Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

He's stated to be far more powerful than Naga Sadow, yet there are many people who have him as Sadow's equal or a considerable inferior to Ragnos and some of the other ancients. I'm curious - where do you guys rank Freedon Nadd in terms of power? Who is he most comparable to in terms of power?

Nadd is likely one of the most powerful of all, perhaps Vader/Krayt tier.

Anakin level, at best. Though that's just speculation.

What do you make of the Ragnos > Nadd arguments, then? Or do you have Ragnos above those two?

Well Marka Ragnos being regarded as the "most powerful of the most powerful", the "greatest Dark Lord of the Sith" etc. probably places him above Nadd and the rest.

While that does seem to be the general consensus and my take on it, I don't think it's entirely set in stone. Ragnos is one of the most vulnerable characters to the "greatness could refer to many things" argument that you guys love to throw around, since political strategy and prosperity were hallmarks of his reign. The quote about him being "the most powerful of the most powerful" only applies up to and of his time, I believe, and it's from a publisher's summary anyway, which a lot of you people seem to dismiss.

Even if that's the case, even back in TOTJ he seemed to be the definitive leader of the Sith Spirit Council. He's clearly the dominant ancient lord, and he's probably Vader level or above.

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Even if that's the case, even back in TOTJ he seemed to be the definitive leader of the Sith Spirit Council. He's clearly the dominant ancient lord, and he's probably Vader level or above.

Who was in the Sith spirit council, lol?

Originally posted by SunRazer
While that does seem to be the general consensus and my take on it, I don't think it's entirely set in stone. Ragnos is one of the most vulnerable characters to the "greatness could refer to many things" argument that you guys love to throw around, since political strategy and prosperity were hallmarks of his reign. The quote about him being "the most powerful of the most powerful" only applies up to and of his time, I believe, and it's from a publisher's summary anyway, which a lot of you people seem to dismiss. Not me, I think that argument rather dubious. At the very least it refer to excellence in all the above, power surely being the foremost as it was most prized by the Sith, certainly the principle attribute of any Dark Lord, which was literally decided by martial combat.

And yeah it does but no one else ever received such a level of praise, and in that respect is the most standout of the Sith. And I think publisher's summaries hold some value tbh. This one being supported by the fact that it is Ragnos who leads the Sith procession and anoints the next Dark Lords.

Fair calls. As I said, I agree that Ragnos > Nadd.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
This one being supported by the fact that it is Ragnos who leads the Sith procession and anoints the next Dark Lords.

This is what I was referring to, Razer.

So do you guys have Ragnos > all ancient Sith in power, barring Kun?

Yeah. Though who knows, Ragnos's forte was combat dominance, he'd have Kun sweating.

Interesting. That would put Ragnos above Vader, which isn't hard to believe holistically but the lack of concrete support is a bit disappointing...

Originally posted by SunRazer
So do you guys have Ragnos > all ancient Sith in power, barring Kun?

Hard to tell with guys like Hord and Kallig doing some major damage in their times. And judging from the comics, the Jedi Exiles themselves were powerhouses.

Technically, Hord fits under Ragnos' supremacy accolade.

The GAOTS comics were written before Hord's accomplishments in TOR.

So? Accolades are never passively retconned. Inconsistent as it may be, SW continuity is still a continuity - meaning that nothing is changed unless there is an explicit change in continuity. Everything depicted afterwards is naturally assumed to go under previously established continuity unless specifically said otherwise. That means that unless there is a specific quote to contradict it, Ragnos' supremacy quote(s) stands.

Who says they are never retconned, especially from In Universe sources?

The fact that it's a continuity? Every source operates in tandem with one another - on a basic level, this is what allows a source to have sequels and prequels. Once a source is published, it's assumed to be naturally acknowledged/included by all relevant material in the future, regardless of authorial intent at the time (given how large the SW Expanded Universe is, obviously no author can remember every single piece of information).

A retcon, as I'm sure you're aware, is an outright rewriting of a prior source. When you show me a contradiction to Ragnos' quotes of supremacy, I'll acknowledge it as a retcon. Otherwise, it isn't. The entire TOR franchise is built on the backs of previously established material. There are contradictions, which are what we call retcons. Everything else is expected to follow previously established material. Whether it's in-universe or not is irrelevant.

You have one quote of supremacy (which can be interpreted in 2 or 3 ways), and you have the feats of another character which are pretty damn impressive.

Feats only work with utter certainty when there's common ground between the feats - ie. Character X ragdolls Character Y, Character Z gets ragdolled by Character Y, so we can infer that Character X can ragdoll Character Z. Cross-era feat comparisons are ultimately arbitrary and solid accolades should always take precedence over such things.

Especially when we know so little of Ragnos' capabilities.