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

Though in my "real" views on Star Wars tiers I put the ancients generally below modern characters, I try to be reasonable and objective about it - I've flirted with the idea of placing Exar Kun above Vader from his spirit feats, and do consider some of their more impressive feats and accolades, such as Darth Jadus holding together part of a dreadnaught.

The moderns being more powerful overall seems to be accurate, both thematically and from the direct evidence present. Directly, we know that Sidious is canonically the most powerful sith lord of all time, and Yoda the most powerful Jedi Master - with Anakin potentially the most powerful Jedi . Barring entities, how many Sidious tier combatants were there in the course of the past 25,000 recorded years? One ? And no Jedi was even remotely on his level - or really, on the level of any of the ancient sith when they were alive. And yet in about a century, there are at least four on Sidious's tier, and over a dozen who match him in potential - the numbers speak for themselves. The modern Jedi and Sith must be stronger from powerscaling.

Thematically, I do think the whole idea of the prophecy of the Chosen One would make more sense if the Force conceived a being to face a particularly monstrous threat - .ie, Palpatine . The concurrently running idea of the Prequel Trilogy in general is the decay and decline of the Republic and the Jedi - and one might think that a Lord of the Rings style power regression would fit in with this. I would argue the contrary. The point of the Prequels isn't that the Jedi fell because they were weak - they fell because they were blind, arrogant, and resistant to change. It would make it an even greater tragedy if the Jedi, who are themselves tragic heroes, were tall and mighty, and lost due to hubris, rather than just because they weren't as good at lifting things as they were before. It is, after all, a sort of exaggerated parallel to Rome / maybe western imperialism, and those civilizations in question had their flaws, but those flaws were amplified by their military might, not the reverse. And finally, you do want the primary two trilogies of the saga to represent some sort of climax, not a steady decay.

----------------

There are two personal reasons though.

Firstly, people as well as myself may be backlashing against the ludicrous ancient sith wank that once roamed the internet. People were declaring that Ragnos could beat Yoda and Sidious at once based on...based on...what, exactly? Literally the fact that they were ancient sith! Kas'im was once considered Dooku's superior as a swordsman, etc. This type of ludicrous worship of ancient characters with no feats or accolades to their name definitely invited some sort of backlash, and here it is. Here is people assuming that Darth Bane was almost as powerful as Palpatine, despite that literally being the opposite of the very basis of the rule of two.

Secondly, and somewhat more loosely, I don't like the "good old days" mentality. I don't like it politically, I look down on people who obsess about the superior morality of older generations or how things were better back then in everything - not just for the frequently veiled bigotry but also for the stupidity because, well, it just statistically isn't true. Things in real life have gotten drastically better in almost every category over time, and this is a claim that can be backed with empirical observation and basic assertions - rates of crime and war are at an all-time low, as are child poverty rates, democracy has spread further than it ever has, we have made incalculable strides in spreading human rights and equity, etc. And yet people still get the impression that the Jim-Crow era 1930s were "morally superior" and "the greatest generation", lol. Even common ideas like Millenials being "lazy" are clearly disabused by the evidence - the latest generation is more likely to work a job in college than their parents were. And I get the same sort of vibe from the ancient wankers. It sounds random and I'm sure it isn't literally true for many of said ancient wankers, but I the vibe's still there, for me, at least.

It's a space age civilization. Sure, I could see some ancient sith taking their secrets to the grave, or collections getting lost or destroyed over time, but as long as they can store data digitally, information would increase over time. Forms would be refined, new techniques would be invented, and that would be the net progress of society - and we see this for ourselves already in SW technology, and in innovations such as Windu's creating vaapad.

That's why the modern characters should be generally more powerful.

Okay.

Actually well writen and coherent, interesting read

If you're going to argue that a modern era character is more powerful though, it should be backed by evidence and not thematic bullshit because we aren't the Forcecast.

Hard to tell. Is Leonardo da Vinci dumber than you because he doesn't know how to work an ipod? Its all perspective

Sidious and Yoda never impressed me canonically anyways. Weak.

Well, besides Plagueis. And while it's true that out of the Jedi we've seen from the Old Republic era, very few can even compete with Yoda in any facet, I'm not sure these are fair statements. Remember that there were Jedi like Fae Coven that were supposedly on Yoda's caliber, to some degree; and I doubt she was alone.



The modern era definitely has the strongest pool.



Lol is that what you were talking about when you linked the TOR brigade with political conservatism?

Originally posted by JKBart
Actually well writen and coherent, interesting read

You're wrong about the Jedi becoming complacent Legend.And most of the PT Jedi accolades come from objective sources.

The entire idea of some eras having some blatant superiority over others, is pretty ridiculous. You can argue New Sith Wars being a dark age but given powerhouses like Bane, Zannah and Cognus came out of the ashes of the Brotherhood, that becomes quickly irrelevant. Contrary to popular moronic belief, the three of them are exceedingly powerful and Bane especially has legendary prowess.

The eras do not have inherent advantages over the other, almost all of them have extremely powerful Force users who can easily give each other deadly engagements.

This concept persists that those such as Sidious, Valkorion and Yoda are somehow untouchable Forces of nature, yet evidence to the contrary exists. They are and have been taken to the edge and even died facing characters of their respective eras that are not as impressive as those typically pitted against them.

Both concepts are simply illogical.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Though in my "real" views on Star Wars tiers I put the ancients generally below modern characters, I try to be reasonable and objective about it - I've flirted with the idea of placing Exar Kun above Vader from his spirit feats, and do consider some of their more impressive feats and accolades, such as Darth Jadus holding together part of a dreadnaught.

The moderns being more powerful overall seems to be accurate, both thematically and from the direct evidence present. Directly, we know that Sidious is canonically the most powerful sith lord of all time, and Yoda the most powerful Jedi Master - with Anakin potentially the most powerful Jedi . Barring entities, how many Sidious tier combatants were there in the course of the past 25,000 recorded years? One ? And no Jedi was even remotely on his level - or really, on the level of any of the ancient sith when they were alive. And yet in about a century, there are at least four on Sidious's tier, and over a dozen who match him in potential - the numbers speak for themselves. The modern Jedi and Sith must be stronger from powerscaling.

Thematically, I do think the whole idea of the prophecy of the Chosen One would make more sense if the Force conceived a being to face a particularly monstrous threat - .ie, Palpatine . The concurrently running idea of the Prequel Trilogy in general is the decay and decline of the Republic and the Jedi - and one might think that a Lord of the Rings style power regression would fit in with this. I would argue the contrary. The point of the Prequels isn't that the Jedi fell because they were weak - they fell because they were blind, arrogant, and resistant to change. It would make it an even greater tragedy if the Jedi, who are themselves tragic heroes, were tall and mighty, and lost due to hubris, rather than just because they weren't as good at lifting things as they were before. It is, after all, a sort of exaggerated parallel to Rome / maybe western imperialism, and those civilizations in question had their flaws, but those flaws were amplified by their military might, not the reverse. And finally, you do want the primary two trilogies of the saga to represent some sort of climax, not a steady decay.

----------------

There are two personal reasons though.

Firstly, people as well as myself may be backlashing against the ludicrous ancient sith wank that once roamed the internet. People were declaring that Ragnos could beat Yoda and Sidious at once based on...based on...what, exactly? Literally the fact that they were ancient sith! Kas'im was once considered Dooku's superior as a swordsman, etc. This type of ludicrous worship of ancient characters with no feats or accolades to their name definitely invited some sort of backlash, and here it is. Here is people assuming that Darth Bane was almost as powerful as Palpatine, despite that literally being the opposite of the very basis of the rule of two.

Secondly, and somewhat more loosely, I don't like the "good old days" mentality. I don't like it politically, I look down on people who obsess about the superior morality of older generations or how things were better back then in everything - not just for the frequently veiled bigotry but also for the stupidity because, well, it just statistically isn't true. Things in real life have gotten drastically better in almost every category over time, and this is a claim that can be backed with empirical observation and basic assertions - rates of crime and war are at an all-time low, as are child poverty rates, democracy has spread further than it ever has, we have made incalculable strides in spreading human rights and equity, etc. And yet people still get the impression that the Jim-Crow era 1930s were "morally superior" and "the greatest generation", lol. Even common ideas like Millenials being "lazy" are clearly disabused by the evidence - the latest generation is more likely to work a job in college than their parents were. And I get the same sort of vibe from the ancient wankers. It sounds random and I'm sure it isn't literally true for many of said ancient wankers, but I the vibe's still there, for me, at least.

It's a space age civilization. Sure, I could see some ancient sith taking their secrets to the grave, or collections getting lost or destroyed over time, but as long as they can store data digitally, information would increase over time. Forms would be refined, new techniques would be invented, and that would be the net progress of society - and we see this for ourselves already in SW technology, and in innovations such as Windu's creating vaapad.

That's why the modern characters should be generally more powerful. To be fair, there aren't really many Sidious tier opponents in all of history.

http://i.imgur.com/H4cUr4b.gif

LMFAO

I think modern characters being less powerful works much better from a narrative standpoint as doesn't leave one constantly scratching their heads as to why such power is never exerted in the OT or PT films. Instead, we can always fall back on the notion that much knowledge had been lost since the time of the ancients.

Originally posted by Dark-Kenshin
I think modern characters being less powerful works much better from a narrative standpoint as doesn't leave one constantly scratching their heads as to why such power is never exerted in the OT or PT films. Instead, we can always fall back on the notion that much knowledge had been lost since the time of the ancients.

You can only show so much in films Kenshin. Plus it's not like anyone was thinking of all these bizarre abilities and such to include during the time of the films.

Originally posted by Dark-Kenshin
I think modern characters being less powerful works much better from a narrative standpoint as doesn't leave one constantly scratching their heads as to why such power is never exerted in the OT or PT films. Instead, we can always fall back on the notion that much knowledge had been lost since the time of the ancients. Or, Legends.

Originally posted by Dark-Kenshin
I think modern characters being less powerful works much better from a narrative standpoint as doesn't leave one constantly scratching their heads as to why such power is never exerted in the OT or PT films. Instead, we can always fall back on the notion that much knowledge had been lost since the time of the ancients.

Actually, the knowledge the PT Jedi had was compared to that of the great library of Ossus:



-- Star Wars Fact File 46

Granted part of this stuff was destroyed by the Empire, but that's beside the point. As for the Sith, Bane already had all the knowledge of Sadow and Nadd, who are among the most powerful and knowledgeable ancient Sith at his disposal, and his successor collected more and more stuff in a thousand years, so it's not surprising that modern Jedi and Sith are above their older incarnations, at least when it comes to high and top tier people.

Much more ancient sith knowledge was lost than could ever be gained by Bane and his sith.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Though in my "real" views on Star Wars tiers I put the ancients generally below modern characters, I try to be reasonable and objective about it - I've flirted with the idea of placing Exar Kun above Vader from his spirit feats, and do consider some of their more impressive feats and accolades, such as Darth Jadus holding together part of a dreadnaught.

The moderns being more powerful overall seems to be accurate, both thematically and from the direct evidence present. Directly, we know that Sidious is canonically the most powerful sith lord of all time, and Yoda the most powerful Jedi Master - with Anakin potentially the most powerful Jedi . Barring entities, how many Sidious tier combatants were there in the course of the past 25,000 recorded years? One ? And no Jedi was even remotely on his level - or really, on the level of any of the ancient sith when they were alive. And yet in about a century, there are at least four on Sidious's tier, and over a dozen who match him in potential - the numbers speak for themselves. The modern Jedi and Sith must be stronger from powerscaling.

Thematically, I do think the whole idea of the prophecy of the Chosen One would make more sense if the Force conceived a being to face a particularly monstrous threat - .ie, Palpatine . The concurrently running idea of the Prequel Trilogy in general is the decay and decline of the Republic and the Jedi - and one might think that a Lord of the Rings style power regression would fit in with this. I would argue the contrary. The point of the Prequels isn't that the Jedi fell because they were weak - they fell because they were blind, arrogant, and resistant to change. It would make it an even greater tragedy if the Jedi, who are themselves tragic heroes, were tall and mighty, and lost due to hubris, rather than just because they weren't as good at lifting things as they were before. It is, after all, a sort of exaggerated parallel to Rome / maybe western imperialism, and those civilizations in question had their flaws, but those flaws were amplified by their military might, not the reverse. And finally, you do want the primary two trilogies of the saga to represent some sort of climax, not a steady decay.

----------------

There are two personal reasons though.

Firstly, people as well as myself may be backlashing against the ludicrous ancient sith wank that once roamed the internet. People were declaring that Ragnos could beat Yoda and Sidious at once based on...based on...what, exactly? Literally the fact that they were ancient sith! Kas'im was once considered Dooku's superior as a swordsman, etc. This type of ludicrous worship of ancient characters with no feats or accolades to their name definitely invited some sort of backlash, and here it is. Here is people assuming that Darth Bane was almost as powerful as Palpatine, despite that literally being the opposite of the very basis of the rule of two.

Secondly, and somewhat more loosely, I don't like the "good old days" mentality. I don't like it politically, I look down on people who obsess about the superior morality of older generations or how things were better back then in everything - not just for the frequently veiled bigotry but also for the stupidity because, well, it just statistically isn't true. Things in real life have gotten drastically better in almost every category over time, and this is a claim that can be backed with empirical observation and basic assertions - rates of crime and war are at an all-time low, as are child poverty rates, democracy has spread further than it ever has, we have made incalculable strides in spreading human rights and equity, etc. And yet people still get the impression that the Jim-Crow era 1930s were "morally superior" and "the greatest generation", lol. Even common ideas like Millenials being "lazy" are clearly disabused by the evidence - the latest generation is more likely to work a job in college than their parents were. And I get the same sort of vibe from the ancient wankers. It sounds random and I'm sure it isn't literally true for many of said ancient wankers, but I the vibe's still there, for me, at least.

It's a space age civilization. Sure, I could see some ancient sith taking their secrets to the grave, or collections getting lost or destroyed over time, but as long as they can store data digitally, information would increase over time. Forms would be refined, new techniques would be invented, and that would be the net progress of society - and we see this for ourselves already in SW technology, and in innovations such as Windu's creating vaapad.

That's why the modern characters should be generally more powerful.


I'm still sticking with KotOR character, not only they are more well written but a lot of knowledge and technic have been lost, Ossus Malachor V etc etc.....


Champions of later era do not have acess to this kid of knowledge... Because it gone forever.

But Still I understand why you do write that you get piss off by those kind of morons.. this normal to write something like this....

The Jedi order have been put to near extinction mutiple time they did rebuild from scratch just to get destroyed again, the knoledge producing juice is actually the sith V.S Jedi warS, the sith are the most agressive in term of resarch, they are the one who did ivented the most deadly and powerfull artifacts, and they are the one that are gone.

The one who stay the most, where the Jedi.. And what did jedi studdy? Healing, nature, the current of the force, and eventually martial arts.
They have destroy a lot of sith research and artifacts......

Originally posted by FreshestSlice
Okay.

K*

Ur welcome ****** boi.