"So Sadow blowing up a Star is a less impressive technique than Force Storm ? So Sadow producing an illusionary army that would've toppled the Republic had he not have been betrayed is a less impressive feat than Sidious's feat of Force Storm?"
Sadow needed to meditate for hours to do the things that you have listed. He needed to channel the force through amulets because he could not control the power. Sidious was able to do a force storm in about five seconds shortly after his fight with Luke.
He is shown to meditate for hours to perform them to his full extent, however mediation simply enhances his performance and it doesn't neccesarrily mean he needs it.
Yep he uses the Amulets, but why does that diminish his power? Look what happened to Sidious when he lost control of the Force Storm, if anything the Amulet can limit the power of Sadow's technique. All in all, the Amulet does not give power to Sadow, the force he used for the specific technique is his raw power.
Correct me if im wrong, but Sidious applied the technique close to his flagship, he did not use the power to the length nor breadth of Sadow sitting in the middle of his fleet, producing an Illusionary Army on a few planets.
So prove that Sadow couldn't reproduce his illusions in a lower grade? Its proven that relatively weaker Dark Jedi ( Aleema ) can use the illusions, in a much lower scale.
Just like Sidious can control the power and extent of his Force Storm Sadow can control his illusion's power and amount.
You are missing my point. Sidious' force storm was able to generate as much power as Sadow's destroying a star, yet it took him less time, and he didn't require as much concentration.
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Picking up some power converters.
Exactly, I think it is made pretty clear in the quote that it is raw combat power. Isn't the quote something along the lines of "Yoda could not defeat the most powerful Sith ever."? It would be plain silly to be talking about how Yoda could not defeat Sidious because of his great political power. Ever encompasses everything (or at least up to that time, yup, that includes the Ancients like Ragnos).
No, Yoda could not defeat The Most Powerful Sith in History, not ever, also how does that disapprove the statement of Sidious being more so in the political/domination factor. It simply means Yoda could not beat Sidious, and none of us here have doubted Sidious's prowess in terms of Force and Physical power.
Quite simply, its not silly because it terms of power, he wielded the most over the galaxy, he manipulated and controlled, thus giving him the title Most Powerful, because he suceeded in what the other Sith had not is quite correct. Political/Domination Power > Single Entity Power. If you dont believe that, the face the facts around our world today, name one leader of Modern Times that was the most powerful being even in personal combat.
Read the comics, Sadow did not require immense concentration nor time to destroy the star, and also you missed the point that if Sadow was to create an Illusionary Army, that could provide as much destructive power as the Force Storm, he wouldn't need to concentrate as much, as far as anyone knows he needed the meditation chamber to help him concentrate enough for an invasion army that divided and attacked more than one planet.
Your twisting what is said to suit your own agenda. When it says "...most powerful in history" it means most powerful in history. The meaning is clear, your just coming up with lame things like "history as in what..." crap.
Thats not the question as I've said though. IF these quotes are canon and can retcon events then it makes absolutely no difference what other people have or have not done. The statement holds true in any case, Palpatine would be the most powerful. It makes no difference who has blown up stars or frozen senate chambers, the statement holds true no matter what.
You guys are being hypocritical. When it says "Ragnos was THE Sith lord the most powerful of the most powerful" its not saying of all time (like the palpatine quote does). The quote is directed at that time frame, where Ragnos WAS the most powerful of the powerful. It does not say "Ragnos was THE Sith lord, the most powerful of all the Sith ever" if it did then the meaning (that you attempt to infer upon the quote) would hold true. But in reality all it is saying is that Ragnos was the most powerful at the time. Its illogical to assume that a statement would hold true in events that have not happened yet, the narration is being made at the time of the events. Its like me saying "Roy jones jr. is the best of the best boxers" and you then maintaining that such a quote would hold true to other (possible) boxers who do not exist but will potentially exist in the future. Such a quote is temporally fixed on the time it was said and to infer a further temporal meaning upon it is illogical.
Deception, 'In history' is 'ever' and in a book that's describing SW history...really, the semantics here are nothing, Dan Wallace said he wrote Sidious as the most powerful Sith ever.
Deception, KJA himself wrote that the weaspon on Sadow's ship destroyed the star...Sadow's power wasn't doing the job by itself...and Sidious didn't need to concentrate to destroy a world or obliterate a fleet...in fact, when he razed a world, he was described to do 'at his leisure'.
This quote is a reference to ever and is in a reference to a battle, Yoda failed to defeat the most powerful Sith ever in what, a debate?
And Palp and Luke have both been shown to create illusionary ships spanning entire fleets. Moreover, Sidious's force storm was described as the single greatest usage of dark side power ever...it ripped the fabric of the galaxy.
Moreover, I can and HAVE proved the guide is C-canon...I've linked to the Holocron, to the Sansweet/Rostini, to Leland Chee's comments and posted the bit on C-canon...it's everything else, books, RPG sourcebook story and background info, card game character info, comics, game plots...
Dan Wallace said sometimes they cut things-some of his stuff was gone over with a fine tooth comb and changed- others were allowed to stay, like changing the Sith Empire, Xendor and the Palpatine thing, and Kevin J. Anderson collaborated...in fact, KJA wrote all that 'vague' info of the Ancients in the NEC
If I may post some things I've posted before, from the Holocron info on the canon level:
G-canon is absolute canon; the six Episodes and anything coming directly from George Lucas (including unpublished production notes from him or his production department that are never seen by the public). Elements coming directly from Lucas in the movie novelizations, reference books, and other sources are also G-canon, though anything created by the authors of those sources is C-canon (see below).
When the matter of changes between movie versions is brought up, the remastered editions are deemed superior to the theatrical ones, since they correct mistakes and 'improve' consistency between the two trilogies. They also express Lucas' "original" intention and also final word.
C-canon is pretty much everything in the Expanded Universe: Star Wars books, comics, games, cartoons, non-theatrical films, and more. Games are a special case as generally only the stories are C-canon while things like stats and gameplay may not be. C-canon elements have been known to appear in the movies, thus making them G-canon. (This includes: the name "Coruscant," swoop bikes, Quinlan Vos, Aayla Secura, YT-2400 freighters, Salporin, and Action VI Transports.)
S-canon is "secondary" canon; the story itself is considered non-continuity, but the non-contradicting elements are still a canon part of the Star Wars universe. This includes things like the online roleplaying game Star Wars Galaxies and certain elements of a few N-canon stories. Many of the materials labelled as S-canon are older sources which may or may not fit within the continuity, but which have not been fully evaluated prior to inclusion in the Holocron database.
N-canon is "non-canon." What-if stories (such as stories published under the Infinities label), most game stats, fanon, and anything else directly contradicted by higher canon ends up here. N-canon is the only level that is not considered canon by Lucasfilm.
Tasty Taste
Member Profile
Total Posts: 1044
Member Since: 05/00
reply
Date Posted: Jan 21, 2004 09:16 AM
Are the entries in the Holocron sorted as cannonical & non-cannonical? Are there various degress of oficialness?
The database does indeed have a canon field. Anything in the films and from George Lucas (including unpublished internal notes that we might receive from him or from the film production department) is considered "G" canon. Next we have what we call continuity "C" canon which is pretty much everything else. There is secondary "S" continuity canon which we use for some older published materials and things that may or may not fit just right. But, if it is referenced in something else it becomes "C". Similarly, any "C" canon item that makes it into the films can become "G" canon. Lastly there is non-continuity "N" which we rarely use except in the case of a blatant contradiction or for things that have been cut.
Tasty Taste
Member Profile
Total Posts: 1044
Member Since: 05/00
reply
Date Posted: Jan 25, 2004 03:52 AM
Okay, I know that the novels are C-level, and I assume that most of the newer comics are also C-level. Where on the continuity spectrum to the Video games come in?
"...continuity "C" canon which is pretty much everything else. " By everything else I mean EVERYthing else. Novels, comics, junior novels, videogames, trading card games, roleplaying games, toys, websites, television. As I've mentioned earlier, any contradictions that arise are dealt on a case-by-case.
This has been our general approach to continuity since we began using the Holocron database to track it.
Which is funny as now the Sith Empire starts at 7000 BBY because of the NEC.And guides have created new planets...and technology...and given us new info about alien species, even the Vong
Traya, you're attempting to fight an unofficial source with proof it counts and maybe, just maybe, you should read the links. Especially as, well, your points have been debunked in the 'they can't create canon'...you know what? They didn't, they just compiled it and that canon was that Sidious was the strongest
Nope, sorry. Leland Chee confirmed it. And the only place that EVER gave the Sith Empire's age? A sourcebook! And it's been retconned! And confirmed! The 25,000 year schism was due to Zendor and eight thousand years later, was Ajunta Pall's rebellion:
is an epic that spans over 25,000 years of continuity, from the founding of the Republic to the formation of the Galactic Alliance. The newly updated book, written by Daniel Wallace (with Kevin J. Anderson), provides an overarching view of the many stories set in the Star Wars universe, finally fills in the gaps of the prequel trilogy and The New Jedi Order, and connects the many eras and tales with newly revealed information
Newly revealed info...this from Star Wars' official site!
I have to say that Lightsnake is making hella good points here, and has the stuff to back it up.
if the NEC is not a guide, but rather considered a book, then Lightsnake is right...
I've seen nothing from anyone else that says otherwise, all everyone keeps saying is either "lmao lightsnake, your back" or throwing out "guides are not canon"...the thing is, this book is apparently not a "guide" its at the same level as a book or comic...
NO ONE else has refuted anything that Lightsnake has said thus far with any supporting evidence...so I'm inclined to believe LS.
I've actually read through everything that he has been saying (without bias) and what he's saying makes sense. What he is saying is apparently official..
__________________
BRAWL FRIEND CODE: 3823-8176-3726
Last edited by ((The_Anomaly)) on Apr 21st, 2006 at 08:13 PM
Thank you, Anomaly...I'd like people to just check out the links I provided and the NEC's summary on the OFFICIAL STAR WARS site said it provides new info.
Well I don't make a habit of just ignoring things because of who is saying it. Not if they have links and scans to back it up.
My computer monitor is large enough to read the NEC scan and it does indeed say what you said it does.
And the levels of canon are set, and this book DOES seem to fall under it, making it C-canon. As well as the comments by Dan Wallace prove it further...and unless someone can find an official source either discrediting the book as C-canon, or something that discredits Dan Wallace's comments, then....well LS your right...and it makes no difference that other people don't like you...
I don't mind not being liked but it honestly grates my cheese that whenever I actually tried to debate civilly, I was flamed and bashed to hell and back
WTF? The Sith Empire starting ar 7000 BBY makes no sense whatsoever...
But it happened.
Anyways, again I don't see the fuss outta this. What's wrong with Palpatine being the most powerful? It doesn't make sense? Destroying suns doesn't make sense. Manipulating black holes doesn't make sense. "The Force" doesn't make much sense either. It's Star Wars. It's fiction. If Palpatine is the strongest, then so be it.
But then, everyone in the PT would receive a massive surge of power. If Palpatine is more powerful than Ragnos, then Yoda is too.
Apr 21st, 2006 12:22 PM
