to you can, but as far as the actual Mantle of Dark Lord of the Sith goes, Kun is undisputed.