IMO:

1) Jedi Consular/Sith Inquisitor

Both are members of their respective councils, both have raised armies loyal to them, both have multiple apprentices (remember the Consular picks up a Voss mystic as an apprentice of sorts). Both of those classes knowledge of the force exceeds the other force using classes which focus more on martial skills.

2) Sith Warrior/Jedi Knight

Mostly for physical prowess, neither has much political power. The Wrath of the Emperor is mostly an errand boy for a force ghost and the Knight is just a random Master who leads the Jedi on the field.

3) Smuggler

At the end of the story, the Smuggler is a an honest to goodness crimelord with an organization of lowlifes, hoodlums and rapscallions at his disposal.

4) The rest

1 JK - only person capable of resisting the emperor's mind control. Comes in to a game of catch up when the enemy is about ten years ahead and only loses one planet, this is not a screw up as some have implied nor a well that is the best we can expect result. Face it before any of the others would have even come close Tython and the Jedi would have been toast or if you reverse the plot for the imps Kaas and the council would have been toast. The rest falls under the first part of my opinion he is the only one who could defeat the emperor regardless of body.

2 Consular - Capable of shielding the Jedi against control of others and still being a bad*** in the force. Creates an army that crushes the imps and the children at every turn.

3 Inquisitor - Gains power by binding ghost and becomes a member of the council.

4 SW - Beats a pretender to the throne and becomes the Wrath after the previous one betrays the empire.

Actually Kira resisted too. Which is especially impressive because she'd been conditioned to have reduced resistance for years.

As for only a planet, how about if it was only Los Angeles? Boston? New York? London? Bei Jing? Colossal screw up. Tython doesn't exactly make up for what was lost.

Actually Kira resisted too. Which is especially impressive because she'd been conditioned to have reduced resistance for years.

 

As for only a planet, how about if it was only Los Angeles? Boston? New York? London? Bei Jing? Colossal screw up. Tython doesn't exactly make up for what was lost.

True Kira resist when she is halfway across the galaxy, but I am talking in the emperors presence something the game itself establishes

. As for your second question if any of the came after years of planning by the enemy and you came in to the picture just before any of these attacks were to take place and you had to clear 5 or 6 other attacks, all of which you do stop then no it would not be a colossal screw up as long as you stop it from happening again. All of which you do in the game. If anything were to be a colossal screw up it would be that with all the advantages Angral has he still fails to destroy more than one small planet, More in lines of a test run like Omaha, Denver, Yorkshire, or Shanghai.

Actually Kira resisted too. Which is especially impressive because she'd been conditioned to have reduced resistance for years.

 

As for only a planet, how about if it was only Los Angeles? Boston? New York? London? Bei Jing? Colossal screw up. Tython doesn't exactly make up for what was lost.

Colossal screwup? Oh yeah, no question. The Mon-Cal General screwed up massively and should be put on trial for war-crimes for his (unintentional and incompetent) involvement in the Empire's development and theft of super-weapons that were turned against the Republic. The tacticians of the Republic also screwed up catastrophically when they decided to leave the most productive agri-world in the republic practically undefended. Anyone who's so much as *looked* at a book or study of logistics knows that you lock down your troop's food supply as tight as you possibly can afford.

The Knight, on the other hand, came into the picture in the 11th hour to save Corescant and Tython from imprisonment and destruction, respectively, before bringing the sith lord behind the attacks to justice.

So yes, the death of that one world was a catastrophic mistake, just not the Jedi's.

Omaha and Denver don't have a population of four million. I'll take Shanghai though - 23 million.

It doesn't matter whether the enemy had time or planning or multiple attacks on their side. The Knight was supposed to stop the attacks, all of them, or else there would be a lot of unhappy people on some world in the galaxy. They didn't. You can argue Angral would've done it anyway even if he wasn't out for revenge, but we can't know that. So it was something the Knight kinda caused, and so the consequences are also on them.

Do note that I'm not suggesting Uphrades was bad from a storytelling standpoint, it's a very strong emotional moment. I'm just saying that getting called a hero after all that is kinda... hollow. It's a very hollow victory, if you can even call it that.

Omaha and Denver don't have a population of four million. I'll take Shanghai though - 23 million.

 

It doesn't matter whether the enemy had time or planning or multiple attacks on their side. You were supposed to stop the attacks, all of them, or else there would be a lot of unhappy people on some world in the galaxy. You didn't. You can argue Angral would've done it anyway even if he wasn't out for revenge, but we can't know that. So it was something you kinda caused, and so the consequences are also on you.

Nope, 100% disagree. Angral would *absolutely* have fried that planet and Tython (and more), regardless of the Knight's involvement. Late-stage Sith Lords tend to get that way. Moreover, if not for the knight Corescant would be effectively locked down, out of play, and on the way to becoming a post-apocalyptic dystopia.

The only reason Angral might not have done the deed, would be if his son had survived to do it instead. The Knight didn't make any mistakes that caused that world to burn (if you disagree, please tell me what he did wrong specifically). The Republic military, on the other hand, had multiple ways that they could have prevented it from happening. If anyone beyond the Sith are responsible for what happened, it's the Republic military.

But you don't KNOW that, in either Tarnis or Angral's case. And if those actions might have enraged Angral to the point that he was willing to destroy instead of conquer whole worlds of the Republic, then the Knight definately has some responsibility and some blame here.

I guess I just don't think the knight is as powerful as other people do, because it's harder to measure his accomplishments, because they're more ambiguous.

Do note that I'm not suggesting Uphrades was bad from a storytelling standpoint, it's a very strong emotional moment. I'm just saying that getting called a hero after all that is kinda... hollow. It's a very hollow victory, if you can even call it that.

So by that reasoning Boston has no reason to celebrate the capture of the recent bomber because he already succeeded, whether or not they had more planed Right? To say that because the JK killed Angral's son and enraged him thus he must bear some of the responsibility for the attack is ridiculous that's like saying some who just happened to stop a madman and thus set off another madman who was related to the first madman is at fault for the second madman. Also don't forget the knight starts out trying to rescue angral son and only kills him when left know other choice. It is not a hollow victory because the knight who has to unravel the plan step by step and has no intel to warn him about Uphrades until it is to late, and still the knight ensures it does not happen again.

So by that reasoning Boston has no reason to celebrate the capture of the recent bomber because he already succeeded, whether or not they had more planed Right? To say that because the JK killed Angral's son and enraged him thus he must bear some of the responsibility for the attack is ridiculous that's like saying some who just happened to stop a madman and thus set off another madman who was related to the first madman is at fault for the second madman. Also don't forget the knight starts out trying to rescue angral son and only kills him when left know other choice. It is not a hollow victory because the knight who has to unravel the plan step by step and has no intel to warn him about Uphrades until it is to late, and still the knight ensures it does not happen again.

Oh please, don't drag real life **** into this.

And Angral is sith, brah. Of course the execution of his son is going to drive him into a fury to unleash ruin unto the Republic.. and it was the JK that killed him. 1 +1 = JK ****ed up

The Knight's accomplishments

1 Uncovers a massive infiltration of the republics weapons division and stops several "commandeered" super weapons.

2 Stops several genocide attempts by the dominated Jedi strike team and saves the other members of the strike team from domination.

3 Defeats the emperor (voice or original body) and causes him to be out of commission for an as yet unspecified period of time.

sorry I don't see the ambiguity.

Oh please, don't drag real life **** into this.

And Angral is sith, brah. Of course the execution of his son is going to drive him into a fury to unleash ruin unto the Republic.. and it was the JK that killed him. 1 +1 = JK ****ed up

Sorry but I was responding to the use of real cities and real scenarios presented by other posters. Angral is a Sith so imprisoning his son would have driven him into a fury and cause him to unleash ruin unto the Republic. After all Sith are crazy sadistic SOBs anyway. so 1+1 = Angral is F***ed in the head and would have done it anyway eventually.

most influential? Warrior.

most powerful? Warrior.

 

why?

 

Being the Emperor's Wrath is no easy task. You have to have some serious qualifications if you are basically the Empire's war leader. Also, being second only to the Emperor (also, in turn, the Emperor's Voice), there's definitely a lot of respect and influence one gains from this position

I guess you haven't played the Jedi Knight

But you don't KNOW that, in either Tarnis or Angral's case. And if those actions might have enraged Angral to the point that he was willing to destroy instead of conquer whole worlds of the Republic, then the Knight definately has some responsibility and some blame here.

Actually, we do know that Angral was planning to destroy Republic worlds regardless of the Knight. Remember that the reason Tarnis dies in the first place is because he was trying to activate the Planet Prison and fought to the death to prevent the Knight from stopping it. This would have caused immense damage to Coruscant and billions of deaths (for comparison, the total population of Uphrades was around 16 million). The Knight walks in on Angral gloating and congratulating Tarnis on his accomplishments. Yes, killing his son angered Angral beyond all reason and led him to swear vengeance against the Jedi in general and the Knight in particular, but it it did not cause him to destroy Republic worlds -- he was in the process of doing just that literally before the Knight walks into the picture.

I guess I just don't think the knight is as powerful as other people do, because it's harder to measure his accomplishments, because they're more ambiguous.

I am not sure why you think so. The Knight (played Light Side) is the clearest example of the heroic archetype in the game. Sure, things in the story go wrong, but not because of anything the Hero does (it's mainly because the Republic military is incompetent and the Jedi Council is only slightly better).

I play a 55 JK and this is my top 3.

1.Inquisitor

2. JK/SW

3.JC

The inquisitor commands an entire fleet and is a dark council member. /end

For second place it gets more complicated sure the SW is the emperors wrath .. but the JK can resist the emperor himself now and not fall into his mind trap and he has a whole list of big accomplishments.

Sorry but I was responding to the use of real cities and real scenarios presented by other posters. Angral is a Sith so imprisoning his son would have driven him into a fury and cause him to unleash ruin unto the Republic. After all Sith are crazy sadistic SOBs anyway. so 1+1 = Angral is F***ed in the head and would have done it anyway eventually.

I didn't mean for Boston to seem like a cheap shot. I was listing major cities and it seemed kinda, I dunno, insensitive to not mention Boston. Sorry about that. I'm kinda hoping this conversation stays positive because it's kinda fun.

So by that reasoning Boston has no reason to celebrate the capture of the recent bomber because he already succeeded, whether or not they had more planed Right?

Well, I can get why Boston feels like that, and I don't begrudge them, but on the other hand there are people who are dead or still in the hospital. I've felt this way about other big captures after major tragedies as well. Lives will never be the same, and celebration doesn't seem equal to the somberness that remembering the victims of the tragedy would suggest.

To say that because the JK killed Angral's son and enraged him thus he must bear some of the responsibility for the attack is ridiculous that's like saying some who just happened to stop a madman and thus set off another madman who was related to the first madman is at fault for the second madman.

Kinda. I mean if you can establish a clear chain of events where Person 1 killed the son of Person 2 and Person 2 started blowing up buildings in revenge, then yeah.

Also don't forget the knight starts out trying to rescue angral son and only kills him when left know other choice.

There's always a choice. Angral himself calls out the Jedi Knight if the Jedi Knight tries to pull that excuse.

It is not a hollow victory because the knight who has to unravel the plan step by step and has no intel to warn him about Uphrades until it is to late, and still the knight ensures it does not happen again.

It's hollow because despite the Knight's best efforts, the worst case scenario happened anyway.

Actually, we do know that Angral was planning to destroy Republic worlds regardless of the Knight. Remember that the reason Tarnis dies in the first place is because he was trying to activate the Planet Prison and fought to the death to prevent the Knight from stopping it. This would have caused immense damage to Coruscant and billions of deaths (for comparison, the total population of Uphrades was around 16 million). The Knight walks in on Angral gloating and congratulating Tarnis on his accomplishments. Yes, killing his son angered Angral beyond all reason and led him to swear vengeance against the Jedi in general and the Knight in particular, but it it did not cause him to destroy Republic worlds -- he was in the process of doing just that literally before the Knight walks into the picture.

They were going to activate the Planet Prison in order to hold Coruscant hostage and demand concessions. While there might have been incidental damage from ships in atmo crashing, that wasn't the primary objective and there's still kind of a big difference between that and what eventually happens.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Planet_Prison

Note: "PEACEFULLY blockade." The primary function of the Planet Prison is not itself destructive.

They were going to activate the Planet Prison in order to hold Coruscant hostage and demand concessions. Big difference between that and what eventually happens.

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Planet_Prison

 

Note: "PEACEFULLY blockade."

What on earth makes you think a Sith Lord would build a planet destroying weapon and then not use it on their most hated enemies?

Angral would have burned every jedi populated world along with every republic and independent world that didn't immediately surrender to the Empire. Probably would have still torched a number of alien homeworlds, after they surrendered, just for kicks.

You can't possibly claim that anything else would have happened unless you 1) Know nothing about the Sith and their behavior throughout history, or 2) a troll just trying to stir up trouble.

Based on your other comments, I'm going to go with 2.

You may think I'm a troll if you want to, though it undermines peaceful discourse and ad hominem attacks like that don't really do your arguments any favours.

I do really think that the Jedi Knight isn't the invincible infallible hero that everyone seems to take their story as representing. I think there's nuances.

As for the Sith, while there are Sith who will destroy everything thoughtlessly even if other actions might benefit them more, not all Sith are like that. We have no reason to think Angral was like that until the loss of his son. There are many uses they might have had for the Planet Prison, and many reasons why they might want to get the other Republic super weapons - if only to keep the Republic from having them, as Watcher One suggested.

I also note that the Empire eventually disavows Angral's actions. That may be calculated, or they may really have thought that Angral plans would waste a lot of resources on planets they'd like to conquer.

It's hollow because despite the Knight's best efforts, the worst case scenario happened anyway.

Worst Case no worst case would be if the Knight failed to arrive in time to save Tython, not a world he had no knowledge was in danger and one that was attacked while the Knight was busy saving Alderaan.

Don't worry about the rest I simply used it as current example, not to darken the mood. My main point in all of this is to hold the Knight up as failure, he would have had to have known the full details about the enemies plans or been part of the projects that made the super weapons in the first place not simply be the guy that gave Angral an excuse do commit the evil acts he so desired to do. As you said he also had a choice he could have come after the Knight directly instead of attacking the republic as a whole.

I have enjoyed this convo myself thanks.

I think that both viewpoints probably have merit. There is nothing wrong with looking at the Knight and seeing just an upstanding person.

I merely can't help how I see the Knight, and I see them as a person who probably blames themselves for a lot of what's happened, and who might even warrant a bit of the responsibility. At the same time, the Knight is actually my favourite character and the only class I've yet played to 50.

So, I was thinking about the original question of this thread, and I wondered if the Bounty Hunter became the leader of the Mandalorian Clans, if they might go up in the rankings of most powerful and most influential.

I would see an increase in the Hunter's influence over the Mandolorians but I not sure this would do anything for the Hunters influence any ware else because even the current Mandolore seem to be thought of as little more than a hired gun by the empire. Though if I had continued my ranks I would have had the BH after the SW because My BH was the baddest stack of to ever take up the profession.

The Knight is definitely my favorite character and I could see him thinking there might have been away to stop Angral before the attack on Uphrades. But I cannot see my knight blaming himself for Angral reactions to my stomping his son, because as we've both said Angral states that there are always choices (even if he is trying to mock the Jedi code) and he chooses the path of attacking the Republic rather personal vengeance. He even tells the SIth on Tat to destroy the code to the doomsday devices which would have destroyed the planet. To me the death of his son was no more than an excuse to commit the atrocities that he already had planned and any impediment or upsetting of his sons plans would have set him off.

They were going to activate the Planet Prison in order to hold Coruscant hostage and demand concessions. While there might have been incidental damage from ships in atmo crashing, that wasn't the primary objective and there's still kind of a big difference between that and what eventually happens.

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Planet_Prison

 

Note: "PEACEFULLY blockade." The primary function of the Planet Prison is not itself destructive.

Ah, but think it through. It is indeed true that the Planet Prison is a relatively peaceful blockade when applied to a world like Earth (or Dantooine or Voss), but Coruscant is a city world and, like most cities, it imports most of its food. We are explicitly told this because Uphrades is one of the main worlds supplying it. Indiscriminately blocking all travel means that Coruscant's citizens (which number somewhere between hundreds of billions and several trillions) would starve. Millions would die just in the initial food riots once people figured out what happened. If there is no way to quickly undo the damage to the atmosphere (and we are not told of any), the death toll would certainly be in the billions, perhaps even tens or hundreds of them.

I will grant you that the damage to the planet would not be as great as that inflicted by the Desolator, but the number of casualties would be higher by at least an order of magnitude and possibly by several orders of magnitude. Also, based on the quote here, Tarnis and Angral were not after mere concessions -- they wanted surrender. This was meant to be a decapitating strike.

Kinda. I mean if you can establish a clear chain of events where Person 1 killed the son of Person 2 and Person 2 started blowing up buildings in revenge, then yeah.

Doesn't make Person 1 accountable. Especially given the fact that the son of Person 2 was going to kill you. Angral's wanted revenge because his son (who was trying to kill lots of people) was killed. It's a typical bad guy scenerio...like Taken 2. Never mind his son is doing obviously bad things (and Sith know they're doing bad things) the fact is, Person 2 is evil as well. Person 2 gets to use it to feel like a martyr as well "Woes is me, the death of my son, now I must avenge his death, even if he was evil and hurting/killing others, no matter the cost."