The Chosen One prophesy had been around since the early days of the republic, before the jedi took much interest in galactic affairs. Even in those days after the First Schism it was known that the force was out of balance hence the prophesy imo. As opposed the Son of Suns prophesy may have been younger but there is no set time frame for its appearance.

 

Also, the Son of Suns prophesy is Luke, it was written in 1975 before the Chosen One prophesy was expanded. Anakin and his killing of the Emperor was the Chosen One prophesy and Luke fulfilled the Son of Suns prophesy per G-cannon.

 

As to how you got the idea that the balance of the force was screwed up from Plagueis and Sidious I have no clue, I know Plagueis is responsible for fulfilling the prophesy and the two of them where the worst of a building mountain of evil that had been festering but that doesn't directly imply that he was the cause of the imbalance as they where essentially carrying on the exact same legacy as Bane, so in a sense it might have started with him

 

As a side note, the prophesies dealt much with eliminating the Sith legacy started primarily around the time of the Great Hyperspace War which they did indeed achieve. This in some sense could bring balance to the force as the greatest force corrupting and abusing organization in the galaxy and the greatest force for good in galaxy destroyed each other resetting things to almost even with the Good edging out the bad in true G-cannon fashion.

I thought Luke didn't fit the criteria for the Son of Suns prophecy because he wasn't born on Tatooine?

I thought Luke didn't fit the criteria for the Son of Suns prophecy because he wasn't born on Tatooine?

The original Son of Suns prophesy was written for the OT and referenced Luke's actions. George later removed references to it from his works and replaced it with the Chosen One prophesy for the PT.

So really it could be either (per the Journal of the Whills Wookieepedia page), but it was originally referencing Luke. I guess you could apply it to Anakin but as it is still vague and debated I prefer to go with the Out of Universe context with this one.

The original Son of Suns prophesy was written for the OT and referenced Luke's actions. George later removed references to it from his works and replaced it with the Chosen One prophesy for the PT.

 

So really it could be either (per the Journal of the Whills Wookieepedia page), but it was originally referencing Luke. I guess you could apply it to Anakin but as it is still vague and debated I prefer to go with the Out of Universe context with this one.

Anakin just makes more sense considering their places of birth.

Except, you know, they did.

 

That's what the entire six movies was about. The prophecy of the Son of Suns (Anakin being born on Tatooine) was that one would be born that would destroy the Sith and bring the Balance back to the Force. The Banite Sith, just by existing, created the imbalance. Palpatine himself was the culmination of this. People don't realize it without reading the books, but Sidious was so balls to the wall powerful, he blunted the Force senses of the entire Jedi Order just by existing.

 

When Yoda said "clouded the future is" at the end of (I think) The Clone Wars movie, he was being quite literal there. Palpatine's mere existence created such a huge imbalance in the Dark Side's favor that he was blocking the entire Jedi Order's and Yoda in particular, ability to divine the future.

 

All the Sith that came about after Sidius and Vader aren't real Sith, they're pretenders to a dead legacy. They may call themselves Sith, and they may know the Sith Code, but they aren't in the same league as the last two, Jacen included, I'm sad to say. The Sith, and the imbalance in the Force, died when Anakin turned his back on the Dark Side and Sidious was destroyed.

I can't comment on Darth Bane, haven't gotten round to reading those books, but Sidious did more than just exist, he was using the Darkside, he and Plagueis created Anakin Skywalker by mucking about with the Force (bad terminology but it avoids all sorts of arguements abou what they were doing).

Sidious was actively skewering the Force, with all sorts of rituals and powers, and Vader was using it to destroy entire civilisations. This was not imbalancing by existing. The claim that later Sith are just pretenders has some value, but they were active darkside users too, and while individually weaker, as a whole would be skewering the Force as well, especially since they were causing huge numbers of deaths (feeds the Darkside).

While this slightly undermines my arguement, it brings into play the core of my arguement, If the Sith bring imbalance to the Force, then all Darksiders must also imbalance the Force, the stronger the Darksider the stronger the imbalance. Anything else is just dressing, and the claims that it is the Sith specifically, are by people who want the arguement to go away, maybe because they are fed up with being asked this question repeatedly, but they are definately just trying to end the conversation.

The Chosen One prophesy had been around since the early days of the republic, before the jedi took much interest in galactic affairs. Even in those days after the First Schism it was known that the force was out of balance hence the prophesy imo. As opposed the Son of Suns prophesy may have been younger but there is no set time frame for its appearance.

 

Also, the Son of Suns prophesy is Luke, it was written in 1975 before the Chosen One prophesy was expanded. Anakin and his killing of the Emperor was the Chosen One prophesy and Luke fulfilled the Son of Suns prophesy per G-cannon.

 

As to how you got the idea that the balance of the force was screwed up from Plagueis and Sidious I have no clue, I know Plagueis is responsible for fulfilling the prophesy and the two of them where the worst of a building mountain of evil that had been festering but that doesn't directly imply that he was the cause of the imbalance as they where essentially carrying on the exact same legacy as Bane, so in a sense it might have started with him

 

As a side note, the prophesies dealt much with eliminating the Sith legacy started primarily around the time of the Great Hyperspace War which they did indeed achieve. This in some sense could bring balance to the force as the greatest force corrupting and abusing organization in the galaxy and the greatest force for good in galaxy destroyed each other resetting things to almost even with the Good edging out the bad in true G-cannon fashion.

Note that by your logic, the Chosen One would have come before that. Because if the Force was out of whack, the Chosen One would have been created to restore balance. But he wasn't, so it couldn't have been. Also remember that the Force exists on a separate plane of existence, its beyond the constructs of time. Just because the Prophecy exists doesn't mean the Force is out of balance, its a prophecy, a premonition of the future. It merely points to the fact that in the future the Force will be out of a balance, and when that time comes the Chosen One will be born.

That said I agree that destroying the Sith is at least tied to restoring balance, because it is the nature of the Sith to disrupt balance by propagating the dark side. Note though that balance is balance, not good edging out evil, that's imbalance. The Force doesn't favour either side, George Lucas himself has stated this. See here for details.

'G-Canon fashion' is an equal balance between good and evil, light and dark. Period.

There's shades of grey. 50 of them even.

I can't comment on Darth Bane, haven't gotten round to reading those books, but Sidious did more than just exist, he was using the Darkside, he and Plagueis created Anakin Skywalker by mucking about with the Force (bad terminology but it avoids all sorts of arguements abou what they were doing).

 

Sidious was actively skewering the Force, with all sorts of rituals and powers, and Vader was using it to destroy entire civilisations. This was not imbalancing by existing. The claim that later Sith are just pretenders has some value, but they were active darkside users too, and while individually weaker, as a whole would be skewering the Force as well, especially since they were causing huge numbers of deaths (feeds the Darkside).

 

While this slightly undermines my arguement, it brings into play the core of my arguement, If the Sith bring imbalance to the Force, then all Darksiders must also imbalance the Force, the stronger the Darksider the stronger the imbalance. Anything else is just dressing, and the claims that it is the Sith specifically, are by people who want the arguement to go away, maybe because they are fed up with being asked this question repeatedly, but they are definately just trying to end the conversation.

Oh I know this. But in addition to that his very existence caused a massive imbalance in the Force. That's just how powerful he was passively.

Oh I know this. But in addition to that his very existence caused a massive imbalance in the Force. That's just how powerful he was passively.

Ha ha, lol.

I'll be here all week.

Oh I know this. But in addition to that his very existence caused a massive imbalance in the Force. That's just how powerful he was passively.

And yet Luke became twice as powerful, which would unbalance the Force in the other direction, but that didn't happen, existing and power alone don't unbalance the Force, it's the use of power and actively meddling that causes imbalances in the Force.

And yet Luke became twice as powerful, which would unbalance the Force in the other direction, but that didn't happen, existing and power alone don't unbalance the Force, it's the use of power and actively meddling that causes imbalances in the Force.

But it wasn't he mere presence that caused this, but an active ritual.

I feel this is true, but Sidious did actively meddle with the Force.

 

But it wasn't he mere presence that caused this, but an active ritual.

That's what I was saying.