Vitiate is the most powerful Dark Sider ever.

Started by Azronger8 pages

Re: Re: Re: Vitiate is the most powerful Dark Sider ever.

Originally posted by AncientPower
LMFAO.

She required an orbalisk that literally pierced the sky, which took centuries to build and then she tried to enact a complex Sith ritual, which summoned more power than Naga Sadow used to cause supernovas but it failed. The orbalisk exploded and they all died in the shockwave.

I also love how you tried to take a pot shot at Vitiate using 8,000 Sith Lords against him when you're only serving to hype the nexus. 😂

Ah, it seems you are correct.

Lmfao, can you read? Vitiate was at the center of the ritual, the focus of the ritual. Seeing as your friend likes to quote fallible characters, namely Nyriss:

Yes, I can read, and nowhere do I spot a line stating he was at the center, although I'd still imagine that's the case given the ritual's purpose. But Vitiate being in the center doesn't change my point in the slightest: the ritual prolonged Vitiate's age and boosted his power, but to what extent is unknown. It doesn't matter where Vitiate was in it.

And I've no idea what you're attempting to prove by quoting a character, who you've conceded is fallible, because someone else other than me quoted her (apparently).

It isn't even remotely false, but your denial is delectable. None of which apply to him.

It is false until you point out to me from where in In a dark side ritual, he drained the life of his home planet, to achieve immortality did you conclude "he absorbed the entire nexus"? All I can gather from it is that he drained all life from the planet, which in no way means he fused the entire nexus into his very being, as you seem to imply. But please, if I am so in denial then feel free to prove me wrong here.

Oh for the love of Christ.

1.This isn't Scourge's description, this is the narrative.

2.He acts absolutely nothing like a Wound in the Force, it is
exceedingly clear in its reference to the Void of Nathema.

3.Because Vitiate doesn't need to rip open the fabric of space(which by the way could easily be a reference to his Force Storms given that Palpatine isn't portrayed as doing anything of the sort in the Dark Empire series). He was quite literally describe as a physical shell barely holding together the
energy that flowed from him in 'palpable waves'.

1. Well, yes, but it quite clearly describes what Scourge saw from his point of view, and is thus subject to hyperbole.

2. And how exactly does a wound in the Force "act", then? To me, it is obvious he's a wound, simply by looking at how both he, Surik, and Nihilus, two confirmed wounds, are all described:

"And that is why Malachor echoes within you still. The screams of countless thousands, Jedi and Mandalorians, crushed by the planet's gravity, annihilated. [...] You carry all those deaths at Malachor within you, and it has left a hole, a hunger than cannot be filled."

-KotOR 2 Jedi Council Masters

There was something strange about the Emperor’s voice. It didn’t sound like the voice of a single being. It had an unusual echo and resonance, almost as if a great multitude were speaking his words in perfect symphony.

A grim theory passed unbidden through Scourge’s mind: was it possible all those that had been consumed by the ritual on Nathema still existed in some form within the Emperor himself? Nyriss said he’d devoured them, but what if she was only partially correct? What if he had imprisoned their spirits inside his own corporeal form, slowly feeding on their life energy over a thousand years to keep himself young and strong?

-TOR: Revan

"He has consumed an entire world, but he still hungers. And with his hunger comes an all-consuming fear. He has lived a thousand years; he knows he could live many thousands more. He is terrified of death."

[...]

REVAN COULD FEEL THE EMPEROR FEEDING ON HIM, drawing on his power to sate his endless hunger.

-TOR: Revan

"His power is great, and it comes from hunger.He is a wound in the Force, more presence than flesh, and in his wake life dies, sacrificing itself to his hunger."

-KotOR 2

Darth Nihilus, a being of pure hunger and dark side power, was approaching the colony.

-TOR Codex

Staring into the hollow darkness of the Emperor’s gaze, Scourge’s mind flashed back to Nathema, and he shivered at the memory.

-TOR: Revan

Exile: "Tell me what you saw."

Visas: "I saw a graveyard world, surrounded by a fleet of dead ships. I felt it through him... as I feel it through you

-KotOR 2

All three carry an echo of the world they were wounded at within them, and all three carry the deaths of those worlds within them also. Each of them also developed an insatiable hunger for life and the Force as a result of feeling so much death at once. So the "void" being referred to here is a wound in the Force, in my opinion. Why I do not think it refers to the void of Nathema is simple: it would make no sense. The novel establishes a clear difference between it and a wound:

The events of Malachor had left a mark on the Force; a wound that would not heal. Here, however, the Force was simply... gone. It was as if someone had ripped it away, leaving only an empty void behind.

If Vitiate was indeed a "void" then that would mean his nature was like is described above, meaning he wouldn't have the Force at all. While I am willing to entertain the idea that Drew Karpyshyn is just that shit of a writer, I'd simply go with him being a wound, and Scourge just didn't know what he was talking about so he described it as best he can. If he was truly like the void at Nathema, he'd be a non-Force sensitive, which he obviously is not.

3. No, it is reference to Palpatine himself. Why he doesn't constantly shred the space around him is because he can simply keep is power under control. Vitiate has never been described in such a manner, nor has this ability been credited to him. Him being a wound or whatever doesn't make him more powerful than Palpatine at all.

Vitiate is never stated to be capable of drawing on Ziost, and your entire claim falls flat when a far more powerful nexus in Yavin IV was clearly incapable of sustaining such a feat.

He doesn't have to draw on the nexus for it to amp him. All Sith spirits are stated to be amped by nexi:

Each dark side spirit has a focal point of power that anchors it in the physical world. For example, the interred Sith Lords of Korriban use their burial sarcophagi to hold their spirits for millennia after death. Freedon Nadd clung to his tomb for countless centuries, waiting for the right opportunity to turn his successor to the dark side. Exar Kun - who didn't technically die so much as merge with the dark side and retain his identity - resisted the dissolution of his spirit by drawing on the remarkable focusing energies of the Massassi temples on Yavin 4.

[...]

Dark side spirits are often connected to a particular dark side location, drawing their strength from an ancient crypt or temple they once inhabited.

-Dark Side sourcebook

Even if Vitiate was able to retain his spirit in the physical world without needing a nexus, it still doesn't change the fact that the nexus would amp him, and that he is capable of drawing on it, like all other Sith spirits.

Evidence for Yavin IV being more potent than Ziost? Not that it debunks my point in any way, since Vitiate first needed to feed a crap ton to regain his strength before he was capable of planetary devastation regardless. So the fact that he couldn't do it on Yavin IV is utterly irrelevant.

Valkorion no longer had any intentions of devouring worlds, but you'd know that if you actually knew anything about his character.

That... is utterly irrelevant here. Whether he had an interest in it or not doesn't change the fact that his feats while possessing the Outlander completely pale in comparison to his Ziost stunt.

He couldn't defeat Arcann or Vaylin by himself because he escaped his own death by entering the Outlander's mind. Good Lord.

I'm not even sure how that sentence makes any sense or what your point here was. How does him being in the Outlander's mind change anything?

This is getting painful to read.

You can't be more powerful than a literal embodiment of the very thing you're powerful in.

Which is why, ding ding ding, it's hyperbole. Palpatine is more powerful than Vitiate per objective statements (and is also stated to a living embodiment of the dark side, btw). Clinging to a hyperbolic quote as literal when you dismiss others from the PT era is indicative of double standards.

And yes, you obviously can be, since according to your logic, Vitiate couldn't have gotten any stronger due to being a "living embodiment" of it already, yet he did, which you already conceded in the opening post. So whether you take it literally or not doesn't even matter, since you can clearly get stronger than "a living embodiment of the dark side" and Palpatine is no exception to that.

Originally posted by Geistalt
You're the one reaching. And failing to see the distinction.

And, either way, TPM Sidious is greater.

If anything, it's your "logic" that just bends over for Valk wank that's hilarious.


Enlighten me.

All of which are sources predating the revelation that he was never actually a Sith. 😬

Vitiate is very much Sith at least until KotFE. He may have had alternate identities, but his Sith Emperor identity does fall under the quotes and is officially Sith per third person declarations. You can argue against it for Valkorion, but it is painfully ironic when you accuse the Plagueis brigade of reaching when your crew pulls shit like this.

Meetra describes Nathema, and by extension, Vitiate, as far worse than either of them. 😬

You used the adjective "destructive" there. Vitiate was never more destructive than either Malachor or Nihilus; he never pulled entire fleets down from orbit and crushed every living thing on the planet; he is at best an equal of Nihilus in terms of destructive potency, since they are both capable of erasing all life on a plent with max effort.

Ah here comes Force Storm crutching, I hope you realise he isn't even remotely the only person to use these, right? And no, destroying half the surface of Coruscant, gradually, whilst amped by Byss and 20,000,000,000 people providing sustenance isn't the same as rendering Ziost a lifeless void in the Force in the space of two minutes as a weakened spirit.

Um, yes, I do (he taught all his Adepts this ability) but all this seems to be is another red herring, since it doesn't change the fact that Palpatine is the only one to have ever used it to such an extent.

Apprently you didn't read the link I posted. The Coruscant showing is a fraction of Palpatine's power. At his best he is a literal moon buster, as in he can annihilate them to their core in a matter of seconds. Far more destructive than Vitiate ever was. The details are in the thread I linked.

If only those accolades weren't rendered null by the fact Vitiate, as Geistalt likes to (hilariously) point out, was literally transformed into an embodiment of the Dark Side of the Force.

Already addressed.

By the way, the entire Sith Entity Codex Entry you like to point out also predates all of the mountainous statements from Lead Writers, newer Codex Entries, newer Valkorion statements and better yet, common sense.

I said already I'm willing to discard it. However, it doesn't exclude him from Palpatine's other accolades such as being the most powerful darksider in general.

Valk's own unreliable word when he's pulling a ruse over the outlander isn't suffecient to dismiss valk being a siht entity per out ofuiverse objective and hence reliable sources

Vitiate is very much Sith at least until KotFE.

There are quotes stating otherwise as of the RotE update (Ziost Vitiate):

--who have completed the Shadow of Revan storyline can now join in the fight against the former Sith Emperor!

--Rise of the Emperor, Game Update 3.2

And:

Your leadership in guiding them through the conflict on Ziost is critical to uncovering the former Sith Emperor’s terrifying plan.

--Rise of the Emperor, Game Update 3.2

As well as:

Unleashed from his sanctuary on Yavin 4, the former Sith Emperor has now struck the Imperial world of Ziost.

--Rise of the Emperor, Game Update 3.2

He wasn't even a Sith as of RotE, let alone KotFE.

Wrong; he was no longer an Emperor. Sith is an adjective in this case.

Originally posted by Geistalt
You're the one reaching. And failing to see the distinction.

Between fact and opinion.

#feelsbeforereals

By all means, keep whining though.

😆
yes Valk stopped being the sith emperor, how the fck does that prove he isn't a sith?

Originally posted by slayne
There are quotes stating otherwise as of the RotE update (Ziost Vitiate):

And:

As well as:

He wasn't even a Sith as of RotE, let alone KotFE.

That only means he is no longer the Sith Emperor, not that he isn't Sith in general. He is referred to as "Vitiate", his Sith identity, at that point, by both the characters and third person statements.

He is referred to as "Vitiate", his Sith identity, at that point, by both the characters and third person statements.

Which proves exactly nothing. They only knew him as Vitiate, not Tenebrae, so calling him by that name isn't proof that he's still a Sith. In general, I'd say his actively working against the Sith as an organization, combined with the 'former Emperor' quote, is proof that he isn't a Sith Lord as of RotE.

Whatever the case with Vitiate, the same certainly isn't true for Valkorion:

The Immortal Emperor is his latest mask and Zakuul his greatest, most ambitious endeavor: an idealistic playground where he can shed his past and experience a new life unburdened by archaic Sith teachings.

--Valkorion's codex entry, KotFE


This is definitive proof that Valkorion, as of KotFE, is no longer a Sith Lord.

Originally posted by slayne
[B]Which proves exactly nothing. They only knew him as Vitiate, not Tenebrae, so calling him by that name isn't proof that he's still a Sith. In general, I'd say his actively working against the Sith as an organization, combined with the 'former Emperor' quote, is proof that he isn't a Sith Lord as of RotE.

Third person statements know him as Tenebrae. Not sure what your point is anyway. If he's referred to as Vitiate, his Sith identity, then he is Sith.

Whatever the case with Vitiate, the same certainly isn't true for Valkorion:

This is definitive proof that Valkorion, as of KotFE, is no longer a Sith Lord.

Yeah, it's not me you have to convince.

Originally posted by slayne
Which proves exactly nothing. They only knew him as Vitiate, not Tenebrae, so calling him by that name isn't proof that he's still a Sith. In general, I'd say his actively working against the Sith as an organization, combined with the 'former Emperor' quote, is proof that he isn't a Sith Lord as of RotE.

Whatever the case with Vitiate, the same certainly isn't true for Valkorion:

This is definitive proof that Valkorion, as of KotFE, is no longer a Sith Lord.


😆 Him moving past old sith ways doesn;t change him being a sith lord.

Bane moved past archaic teachings

Nihlus moved past archaic teachings

Sidious move dpast archaic teachings.

I really hope that isn't your "definitive proof"

Being unburdened by the anger/rage of the Sith doesn't mean he doesn't implement it at all.

All it really means is that he doesn't have to (to keep Zakuul at beck and call).

@Kbro:

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
😆 Him moving past old sith ways doesn;t change him being a sith lord.

Bane moved past archaic teachings

Nihlus moved past archaic teachings

Sidious move dpast archaic teachings.

I really hope that isn't your "definitive proof"


He didn't move past them, lmao. He's unburdened by them, and, therefore, isn't following them. Him not following Sith teachings is proof that he is not a Sith. He no longer adheres to their code, and he isn't affiliated with them in any way. He even says it himself. What more do you need?

@Geist

Originally posted by Geistalt
Being unburdened by the anger/rage of the Sith doesn't mean he doesn't implement it at all.

Drawing on anger and rage doesn't make you a Sith. I don't see your point.
All it really means is that he doesn't have to (to keep Zakuul at beck and call).

No, it means he is not actively following the teachings of the Sith. Which is definitive proof that, as of KotFE, he is not a Sith Lord. This is even further supported by the fact that he outright states he's not a Sith.

@Az:

Originally posted by Azronger
Yeah, it's not me you have to convince.

Was aimed at Kbro and Geistalt, sorry.
Third person statements know him as Tenebrae. Not sure what your point is anyway. If he's referred to as Vitiate, his Sith identity, then he is Sith.

No, it doesn't. Vitiate was simply a name given to him, and is not indicative of him being a Sith Lord, regardless of whether it was his Sith identity at the time.
Also, what sources (pre-KotFE) refer to him as Tenebrae?

Not actively following Sith teachings is not the same as actively rejecting Sith teachings.

Originally posted by Geistalt
Not actively following Sith teachings is not the same as actively rejecting Sith teachings.

Who the fck cares, it didn't say anything aboiut sith teachings as a whole, it said "archaic" sith teachings.

None of the ecvidence that's been provided has said jack about valk not being a sith.

Valk's factually a sith entity. End of story

Not actively following Sith teachings is not the same as actively rejecting Sith teachings.

In Valkorion's case, both are true as per the quote. Him being 'unburdened' by them means that he rejects them. He does not believe they are true, and, as a result, he's 'unburdened' by them.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Who the fck cares, it didn't say anything aboiut sith teachings as a whole, it said "archaic" sith teachings.

None of the ecvidence that's been provided has said jack about valk not being a sith.

Valk's factually a sith entity. End of story


Archaic Sith teachings still classify as Sith teachings, so if Valkorion rejects them, and does not follow them, he is not a Sith. Unlike Bane or Sidious, he didn't change the Sith teachings, he actively rejected them. Therefore, only one conclusion can be drawn: Valkorion is not a Sith.

Your inability to follow logic is quite honestly amusing.

Originally posted by slayne
In Valkorion's case, both are true as per the quote. Him being 'unburdened' by them means that he rejects them. He does not believe they are true, and, as a result, he's unburdened by them.

Archaic Sith teachings still classify as Sith teachings, so if Valkorion rejects them, and does not follow them, [


Yes, Valk doesn't follow archaic sith teachings 👆

-

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Yes, Valk doesn't follow archaic sith teachings 👆

Your point?