@Tempest, SunRazer
If you'd be so kind, if I don't respond within a reasonable amount of time (by this time tomorrow probably at the latest) send me PMs and remind me to get back to this. I've been busy the last few days, between this and helping my grandfather cut and stack wood, and helping my grandmother watch kids. It's somewhat difficult to keep track of time. I've no intention of dropping out of the conversation.
Originally posted by Haschwalth
You also have to take into the extent of the affects. I would presume Naga would have some influence over the stars, without his meditation sphere, but to a vastly lesser degree. With the sphere he was creating massive solar flares, and even played a decent role in making a star go supernova.He states that it was only a glimmer of what Naga had done, which makes sense, as
Naga had his meditation sphere. He indicates that he held Naga sadow in quite high regard.
The Sphere has a stated amp of x1000 in Book of Sith which is what he caused Flares. The Corsair was what he used to cause the Nova, whick Book of Sith credits as being exotic Force technology.
True, but many modern force users at times fall into the belief that the Ancients were massively more powerful than they really were. By Plagueis time, the belief was that the ancients performed some of their greatest accomplishments without any details as to how. Brakiss easily could believe that.
Originally posted by darthbane77
1: Byss was also a pretty heavily circumstantial feat anyway, so it's not the best example.
More circumstantial than Ziost or Katarr? I don't think so.
The other mediums still show Sidious struggling heavily against Yoda. As opposed to Vitiate, who was capable of borderline one-shotting Revan, and is a confirmed superior of the Dread Masters.
Of course, because Yoda's supposed to be "the most powerful foe the darkness has ever known". Which includes Revan, naturally. As for Vitiate, he never came close to one-shotting Revan without charging up his powers, and I've never been particularly impressed by the Dread Masters.
So this doesn't really prove anything.
Originally posted by The Merchant
The Sphere has a stated amp of x1000 in Book of Sith which is what he caused Flares. The Corsair was what he used to cause the Nova, whick Book of Sith credits as being exotic Force technology.True, but many modern force users at times fall into the belief that the Ancients were massively more powerful than they really were. By Plagueis time, the belief was that the ancients performed some of their greatest accomplishments without any details as to how. Brakiss easily could believe that.
Yes, but on the scale of a star, there is a vast amount of leeway for ones affect on it.
Naga sadow destroying, or playing a massive role in making it go supernova, is undoubtedly over 1000 times more powerful than just making it flicker/cause solar flares.
Brakiss clearly has detailed knowledge on Naga Sadow's events though.
"More than five millennia ago the Denarii Nova exploded, ripping through these stars and reducing them to cinders," Brakiss said. "The powerful Sith sorcerer Naga Sadow caused this cataclysmic event to gain his freedom from pursuing Republic warships. With the extravagant power of the dark side, Naga Sadow tore these two stars apart and used giant flares like two slapping hands to crush the fleet behind him."
Originally posted by SunRazer
More circumstantial than Ziost or Katarr? I don't think so.Of course, because Yoda's supposed to be "the most powerful foe the darkness has ever known". Which includes Revan, naturally. As for Vitiate, he never came close to one-shotting Revan without charging up his powers, and I've never been particularly impressed by the Dread Masters.
So this doesn't really prove anything.
That quote was taken from Yoda's viewpoint, thus cannot be applied to anyone he hasn't met. Or do you know that, and I'm missing context from your argument.
This truth: that he, the avatar of light, Supreme Master of the Jedi Order, the fiercest, most implacable, most devastatingly powerful foe the darkness had ever known...
Finally, he saw the truth.This truth: that he, the avatar of light, Supreme Master of the Jedi Order, the fiercest, most implacable, most devastatingly powerful foe the darkness had ever known...
It's a personal thought. Whether it's inaccurate, or the description comes from the narrator is another matter.
Originally posted by SunRazer
I use them as evidence to construct my case the same way a detective would use fingerprints, hairs, blood stains and witness statements to construct a case for the crime scene. They're building blocks to construct a larger, more cohesive narrative. I don't read them like some sort of Bible.
Funny thing is that you are doing the reverse of what a detective would do. What you do with accolades is reading them like some sort of a bible and say they are 100% true. A detective works with actual, 'physical' evidence. He doesn't work with words.
If the accolade proves to be sufficiently unreliable or inaccurate, then it's invalid. But in this case, it hasn't. Palpatine has never really come close to exerting maximum effort with respect to any of his powers, hence the idea of comparing feats is flawed.
Are you kidding me? This character has appeared in dozens of stories in the Expanded Universe. We already have enough information about him regarding what or what he cannot do.
Your argument is wrong. It's not like Sidious was only as detailed as Darth Tenebrous in the Expanded Universe.
No, the idea of comparing feats is not flawed. Feats always show what a character is capable of. It is a 'factual' proof; you can 'debunk' accolades if there are discrepancies or the character doesn't stand up to the claims of the accolades, but you can't debunk feats.
Firstly, RotS was written after the NJO and DNT books. Regardless, it doesn't need to be written after them to include Luke.
I know that. That's why I brought this in our discussion.
If we follow your logic, it doesn't matter if it was written after the NJO and DNT books. It's not like it was said that: "Yoda was the most powerful avatar of this/his time."
It flatly said that he was the strongest light side avatar(The time frame is not specified at the present tense. It just says that he is the strongest avatar of the light side; similar to Dark Empire description of Palpatine being the most powerful expression of the dark side)
This can also be taken as a prequel retcon regarding accolades nullifying Luke's. But just by peering into these accolades, we know instantly that they are wrong and that Luke>Yoda.
But what you do now in regards to this line(ROTS) is to use the time frame method that I also use when I analyze (absolute) accolades in comparision to other (absolute) accolades and the characters' feats.
And I did give you a good example:
In the Revan novel, Vitiate has been stated as the history's most powerful dark side master; but after his ritual(Exar Kun was stated to be the galaxy's darkest power); of course that Exar Kun appeared earlier in the Legends' timeline. But you get my point.
And from Vitiate's feats(post-Medriaas); we know that Vitiate>Exar Kun regarding the aspect of the Force.
What you fail to realize is that, when it comes about (absolute) accolades, the reverse is also bound to happen.
E.g: The first story from Mortal Kombat has Shao Kahn being the most powerful warrior in the universe 4000 years after the fall of Onaga
The second story(which is a prequel) from Mortal Kombat has Onaga declared as the most powerful warrior ever seen in the universe
If you are an adept of accolades; you should know that 'absolute' accolades do not limit themselves to a certain era, even if they are a prequel accolade; it encompasses all eras.
Just because Yoda was called the most powerful avatar of the light side, or Vitiate declared as the history's most powerful dark side master doesn't render them as during their-time-period accolades(e.g: Yoda was the most powerful of his time or that Vitiate was of his time); because they are in fact absolute 'prequel' retcon accolades.
Yes, Sidious has his own 'absolute' accolades, but we all know that they clash with Vitiate's accolades too.
That's why when absolute accolades clash(from two different characters); they should be dismissed and use feats instead.
And after we passed that section, we need to see if the accolades are supported by the character's feats.
But "most" of them don't, so I don't understand what you mean. They're entirely designed to consider the EU.
Yes, they are. Pretty much every Legends story that has taken place during Lucas' canon incoporates Lucas' vision of his world, as well of his characters.
Only what doesn't include his movie events and characters is free of Lucas' vision. E.g: The Old Republic era
@ SunRazer and Tempest, it'll be a while before I can get back to this. So I'm gonna admit at least a temporary concession, so neither of you are waiting for me to get back to this. I'll try keeping this at the back of mind, so I can get back to this, but chances are, I'll just start the debate up in a different thread after I have all my sources finally. Either way, I enjoyed the conversation. 🙂
Originally posted by darthbane77
@ SunRazer and Tempest, it'll be a while before I can get back to this. So I'm gonna admit at least a temporary concession, so neither of you are waiting for me to get back to this. I'll try keeping this at the back of mind, so I can get back to this, but chances are, I'll just start the debate up in a different thread after I have all my sources finally. Either way, I enjoyed the conversation. 🙂
Well, I'm not actually chasing concessions. I'll look forward to when you get back, though.
Likewise.
Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
I can't wait. Also search for the quote that said something like:
Emperor Palpatine and his adepts wove their dark energies over Byss to drain the people's lives."It's in a manual about space ships.
Not sure about the manual, but quotes do mention the adepts being involved. But crucially, there's no reason to assume they were imperative to the Emperor's effort, not when Palpatine's draining was pretty much effortless anyway. The reasonable assumption is that he allowed them to slowly feed on the planet's populace with him, as he had both time and resources at his disposal. He wasn't consuming the entire population quickly like Nihilus did.
Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
Funny thing is that you are doing the reverse of what a detective would do. What you do with accolades is reading them like some sort of a bible and say they are 100% true. A detective works with actual, 'physical' evidence. He doesn't work with words.
I treat them like facts because they've stood the test of time and, despite many people's best efforts, are not contradicted. If I had dozens of witness statements, I would be putting serious weight on that, yeah. Especially if the actual physical evidence also leaned that way (I do think Sidious' feats are better than Vitiate's).
That was also just an analogy. Most of these quotes have considerably greater weight than individual witness statements because the reliability of a sourcebook is generally a lot higher than the reliability of the average witness statement.
Are you kidding me? This character has appeared in dozens of stories in the Expanded Universe. We already have enough information about him regarding what or what he cannot do.
Your argument is wrong. It's not like Sidious was only as detailed as Darth Tenebrous in the Expanded Universe.No, the idea of comparing feats is not flawed. Feats always show what a character is capable of. It is a 'factual' proof; you can 'debunk' accolades if there are discrepancies or the character doesn't stand up to the claims of the accolades, but you can't debunk feats.
Uh-huh, we do have an idea of what Palpatine can't do at the various points in his life, and when you show me someone doing what he can't do then we can talk. Showing me better feats than ones he doesn't perform with maximum effort isn't a contradiction to any of the accolades.
I know that. That's why I brought this in our discussion.If we follow your logic, it doesn't matter if it was written after the NJO and DNT books. It's not like it was said that: "Yoda was the most powerful avatar of this/his time."
It flatly said that he was the strongest light side avatar(The time frame is not specified at the present tense. It just says that he is the strongest avatar of the light side; similar to Dark Empire description of Palpatine being the most powerful expression of the dark side)
This can also be taken as a prequel retcon regarding accolades nullifying Luke's. But just by peering into these accolades, we know instantly that they are wrong and that Luke>Yoda.
But what you do now in regards to this line(ROTS) is to use the time frame method that I also use when I analyze (absolute) accolades in comparision to other (absolute) accolades and the characters' feats.
First of all, if you were trying to attack my logic you'd cite something from before the NJO, not after. You already agree with me that sources that come after aren't "outdated", to use your terminology.
Anyway, you missed the point. Yoda's accolade is in-universe; it only goes up to the time of the source, which is 19 BBY. Luke has not even been born at that time. But various other foes of darkness have existed in the years before 19 BBY (Revan, the Exile, the HoT, Barsen'thor, Mace Windu, etc.) The quote applies to them.
It can't refer to Luke because Luke wasn't an opponent of darkness during the events of RotS, in the SW universe. That is also why Vitiate's accolades don't actually include Palpatine. They only go up to his time, not beyond. So they include Exar Kun, Naga Sadow, Darth Revan, Nihilus, etc. but they don't include characters afterwards like Bane, Plagueis, Palpatine, Caedus, Krayt, etc.
So with Vitiate, feats are literally the only option. He doesn't have accolades contesting Palpatine's.
And I did give you a good example:In the Revan novel, Vitiate has been stated as the history's most powerful dark side master; but after his ritual(Exar Kun was stated to be the galaxy's darkest power); of course that Exar Kun appeared earlier in the Legends' timeline. But you get my point.
And from Vitiate's feats(post-Medriaas); we know that Vitiate>Exar Kun regarding the aspect of the Force.What you fail to realize is that, when it comes about (absolute) accolades, the reverse is also bound to happen.
In the novel, Vitiate is stated as the most powerful by Nyriss, who has no reason to know who Exar Kun is. Her knowledge is not only fallible but proven by the TOR encyclopedia to be outright wrong (in the case of Nathema).
The first time Vitiate gets a clear accolade putting him above any other preceding dark sider is in TOR.
If you are an adept of accolades; you should know that 'absolute' accolades do not limit themselves to a certain era, even if they are a prequel accolade; it encompasses all eras.Just because Yoda was called the most powerful avatar of the light side, or Vitiate declared as the history's most powerful dark side master doesn't render them as during their-time-period accolades(e.g: Yoda was the most powerful of his time or that Vitiate was of his time); because they are in fact absolute 'prequel' retcon accolades.
Yes, Sidious has his own 'absolute' accolades, but we all know that they clash with Vitiate's accolades too.
That's why when absolute accolades clash(from two different characters); they should be dismissed and use feats instead.
And after we passed that section, we need to see if the accolades are supported by the character's feats.
That's blatantly untrue. You need to learn the difference between in-universe and out-of-universe accolades. In-universe ones only go up to whatever the source is. If the source happens to include all of history, then great. But if it's, say, a novel, it will only go up to that novel's in-universe placement in SW history, not after. They may also be subject to in-character biases (which is what people are disputing the Yoda accolade for), though that doesn't make them inherently wrong. The source of Vitiate's accolades are the TOR codex and encyclopedia, both of which only go up to TOR and not beyond. Hence, Sidious is excluded from those accolades, as if anyone else who came after TOR. This is also why the accolade from the RotS novel only goes up to the RotS novel, and not after. So Luke and Leia and any other foes of darkness from after the book are exempt.
OOU ones will always include all of history. They're also more reliable as they're not going to be subject to in-character biases.
Yes, they are. Pretty much every Legends story that has taken place during Lucas' canon incoporates Lucas' vision of his world, as well of his characters.Only what doesn't include his movie events and characters is free of Lucas' vision. E.g: The Old Republic era
Not really. Legends sources try not to offend Lucas' canon (but that's actually all sources; TOR is only so removed from the main saga that it doesn't need to worry nearly as much about offending Lucas' creation), but apart from that they're given enough reign to do what they want. And they can certainly recognise other Legends works (TotJ is recognised in Shatterpoint, TOR is recognised in Darth Plagueis and Book of Sith, etc.) so your argument makes no sense.
You're really just looking for reasons to attack sources you don't like, do you? Please tell me you're interested in actually judging these accolades fairly and not consigning an entire mass of them to oblivion just because they refer to characters from a certain era.
Originally posted by SunRazer
Not sure about the manual, but quotes do mention the adepts being involved. But crucially, there's no reason to assume they were imperative to the Emperor's effort, not when Palpatine's draining was pretty much effortless anyway.
1. The manual(which it was about space ships) stated that Palpatine and his adepts wove their dark side energies over the Byss people and drained it mutually. Not only that, but it also mentioned that the emperor purposefully chosen those people. And also it mentioned that the people were willingly in worship with him and offering their life-energies to Palpatine and his evil high-tiered adepts.
I don't know what you mean by 'effortless'? It was stated that this act was not instantaneous; it was a gradual feeding, in common. Also the way that manual described it how Palpatine and his high-tiered adepts fed on Byss remembers me of a Sith ritual: mainly because it said that: "Palpatine and his dark adepts wove their dark side energies over Byss."
Now if I just remember its name for god's sake.
The reasonable assumption is that he allowed them to slowly feed on the planet's populace with him, as he had both time and resources at his disposal.
No. It means that they were draining the Byss people together.
He wasn't consuming the entire population quickly like Nihilus did.
There's nothing that suggests he can. As you know, he was performing Life-Drain, not 'Force' drain. He could have consumed them all if he was an all-powerful Dark Lord of the Sith. Bringing non-sensitive to Byss wouldn't be a problem to him, you know. 🙂
I treat them like facts because they've stood the test of time and, despite many people's best efforts, are not contradicted.
It's you who treats them like fact. Well said.
And, no, they've not stood the test of time. Unless you mean accolade-wise, not feat-wise.
But as I said before. Absolute accolades(that don't have the present time frame specified) are available for all eras even if these stories are designed as a prequel rather than a sequel.
If I had dozens of witness statements, I would be putting serious weight on that, yeah. Especially if the actual physical evidence also leaned that way (I do think Sidious' feats are better than Vitiate's).
1. Your dozens of witness statements are just meaningless accolades that are designed to elevate Lucas' characters in the Legends universe during the movies' timeline.
2. The physical evidence does not lean that way. This is just your opinion. As you said it is only your opinion that Sidious>Vitiate.
Most of these quotes have considerably greater weight than individual witness statements because the reliability of a sourcebook is generally a lot higher than the reliability of the average witness statement.
1. The descriptions that I have referred(about Kun and Vitiate) are not from a character's point of view, but from the universe's itself
2. And, yet, in your Sidious Respect Thread, you used average witness statements(as well) to prove him as the top dog Sith
Uh-huh, we do have an idea of what Palpatine can't do at the various points in his life, and when you show me someone doing what he can't do then we can talk.
You wanna tell me what he can't do? Fine.
1. His Force drain isn't applicative in combat
2. The Force lightning blasted Windu with all of Sidious' full power; and he couldn't turn Windu into a pile of bones like he did with those three-five Dark Prophets on Kalakar Six. This suggests that Palpatine accomplised that feat under the dark energies of the moon's nexus
3. Sidious cannot manipulate midi-chlorians
4. Sidious cannot create his perfect body(reference to point 3)
5. Sidious couldn't use rituals that turn a place into a blind spot/void
6. Sidious traveled to the Valley of the Sith Lords to seek guidance and hoping to revitalize his failing clone body, Sidious sought knowledge in the Great Temple
7. Sidious cannot TK objects as large as the Ravager. Don't use the Galen Marek when he fought Sidious example, because he merely re-directed it and it was already falling apart. Not only that, but he was already exhausted of the effort, and he didn't successfully accomplished the task as The Destroyer continued to skid across the surface towards the cannon, despite Starkiller's attempts to brake it.
Note: of course that these points are not just about his Force strength but also about his general dark side knowledge. See, why these accolades are so full of discrepancies and should not be taken as fact?
First of all, if you were trying to attack my logic you'd cite something from before the NJO, not after.
It doesn't matter which came first:
1. Because by the time ROTS was published; Luke was already created in the Expanded Universe.
2. So, no, just because ROTS characters were created before NJO(in-universe perspective) doesn't make it less truer.
Absolutes accolades are absolute accolades; if they don't have the present time frame specified; it cannot be taken as during-a-character's-time-period. It encompasses all times.
Hence the term of: retcon prequel accolade
Yes, there are retcon sequel accolades too, but there are also prequel accolades.
When absolute accolades are written in a story, they encompass all the history of the timeline, not just a time frame portion(whether they are sequel or prequel absolute accolades).
To get my point even better:
You can name your character as the strongest warrior ever in your universe. But someone else adds another character, that predates yours in your universe, and calls them the strongest warrior ever. Therefore, the absolute accolade of his characters retcons your out.
Anyway, you missed the point. Yoda's accolade is in-universe; it only goes up to the time of the source, which is 19 BBY.
As I said before it does not matter if it is in-universe. The absolute accolade still remains intact because it doesn't specify the present time frame. If it does, then you are right.
Luke has not even been born at that time.
It doesn't matter. In the fictional universe's timeline, Luke was already created before ROTS was ever published. Isn't this the argument you, Sheevites, use when claiming Sidious' supremacy over the other ones? You all say that Sidious' DE accolades still hold true even when other characters were not created back then in the 90's(but they are contained within the universe before being created)?
But various other foes of darkness have existed in the years before 19 BBY (Revan, the Exile, the HoT, Barsen'thor, Mace Windu, etc.)
See, I am using the same logic against you. But what you fail to realize is that these absolute accolades(if the time frame is not specified at the present tense) also do apply in reverse as well.
It can't refer to Luke because Luke wasn't an opponent of darkness during the events of RotS, in the SW universe.
Still, no. You either accept that whenever prequel/sequel absolute accolades(that don't specify the present tense) are published, they retcon the continuity and cannot be taken seriously(because they create discrepancies) or you can choose to understand that whenever a character's accolades appear it only refers to the respective time frame of the story(even when they are 'absolute'😉 and does not take into account potential future stories with future characters. This is the reason why I disregard accolades and use feats instead.
That is also why Vitiate's accolades don't actually include Palpatine. They only go up to his time, not beyond. So they include Exar Kun, Naga Sadow, Darth Revan, Nihilus, etc. but they don't include characters afterwards like Bane, Plagueis, Palpatine, Caedus, Krayt, etc.
By your thinking system, actually, they do. From your point of view, if absolute accolades(sequel or prequel) don't specify the present time frame, then they are available for all the continuity in the timeline. 🙂
In the novel, Vitiate is stated as the most powerful by Nyriss, who has no reason to know who Exar Kun is. Her knowledge is not only fallible but proven by the TOR encyclopedia to be outright wrong (in the case of Nathema).
It's not that I was even talking about Nyriss. 😆
"The Sith Emperor, history's most powerful dark side master, performed a ritual of incredible scope to consume the life energy of every being on his homeworld."
-(Star Wars: The Old Republic: Encyclopedia)
The first time Vitiate gets a clear accolade putting him above any other preceding dark sider is in TOR.
The quote takes place before Exar Kun's rise to power, though. 😉
That's blatantly untrue.
No, it is not. This is exactly your logic.
You need to learn the difference between in-universe and out-of-universe accolades.
Umm, Sidious' quotes about him being the most powerful Sith are also in-universe. . .
Are you talking about authors' statement, and I am not aware of that?
In-universe ones only go up to whatever the source is.
If the time frame is specified, yes((because then you have evidence that it only refers to that particular era). If not, it does not.
It does not matter if they(absolute accolades) take place before or after Palpatine. Literature does not work like that, mate.
If the source happens to include all of history, then great. But if it's, say, a novel, it will only go up to that novel's in-universe placement in SW history, not after.
So, that means if in any novel Sidious is described as the strongest Sith Lord of them all it just does not hold water. Nice to know.
The source of Vitiate's accolades are the TOR codex and encyclopedia, both of which only go up to TOR and not beyond.
TOR's timeline isn't linked with the PT and OT's timeline in Legends? Don't they share a common timeline? 😕
Sidious is excluded from those accolades, as if anyone else who came after TOR.
I also use the same logic and say that any TOR Sith is excluded from Palpatine's accolades because those sources only focus on the movie era.
😎
This is also why the accolade from the RotS novel only goes up to the RotS novel, and not after.
And, thus we established that in a story, the time-frame is limited only to that story.
OOU ones will always include all of history.
Isn't the TOR Encyclopedia an OOU source? 😕
They're also more reliable as they're not going to be subject to in-character biases.
I never take characters' words or perspective for granted.
Not really. Legends sources try not to offend Lucas' canon (but that's actually all sources; TOR is only so removed from the main saga that it doesn't need to worry nearly as much about offending Lucas' creation), but apart from that they're given enough reign to do what they want.
TOR is specifically removed because it doesn't follow Lucas' d*ck. That's why. I am glad that at least you admitted that.
And they can certainly recognise other Legends works (TotJ is recognised in Shatterpoint, TOR is recognised in Darth Plagueis and Book of Sith, etc.) so your argument makes no sense.
Just because they are recognized, that does not mean that Lucas' vision is not applied in Legends(during his movies)
After all, you saw how 'easily' Luceno got rid off Vitiate in the novel. As if he didn't want a contender to Palpatine's throne.
You're really just looking for reasons to attack sources you don't like, do you?
Because sources are not made by some god-like begins who can foresee the future and know that accolades of a character will last forever? They are still created by people like us. And this problem isn't just in Star Wars; it is in any massive extended universe.
lease tell me you're interested in actually judging these accolades fairly and not consigning an entire mass of them to oblivion just because they refer to characters from a certain era
I do judge them, fairly. They are still fallible sources because they are created by beings who cannot foresee the future. Hence, I never rest my case on accolades.
Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
1. The manual(which it was about space ships) stated that Palpatine and his adepts wove their dark side energies over the Byss people and drained it mutually. Not only that, but it also mentioned that the emperor purposefully chosen those people. And also it mentioned that the people were willingly in worship with him and offering their life-energies to Palpatine and his evil high-tiered adepts.I don't know what you mean by 'effortless'? It was stated that this act was not instantaneous; it was a gradual feeding, in common. Also the way that manual described it how Palpatine and his high-tiered adepts fed on Byss remembers me of a Sith ritual: mainly because it said that: "Palpatine and his dark adepts wove their dark side energies over Byss."
"Willingly" after their minds were enslaved, perhaps. Otherwise it's retconned.
I mean "effortless" because Palpatine exerts no effort to do that. He does it continuously wherever he goes: as he travels across the galaxy, as he goes about with his daily life, etc. They're forever feeding him even when he's focused on other things. It requires no conscious effort on his part, which is why it seems pretty effortless to me, and why I think the adepts were involved by Palpatine's choice rather than by necessity.
Now if I just remember its name for god's sake.
I know which quote you're referring to.
No. It means that they were draining the Byss people together.
That's not mutually exclusive to what I said.
There's nothing that suggests he can. As you know, he was performing Life-Drain, not 'Force' drain. He could have consumed them all if he was an all-powerful Dark Lord of the Sith. Bringing non-sensitive to Byss wouldn't be a problem to him, you know.🙂
Except for him being more powerful than Nihilus, who can do that, yeah. And being more powerful than various other Sith Lords who considered themselves above destroying worlds.
It's you who treats them like fact. Well said.And, no, they've not stood the test of time. Unless you mean accolade-wise, not feat-wise.
But as I said before. Absolute accolades(that don't have the present time frame specified) are available for all eras even if these stories are designed as a prequel rather than a sequel.
I mean both.
I keep hearing that they've been contradicted by feats, but I've yet to hear any actual case for it. Does anyone want to start?
Uh-huh, and Palpatine has them when they blatantly refer to all of history. You think that just because Palpatine's a PT character, "all of history" now means all of PT history and not of all SW EU history. Then you had the gall to accuse me of not accepting facts due to confirmation bias. 😂
1. Your dozens of witness statements are just meaningless accolades that are designed to elevate Lucas' characters in the Legends universe during the movies' timeline.
Meaningless because it's PT, I get it. No quote ever written pertaining to PT characters is now of any value because they're all part of the global Jewish conspiracy to elevate Lucas' characters in Legends! Waaah!!!
Remember when you accused me of not liking Nihilus so I did everything in power to be in denial over it? Well, here's right back at 'ya: you just don't like Palpatine, so you ignore his accolades and do your best to lowball him, devalue anything he gets to prop him up, and so on. 🙂
But we all know that somebody has to be the strongest. Maybe you just don't like who that someone is?
2. The physical evidence does not lean that way. This is just your opinion. As you said it is only your opinion that Sidious>Vitiate.
It's fact based on accolades, but my opinion is that the feats support those accolades, yes. And I said it was my opinion as I waited for someone to debate me on that and that still hasn't happened.
1. The descriptions that I have referred(about Kun and Vitiate) are not from a character's point of view, but from the universe's itself
2. And, yet, in your Sidious Respect Thread, you used average witness statements(as well) to prove him as the top dog Sith
1. I didn't say otherwise.
2. I used both, as it's a respect thread, lol. It's not an argument. I was compiling the sources that said that.
You'll really reach to any lengths to try and discredit people, won't you? Why don't you accuse me of sexual abuse while you're at it.
You wanna tell me what he can't do? Fine.1. His Force drain isn't applicative in combat
Based on what?
When has Vitiate used Drain in combat? When has Nihilus, apart from after he's stunned his opponents?
2. The Force lightning blasted Windu with all of Sidious' full power; and he couldn't turn Windu into a pile of bones like he did with those three-five Dark Prophets on Kalakar Six. This suggests that Palpatine accomplised that feat under the dark energies of the moon's nexus
Or maybe Mace was just stronger than those Dark Side Prophets? Shock, horror. Also, if it was a dark side nexus, then the [u]Dark Side[/i] Prophets would've been amped as well. Not to mention the RotS script has Mace trying to deflect the Lightning with the Force. It also goes without saying that Palpatine grows stronger after this, but I presume your intent is to debunk the idea that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord even as of RotS.
Prove to me that Nihilus and Vitiate can turn Mace into a pile of bones in the time that Sidious was shocking him.
[u]3. Sidious cannot manipulate midi-chlorians[/b]
Factually untrue; he just didn't master it to the same degree as Plagueis.
By both his word and a separate objective quote, Sidious learnt everything Plagueis did, while in Darth Plagueis he helps Plagueis engineer breakthroughs in manipulating midi-chlorians, and tells Plagueis that he can save him but kills him instead. Midi-chlorian manipulation is also identified as the "power over life and death" in the back cover of the Darth Plagueis paperback, and Sidious is stated to use an identically named power to save Anakin after his immolation in RotS, as well as proposing to teach it to Ferus Olin in the Last of the Jedi series.
[u]4. Sidious cannot create his perfect body(reference to point 3)[/b]
No, he can't. Want to show me the evidence that Nihilus and Vitiate can?
5. Sidious couldn't use rituals that turn a place into a blind spot/void[quote]Based on what?
This is knowledge, not power, by the way. Doesn't even relate to his accolades.
[quote]6. Sidious traveled to the Valley of the Sith Lords to seek guidance and hoping to revitalize his failing clone body, Sidious sought knowledge in the Great Temple
Because Essence Transfer, which was Vitiate and Nihilus' safeguard against bodily death, was no longer helping him as he was literally so strong in the dark side that his bodies kept failing. So this isn't something Nihilus and Vitiate surpassed him in either, nor does it have to do with power. Palpatine's bodies failing were the result of him being so strong in the dark side.
7. Sidious cannot TK objects as large as the Ravager. Don't use the Galen Marek when he fought Sidious example, because he merely re-directed it and it was already falling apart. Not only that, but he was already exhausted of the effort, and he didn't successfully accomplished the task as The Destroyer continued to skid across the surface towards the cannon, despite Starkiller's attempts to brake it.
Based on what can Sidious not do it? You need to show me that he can't, not that he didn't. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, as they say.
After all, we have Sidious being able to, with a thought, crack the foundations of his palace which is 3 km x 20 km wide, large enough to house Star Destroyers and vastly larger than the Ravager. There's also the debated Lusankya incident, which is also far larger than the Ravager.
Note: of course that these points are not just about his Force strength but also about his general dark side knowledge. See, why these accolades are so full of discrepancies and should not be taken as fact?
No, I really don't.
It doesn't matter which came first:1. Because by the time ROTS was published; Luke was already created in the Expanded Universe.
2. So, no, just because ROTS characters were created before NJO(in-universe perspective) doesn't make it less truer.
Absolutes accolades are absolute accolades; if they don't have the present time frame specified; it cannot be taken as during-a-character's-time-period. It encompasses all times.
It doesn't matter because you said so? Alright.
In-universe perspective matters because the accolade is in-universe. If it was out-of-universe, then you'd be right in that includes Luke as well. But that one isn't.
Hence the term of: retcon prequel accoladeYes, there are retcon sequel accolades too, but there are also prequel accolades.
When absolute accolades are written in a story, they encompass all the history of the timeline, not just a time frame portion(whether they are sequel or prequel absolute accolades).
That's certainly a new term to me. Are you sure you're not just making them up?
To get my point even better:
You can name your character as the strongest warrior ever in your universe. But someone else adds another character, that predates yours in your universe, and calls them the strongest warrior ever. Therefore, the absolute accolade of his characters retcons your out.
That depends on if that someone else's character's accolade is in-universe or out-of-universe. If it's IU, then your character is excluded and thus is still the strongest. If it's OOU, then it retcons your quote and their character is now the strongest.
As I said before it does not matter if it is in-universe. The absolute accolade still remains intact because it doesn't specify the present time frame. If it does, then you are right.
I didn't say it specifies the present time frame. I said it includes all of history up to and including the present, but not after. That's how in-universe works.
This really isn't complicated.
It doesn't matter. In the fictional universe's timeline, Luke was already created before ROTS was ever published. Isn't this the argument you, Sheevites, use when claiming Sidious' supremacy over the other ones? You all say that Sidious' DE accolades still hold true even when other characters were not created back then in the 90's(but they are contained within the universe before being created)?
No, this just shows that you don't even read what I say. Quotes don't have expiration dates, so the whole "published in the 90's/00's/10's" argument is irrelevant. That's never been a part of my stance.
My stance is that Sidious' DE accolades hold true up to and of his time when they're out-of-universe (ie. DE endnotes). If they're in-universe, they would include all of history up to and of his time (Nihilus and Vitiate included) but not after, e.g. Caedus and Krayt.
See, I am using the same logic against you. But what you fail to realize is that these absolute accolades(if the time frame is not specified at the present tense) also do apply in reverse as well.
Using my logic? We may have to go back to kindergarten here. I've explained my logic above. You're just not getting it.
Still, no. You either accept that whenever prequel/sequel absolute accolades(that don't specify the present tense) are published, they retcon the continuity and cannot be taken seriously(because they create discrepancies) or you can choose to understand that whenever a character's accolades appear it only refers to the respective time frame of the story(even when they are 'absolute'😉 and does not take into account potential future stories with future characters. This is the reason why I disregard accolades and use feats instead.
With each segment of your post, my hope that you're being willfully obtuse fades.
Once again, all that matters is whether the quote is in-universe or out-of-universe. Sidious is lucky because since he comes after Nihilus and Vitiate in the IU timeline, so whether it's in-universe or out-of-universe, his quotes will apply to them. But Nihilus and Vitiate can only retcon Sidious' quotes if they're out-of-universe, as in-universe quotes would only go up to KotOR II and TOR respectively, and not beyond.
This also applies between Nihilus and Vitiate alone. Vitiate is fortunate that he comes after Nihilus in the IU timeline, so whether in-universe or out-of-universe (he only has in-universe), his quotes of supremacy apply to Nihilus. Whereas Nihilus' in-universe quotes only go up to KotOR II and not beyond, so it would include Vitiate for the first thousand years of his life but not during the Revan novel or TOR. He would need an out-of-universe quote to retcon Vitiate's accolades, which of course he doesn't have.
By your thinking system, actually, they do. From your point of view, if absolute accolades(sequel or prequel) don't specify the present time frame, then they are available for all the continuity in the timeline. 🙂
Available for all of continuity up to and including their time, but not after. Not sure if being forced to repeat myself makes this any clearer to you.
You also need to stop pretending you know exactly how I think when you can't even grasp the foundations of my stance. What happened to me thinking I'm always right? Sounds like you're the one doing that here. 🙂
Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
It's not that I was even talking about Nyriss. 😆"The Sith Emperor, history's most powerful dark side master, performed a ritual of incredible scope to consume the life energy of every being on his homeworld."
-(Star Wars: The Old Republic: Encyclopedia)
😆 Nice attempt at revisionism, but that's not what you said. What you said was this:
And in the Revan novel, Nyriss is the one who says Vitiate is the most powerful.
Points for trying, though. You can ask Vitiate to redeem them for an epic fail coupon. 🙂
The quote takes place before Exar Kun's rise to power, though. 😉
No, it doesn't? It takes place 300 years after. It uses present tense to refer to the past.
I would ask you to trust my knowledge of English but you're not going to agree.
No, it is not. This is exactly your logic.
Here we go again with you pretending to know everything about my stance when you can't even grasp the foundations.
Settle down and consider that you might not be understanding me, hence the lack of headway. I'm trying my hardest to understand you.
Umm, Sidious' quotes about him being the most powerful Sith are also in-universe. . .
Some of them are, yes, some of them aren't.
Once again, you fail to understand that in-universe for Sidious applies to Vitiate and Nihilus but the opposite doesn't, because in-universe, Sidious comes after Vitiate and Nihilus. In-universe, Sidious hadn't existed yet in the times of Vitiate and Nihilus.
Are you talking about authors' statement, and I am not aware of that?
No, because authors' statements aren't canon. They're a last resort for me when there's absolutely nothing else.
However, you may be interested to know that Chris Avellone holds Nihilus beneath Vader and Sidious. 😉
If the time frame is specified, yes((because then you have evidence that it only refers to that particular era). If not, it does not.
It does not matter if they(absolute accolades) take place before or after Palpatine. Literature does not work like that, mate.
Continuity does, though. 😂
So, that means if in any novel Sidious is described as the strongest Sith Lord of them all it just does not hold water. Nice to know.
Once again, it doesn't hold water for Sith coming after, like Caedus and Krayt. It does hold water for those who in the in-universe chronology come before Sidious, such as Vitiate and Nihilus, though.
I've said this many, many times. The fact that you still don't understand, willfully or not, should keep you from these repeated pretences of knowing everything about my stance. You don't.
TOR's timeline isn't linked with the PT and OT's timeline in Legends? Don't they share a common timeline? 😕
Of course they do. But an in-universe quote in TOR stops the timeline at TOR. That's why it can't go beyond and influence the PT. Whereas an in-universe quote in the PT era stops the timeline at the PT, which includes TOR.
I also use the same logic and say that any TOR Sith is excluded from Palpatine's accolades because those sources only focus on the movie era.😎
No, I can tell you're not using the same logic, and so can everyone else. 😂
And, thus we established that in a story, the time-frame is limited only to that story.
Nowhere did I say that.
Isn't the TOR Encyclopedia an OOU source? 😕
No, there's a note at the start saying it's written in an IU perspective.
This encyclopedia expands on the already massive galaxy that is Star Wars: The Old Republic. Written entirely in-universe, this book uncovers secrets only hinted at in the game, divulges never-before-revealed traits and histories of major characters, and details the high-flying adventures and drastic stories that play out during the conflict between the Republic and Empire.
So yeah, it's in-universe.
TOR is specifically removed because it doesn't follow Lucas' d*ck. That's why. I am glad that at least you admitted that.
Because it's set far in the past, yeah. All the PT needs to do is not contradict the movies; that's literally it. Despite many false allegations, Lucas says nothing about Palpatine being the most powerful Sith Lord because he doesn't care about the EU. So the quotes about Palpatine being the most powerful are really that: genuine quotes tailoured for the EU, not Lucas. He's never made such claims and he doesn't care.
Not sure what your hate boner is for Lucas anyway, but you're rapidly confirming allegations of confirmation bias. Makes it more amusing that you throw the charge at me.
Just because they are recognized, that does not mean that Lucas' vision is not applied in Legends(during his movies)
After all, you saw how 'easily' Luceno got rid off Vitiate in the novel. As if he didn't want a contender to Palpatine's throne.
Luceno never got rid of Vitiate, lol. He's also never written any of Palpatine's supremacy accolades (except the one from The Complete Visual Dictionary, which I believe you and several others don't even think refers to Palpatine being the most powerful), so no, I don't think he's got that sort of investment in the character. But cheers for another Jewish conspiracy theory. 👆
Because sources are not made by some god-like begins who can foresee the future and know that accolades of a character will last forever? They are still created by people like us. And this problem isn't just in Star Wars; it is in any massive extended universe.
The idea that individual quotes are fallible is something I agree with; I said as much at the start. The difference is that Palpatine's quotes surmount any issues of reliability because there are so many of them, written by so many different authors in so many different texts (and types of text) across so many years. That's what makes Palpatine's supremacy a lot harder to undermine than the lone quote saying Malak is far more powerful than Exar Kun, for example. It's a repeated fact, not an ambiguous one-off.
I do judge them, fairly. They are still fallible sources because they are created by beings who cannot foresee the future. Hence, I never rest my case on accolades.
Nobody says they aren't fallible. But fallible doesn't mean wrong, it only means capable of being proven wrong. Which you still haven't done. 👆
For the purpose of all this. I suggest we start a separate thread, if you want to, of course. This isn't about the main thread, anymore. I have seen similar cases when Nai debated with Beni or other KMC members.
Although it's a pleasure discussing with you here on KMC. You always have something up your sleeve to say. 💃
Except Comic Vine. There it's like you are a completely different person
Not really. I've been bored enough now to waste this much time of my life debating the supremacy of fictional characters, but that won't always be the case. For that matter, I can't even guarantee how long I'll be around here.
It seems we're not going to make any headway though as our fundamental interpretations of continuity are markedly different and we make different distinctions. I don't care enough about someone not having Palpatine at the top to make another three posts, tbh, especially knowing that we're unlikely to make progress. We'll see.
Well, at least, I am finally glad that you don't consider me a troll or a retarded member. And you are right. We have a different thinking system when it comes about this type of stuff.
Now, I am not saying you are wrong based on your beliefs. But I hold feats in greater regards than accolades; no character is an exception in my book.
It would be better if you were 'criticizing' me regarding my SW fan stories.