You two should probably have gussed already but this guy clearly doesnt care what canon states and will only accept the canon that fits his opinion.

Hence the over-obsession with calling sources that disagree with him 'outdated.'

I don't have a problem because neither the Sith Emperor, Marka Ragnos, Naga Sadow or any other ancient dark side practitioners rival Darth Sidious' power to create the Force storm. I have a problem with you thinking that they can.

I can understand your reservations regarding Marka Ragnos and Naga Sadow but Tenebrae is on a whole new level in comparison to them; he can harness and control dark side power of extraordinary scale and scope. Possibilities for Tenebrae are endless specially after his transformation.

How do you think Sidious acquired the capability to unleash Force Storm with his own power? He was siphoning energies from all the inhabitants of the planet Byss to fuel his power (his powerbase was unnatural and gigantic in other words). Tenebrae was in similar condition after his transformation; he simultaneously siphoned energies from souls of countless beings trapped in the void around planet Medriaas, many living individuals on Dromund Kaas and also Revan from another far away region. Therefore, Tenebrae's powerbase was enormous too and possibilities were endless for him accordingly.

In other words, both Tenebrae and Sidious moved beyond the scope of Midichlorian count to fuel their power on the basis of their dark side abilities.

But you seem to have missed the point here, and are grasping as semantics, the statement I highlighted contains the words (lets put it in context here like you said) 'Sith power.' The Sith power - and there is no room for argument here - is the dark side. Therefore Sidious' accolades are identical to the Sith Emperor's and there is no conflict, because Sidous came after the Sith Emperor. Darth Sidious is the greatest Sith Lord and dark side practitioner ever.

Tenebrae have the accolades of being the most powerful in every possible way:-

1. Sith Lord

2. Dark side master

3. Force-user

This makes sense since this individual can harness and control dark side power on galactic scale.

Regardless this pointless debate can easily be resolved by examining the nature of the Force Storm and Sidious' near mastery over it. Firstly let's revisit my previous assessment of the ability, Sidious was capable of unleashing immensely powerful Force storms that could rend the very fabricate of space and destroy armies, fleets and even planets. It is the most powerful display of the dark side to date, an unassisted manifestation of pure dark side power.

No, this debate isn't resolved with Force Storm unleashing talent of Sidious. The greatest and most destructive feats of dark side have been performed with Sith Sorcery actually. Yes, such feats have been performed with rituals and/or dark side superweapons but none have demonstrated the capability to harness and control power of such lethal and epic proportions like Tenebrae. This individual was so powerful and naturally attuned with the dark side that he could perform feats that would be otherwise unthinkable for majority in the mythos. You do not realize the intensity, talent and power that is required to harness and control the dark side power of proportions that was unleashed on planet Medriaas with which Tenebrae completed his transformation and also tested the limits of his dark side abilities; and he became even better after his transformation:

Tenebrae's capacity as a practitioner of the Force had been vastly increased in the aftermath (hint: from siphoning energies of countless beings/souls), and he eventually prepared himself to harness and control dark side power of galactic proportions afterwards.

You fail to comprehend the Force abilities of Tenebrae properly. Though, Tenebrae's story leaves immense room for creative liberties, this doesn't means that he has to demonstrate or learn every known dark side power to prove his worth or position in the mythos.

Celestials haven't unleashed Force Storms either but do we need this argument to figure out how powerful they are or whether they match or surpass Sidious in power? Why double-standards for Tenebrae only?

Also, even if Sidious is not the most powerful dark side master, this doesn't diminish his power or capability to hold his own against other TOP-TIER dark side masters. So chill out.

Taken from the Book of Anger:

 

It must be understood that anger can be funneled through the body and released near the heart at the "vital gate." The destruction that can be unleashed can be immense. Thousands of enemies can be annihilated in a single act of malice.

 

In time, the channeled anger of the dark side will prove just as destructive as the Death Star. There will no longer be a need for costly constructions. Already, I have perfected the Force maelstrom...

 

...This technique can be increased into a Force Storm. The churning energy mass of a Force Storm can consume everything it touches, for at its eye is pure hate. Just as a black hole devours a star, this storm can swallow armies and fold space. It may take decades to master this art, but once I have perfected it, I will be invincible.

 

You seem to be failing to grasp the full implications of the Force Storm. It should not simply be treated as just another technique in the dark side, but the highest manifestation of dark side energy to date that in order to wield requires unprecedented power and the will necessary to direct it. If the Sith Emperor possessed such power, he would able to create manifestations of dark side energy on such a magnitude, achieving his grand vision would have been a doddle.

While I do not underestimate the value, destructive potential and power required to unleash Force Storm, over-estimating this dark side ability is not the way forward either. Nihilus could unleash devastation on planetary scale with his Force Drain abilities; he had such level of command over this particular dark side talent. Tenebrae could do even better with his Sith Sorcery talent so assuming that only Sidious knows how to harness dark side power to extremely lethal levels is a logical fallacy. Instead of narrowing down your perception to talents of Sidious, focus on the holistic picture; Force Storm doesn't represents the pinnacle of dark side practices (it is among the most lethal applications of the dark side at best). Yes, Force Storm ability does grants Sidious enormous offensive reach and fighting potential, and this is firmly respected by majority of fans of the mythos (including me).

And before you point the Sith Emperor being impossible to kill and beyond his body etc. Sidious achieved this as well, in place of 'Voices' he produced clones and after his essence was sundered from his body he dragged himself from the depths of Chaos and managed to possess one of his disciples.

 

And even after experiencing a third death Sidious was not defeated, he was only completely destroyed when his essence was trapped in the body of a dying Jedi who dragged him back into the Netherworld.

Beni, do you think that I am ignorant or something? My knowledge of the lore isn't restricted to ancient era characters.

By the way, read this:

---

He was immortal, and wielded immense power on a colossal scale. Capable of unleashing the power of the dark side on a magnitude that the Sith Emperor was simply incapable of - which is painfully evident from the failure of his vision.

I respectfully disagree! Tenebrae's power reach is greater then that of Sidious which is evident from him being able to harness and control power of such a scale which created the largest dark side nexus the Galaxy every witnessed, left planet Medriaas a void in the Galaxy and destroyed any other life form within its coverage. In comparison, Lord Kaan (the most powerful Sith in the brotherhood) couldn't control even a Thought Bomb and got destroyed in response. Several centuries later, Tenebrae was capable of harnessing and controlling dark side power on Galactic scale.

Also, what do you mean by failure of vision? This is the most illogical argument you have brought yet (a cheap excuse to belittle Tenebrae). His vision failed due to intervention of Jedi and Sith who betrayed him. Tenebrae was disturbed/interrupted from the ritual of Galactic proportions in which he had invested his powers. He wasn't in the position to destroy his enemies during this moment and lost.

As per your logic, Sidious and Celestials also failed in their vision. When you engage in wars or battles, you risk getting destroyed. The Force always strives for balance and it would never permit one particular individual to influence it.

The only other instance in which the Force Storm has been unleashed was by Darth Rivan through the aid of the Darkstaff, an incredibly powerful sentient dark side artifact. In order to unleash the Force Storm the Darkstaff had to be charged with colossal levels of dark side energy by absorbing the Force energy of living beings. Essentially a variant of Force drain.

 

This can be directly compared to the Sith Emperor's planned ritual to consume the life force of the entire galaxy which in order to enact required the sacrifice of billions of life forms, to provide the necessary Force energy to complete the ritual. What it is vital to note however is that firstly, as your incorrect use of syntax made clear, the Sith Emperor never completed the ritual, and therefore secondly he never achieved the Force power necessary to create the massive dark side nexus you refer to. Simply put the Sith Emperor, like Darth Rivan, could not manifest dark side energies on a galactic scale without external aid - whereas Darth Sidious, who did not require the absorption of Force sensitives to complete unleash the Force storm - could, because his Force affinity was considerably greater.

Please focus on following spoilers:

You are immensely over-estimating the power required to unleash Force Storm; of-course, Darth Rivan could not unleash Force Storm with his personal abilities since he wasn't siphoning energies from countless beings like Tenebrae and Sidious. This is why he used a dark side superweapon to unleash Force Storm but Tenebrae and Sidious do not need such kind of weapons to gather sufficient energies to unleash Force Storm.

Also, Tenebrae's ultimate Sith Sorcery plan is beyond your comprehension perhaps. The prominent Galaxy in the Star Wars comprises of billions of Star Systems and its exact span is unknown; Tenebrae acquired the capability to harness and control dark side power of this scale after a span of thousand years; no other dark side master even comes close.

I cannot stress enough that pointing to the Sith Emperor's grand ritual is redundant, because he was not yet powerful enough to enact it and failed to achieve that power. Which I'm afraid leaves you with nothing else, because Darth Sidious has surpassed the Sith Emperor's mastery over mind control, Force drain, Sith lightning and the creation of dark side nexuses. The evidence against you I'm afraid is painfully evident.

Beni, you are hallucinating now. You need to take a break from this debate and refresh your mind. It seems like as if Star Wars authorities pay you to defend and promote Sidious.

Not that it helps your case.

Sure! If I am up against fans who do not listen; then of-course, this is a lost cause.

No, Sidious has Vitiate beat in several aspects.

Both Sidious and Tenebrae have unique accomplishments of their own.

I'm doing that becuase I don't really care, but if you want.

I don't see a point here.

Aw, that's cute. Trust me, I think I can handle this.

Trust me! You are the not the first one who can offer detailed argument in favor of Sidious that I have come across yet. I am member of several other forums and I had answer for most of the arguments in favor of Sidious.

So side with you? No thanks.

It is not about siding; it about reaching a middle ground so that these kind of debates can be minimized in this forum and people can roll on with latest updates in the mythos.

Luke Skywalker achieved the potential of Anakin Skywalker, as in he's twice as powerful as Darth Sidious.

G-canon Sidious; possible. He couldn't handle Lord Nyax by himself though so how would you rank Lord Nyax in power scale?

He's already made it clear who the best is on his Twitter.

Link? Timing?

You two should probably have gussed already but this guy clearly doesnt care what canon states and will only accept the canon that fits his opinion.

I can say the same about all of you who are favoring Sidiious.

Bring me SOLID proof that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord in the history of the mythos as per G-canon sources. Oh wait, you can't.

Also, even if he is the most powerful follower of Sith philosophy in the history, their are dark side masters who match or surpass him in power regardless. A dark side master is not necessarily a Sith Lord and even a Sith Lord can stop being one; therefore, stop putting too much emphasis on semantics. Focus on deeper aspects of the mythos and you will understand my position. Otherwise, you are just another fan who cannot be reasoned with.

You should learn to differentiate Lucas's universe from EU like GL himself does.

"There are two worlds here," explained Lucas. "There’s my world, which is the movies, and there’s this other world that has been created, which I say is the parallel universe—the licensing world of the books, games and comic books. They don’t intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they do intrude in between the movies. I don’t get too involved in the parallel universe."

You know me! I can argue in favor of Vitiate much better then anybody in this forum yet.

Beni, you are hallucinating now. You need to take a break from this debate and refresh your mind. It seems like as if Star Wars authorities pay you to defend and promote Sidious.

Trust me, you have no competition.

I admire your debating skills and knowledge. If I say otherwise, I would be lying.

However, you hold G-canon creations in much higher regard then TOR era C-canon creations. I mean, it is baffling to see the level of bashing that fans of TOR era C-canon creations get from fans of G-canon creations as if they committed a crime.

Seriously, bro, stop promoting/spreading invincibility myth about characters such as Yoda, Luke and Sidious. All of them can win or loose against TOR era elites depending upon various factors and their own strengths and weaknesses. You loose credibility, if you think otherwise.

Terms such as "most powerful" are promotion tactics used by authors to convey to readers that the affiliated characters are not to be underestimated in the light of the whole mythos. This is it. FULL STOP.

Never would any author stubbornly insist that his/her creation is unbeatable or such. End of argument.

Get my drift?

One more thing: you are creating ranking lists in this forum! STOP! They are misleading and represent personal perception of some members which have not been adequately scrutinized. Star Wars mythos is introducing lot of powerhouses recently and it is becoming extremely hard to rank characters in terms of power on grand scale. Sure we can debate using information at hand but then people have different perceptions about the same thing and you (yourself) are not flexible enough when it comes to your favorites. I have noticed that names like HoT and Satele are missing in such lists, the irony.

Get my drift once again?

Lol, the only argument that he is incapable of responding to, because it is a fact, he avoids with nonsensical statements. I think I am done here.

I am capable of debating and refuting that entire statement of yours.

What baffled me (when reading that particular statement) was your assumption that Sidious outclassed Tenebrae in every possible manner; you realize how unreasonable and unrealistic you sound with this kind of perception? Your statement gave me a pause and I thought that am I wasting my time with you; it felt like as if I have to start from 0 again.

In my own thread, I gave you and your allies too much concession and liberty in promoting your perceptions but trust me, it gets retarded after repeated attempts from you and your allies to belittle TOR era elites. It is like, fans like you always find impetus to undermine TOR era elites and promote G-canon characters as godly beings in comparison.

When canonical evidence is offered in favor of TOR era elites, suddenly fans like you pull off G-canon superiority card. I mean, come on! GL developed canonical ranking system because he didn't wanted any other author to retcon his works (this was/is a genuine concern). However, GL didn't meant to enforce his perception about power based rankings of characters in the EU content (he have repeatedly pointed out that EU is not his domain and he have nothing to do with it). Fans like you try to take advantage of this ranking system to fit your agenda unfortunately. This is unhealthy practice and kills debating momentum and/or leads to resentments. STOP employing these dirty tactics to silence opposing views and try to respect canon in its entirety; trust me, debating with you will be lot more fun then.

The entire explanation above is the "refreshment" that I want you to seek. I do not want your arguments to be filled with G-canon superiority cards and such. Just use canon sources to support your arguments and I would be fine with this. Otherwise, we would be creating unwanted barriers and nothing else.

Now want me to refute your last statement?

I think it's unfair to call giving G-Canon superiority a "dirty tactic".

G-Canon is, rightfully, the final say. I agree that within the EU in general these ranking systems are a waste of time and healthy debate can be held around many EU characters. The thing is though the Civil War era contains the culmination of all the turmoil in the EU. EU authors and creators can come up with whatever they want and compare their SWpeens together in a sort of "I've created the best bad guy ever, look what I wrote about him". Their writing "evidence" for how powerful a given character is is exactly the same thing as GL saying outright that Sidious is the most powerful dark side wielder. No, he didn't show all this in the films nor write pages and pages of (varying quality) prose about him but he did create the character within the universe he created. He created him initially as "the bad guy" but later fully realised his role as the culmination of every EU Sith Lord. Sidious achieved the "holy grail", he destroyed the Jedi Order and the Republic and but for the actual Force fighting back he would have reigned his Galactic Empire Indefinitely.

I know the above takes a lot of aspects from EU sources ("evidence" if you will) but in my view the statement by GL is tantamount to any number of pages or drawings by anyone else.

If some other author wrote, tweeted, said or signed that Tenebrae "was the most powerful dark side force wielder ever" would that suddenly override GL's statement? I understand that what is written/seen about characters within both the films and EU should hold significant weight and in many situations be the ultimate slide rule but in circumstances where GL himself has made a statement it is difficult, in my mind at least, to overrule him in favour of some secondary creator's fantasies. It isn't "movie fanboyism" to say this, I don't think. I think it's the fairest judge. Given the constantly evolving state of SW canon, it's fair to assume we might yet learn more of how powerful Palps or Tenebrae are. There might be an author around the corner ready to carve out his own "lol most p0w3rful evar!!1!!". As it stands we have Luke vs. Darth Sidious as the coming to the fore of the history of the Force. Pretty much the brightest light up against the darkest shadow. Behind them there is plenty of room for jostling and fiddling with semantics, definitions and interpretations to have a solid, healthy debate about everyone else's places but I can't help but feel GL's own statements about his own work puts everyone else in their shadow (or obscured by the light, whatever).

EDIT: I don't mean to try to counter or contradict and canon based arguments. Those using the C/G-Canon to argue in favour of Tenebrae being more powerful than Palaptine can put forward some solid, convincing arguments. SW canon is often contradictory in certain respects though. While sound arguments can be put forward in both Sith's cases I think (personally) that Sidious shades it in terms of lore/canon. I don't think my canon based view is all that important though, since we have it from the SW universe's own God (GL) that Sidious is the nastiest nasty. Were the debate "from an out of universe perspective is GL wrong to brand Darth Sidious the most powerful?" then we could rightfully challenge GL's statements but from an in universe perspective I'm not so sure.

I think it's unfair to call giving G-Canon superiority a "dirty tactic".

It is in a sense! It gives impetus to the fans of G-canon works to use G-canon superiority card to undermine debates. People should understand that EU is not GL's domain and is as much valid as his works are:

1. "'Gospel,' or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelizations. These works spin out of George Lucas' original stories, the rest are written by other writers. However, between us, we've read everything, and much of it is taken into account in the overall continuity. The entire catalog of published works comprises a vast history—with many off-shoots, variations and tangents—like any other well-developed mythology."

2. "We've stuck to a very clear branding strategy for the past decade. This is Star Wars. Individual movies come and go, as do TV shows, video games, books. They all contribute to the lore of Star Wars, but in the end it is one saga and that saga is called Star Wars. We've wanted to send a clear message to our fans that everything we do is part of that overall saga."

3. "The analogy is that every piece of published Star Wars fiction is a window into the 'real' Star Wars universe. Some windows are a bit foggier than others. Some are decidedly abstract. But each contains a nugget of truth to them. Like the great Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi said, 'many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view.'"

The real purpose of canonical rules is to ensure that EU doesn't interferes with G-canon works (retcon them). Enforcing G-canon superiority is not the job of fans and it is not a wise thing to do in an EU based medium. Respect canon in its entirety.

If GL statements are to be treated like gospel then their is no story beyond Episode 6:

"I've left pretty explicit instructions for there not to be any more features. There will definitely be no Episodes VII-IX. That's because there isn't any story. I mean, I never thought of anything. And now there have been novels about the events after Episode VI, which isn't at all what I would have done with it. The Star Wars story is really the tragedy of Darth Vader. That is the story. Once Vader dies, he doesn't come back to life, the Emperor doesn't get cloned and Luke doesn't get married..."

Do proponents of G-canon superiority and GL statements (among fans here) want to subscribe to this statement?

I mean, why pick and choose among his statements?

G-Canon is, rightfully, the final say.

Not necessarily for EU which is a different domain in comparison. In fact, latest G-canon works have borrowed ideas/concepts from EU.

Star Wars: The Clone Wars animated series is G-canon, right?

I agree that within the EU in general these ranking systems are a waste of time and healthy debate can be held around many EU characters. The thing is though the Civil War era contains the culmination of all the turmoil in the EU. EU authors and creators can come up with whatever they want and compare their SWpeens together in a sort of "I've created the best bad guy ever, look what I wrote about him". Their writing "evidence" for how powerful a given character is is exactly the same thing as GL saying outright that Sidious is the most powerful dark side wielder. No, he didn't show all this in the films nor write pages and pages of (varying quality) prose about him but he did create the character within the universe he created. He created him initially as "the bad guy" but later fully realised his role as the culmination of every EU Sith Lord. Sidious achieved the "holy grail", he destroyed the Jedi Order and the Republic and but for the actual Force fighting back he would have reigned his Galactic Empire Indefinitely.

EU have given a detailed backstory to events which led to rise of Sidious. Also, Sidious is not the only Sith to destroy the Jedi Order and he didn't exactly destroy the Republic; he transformed the Republic in to a Sith Empire from within. However, he underestimated the resolve of the Jedi and the rebellion and failed as well.

I know the above takes a lot of aspects from EU sources ("evidence" if you will) but in my view the statement by GL is tantamount to any number of pages or drawings by anyone else.

Not an ideal perception. GL represents his own works; not EU.

1. "There are two worlds here," explained Lucas. "There's my world, which is the movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is the parallel universe—the licensing world of the books, games and comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they do intrude in between the movies. I don't get too involved in the parallel universe."

2. "I don't read that stuff. I haven't read any of the novels. I don't know anything about that world. That's a different world than my world. But I do try to keep it consistent. The way I do it now is they have a Star Wars Encyclopedia. So if I come up with a name or something else, I look it up and see if it has already been used. When I said [other people] could make their own Star Wars stories, we decided that, like Star Trek, we would have two universes: My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions."

3. "They have their own kind of world. There's three pillars of Star Wars. I'll probably get in trouble for this but it's OK! There's three pillars: the father, the son and the holy ghost. I'm the father, Howard Roffman [president of Lucas Licensing] is the son and the holy ghost is the fans, this kind of ethereal world of people coming up with all kinds of different ideas and histories. Now these three different pillars don't always match, but the movies and TV shows are all under my control and they are consistent within themselves. Howard tries to be consistent but sometimes he goes off on tangents and it's hard to hold him back. He once said to me that there are two Star Trek universes: there's the TV show and then there's all the spin-offs. He said that these were completely different and didn't have anything to do with each other. So I said, "OK, go ahead." In the early days I told them that they couldn't do anything about how Darth Vader was born, for obvious reasons, but otherwise I pretty much let them do whatever they wanted. They created this whole amazing universe that goes on for millions of years!"

If some other author wrote, tweeted, said or signed that Tenebrae "was the most powerful dark side force wielder ever" would that suddenly override GL's statement? I understand that what is written/seen about characters within both the films and EU should hold significant weight and in many situations be the ultimate slide rule but in circumstances where GL himself has made a statement it is difficult, in my mind at least, to overrule him in favour of some secondary creator's fantasies. It isn't "movie fanboyism" to say this, I don't think. I think it's the fairest judge. Given the constantly evolving state of SW canon, it's fair to assume we might yet learn more of how powerful Palps or Tenebrae are. There might be an author around the corner ready to carve out his own "lol most p0w3rful evar!!1!!". As it stands we have Luke vs. Darth Sidious as the coming to the fore of the history of the Force. Pretty much the brightest light up against the darkest shadow. Behind them there is plenty of room for jostling and fiddling with semantics, definitions and interpretations to have a solid, healthy debate about everyone else's places but I can't help but feel GL's own statements about his own work puts everyone else in their shadow (or obscured by the light, whatever).

Look! Fans are expected to respect canon in its entirety. Star Wars is much bigger then what GL represents; the lore has many contributors and GL is no longer the BOSS. So why stick to the past? I say roll on with latest updates.

GL isn't overruling "most powerful" declarations in the EU; he doesn't cares.

EDIT: I don't mean to try to counter or contradict and canon based arguments. Those using the C/G-Canon to argue in favour of Tenebrae being more powerful than Palaptine can put forward some solid, convincing arguments. SW canon is often contradictory in certain respects though. While sound arguments can be put forward in both Sith's cases I think (personally) that Sidious shades it in terms of lore/canon. I don't think my canon based view is all that important though, since we have it from the SW universe's own God (GL) that Sidious is the nastiest nasty. Were the debate "from an out of universe perspective is GL wrong to brand Darth Sidious the most powerful?" then we could rightfully challenge GL's statements but from an in universe perspective I'm not so sure.

Sidious was the ultimate bad@ss in G-canon universe/story; this doesn't implies that he is the ultimate bad@ss in the whole mythos. GL's statements shouldn't be treated like gospel for EU.

I've not quoted the whole post since to be honest I largely agree with you.

3. "The analogy is that every piece of published Star Wars fiction is a window into the 'real' Star Wars universe. Some windows are a bit foggier than others. Some are decidedly abstract. But each contains a nugget of truth to them. Like the great Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi said, 'many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view.'"

The bolded part is important and possibly the linchpin of my disagreement. I'd tend to think that Lucas would, to his mind, stick by his claim and vision that the period of time he chose to document in his movies encompasses the sort of "nexus" or real, key defining point in Galactic history. It does include 0BBY, after all.

So in his point of view, that is going to be true. I think we should lend a degree of respect to that.

2. "I don't read that stuff. I haven't read any of the novels. I don't know anything about that world. That's a different world than my world. But I do try to keep it consistent. The way I do it now is they have a Star Wars Encyclopedia. So if I come up with a name or something else, I look it up and see if it has already been used. When I said [other people] could make their own Star Wars stories, we decided that, like Star Trek, we would have two universes: My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions."

I realise GL doesn't involve himself with the EU (although I suspect the line about him not reading any of it might be a porkie). I'm not sure this should discredit his statements though. He had, or has, control over what goes on in his universe to a lesser or greater extent depending on the medium we're talking about. All writers should, really, bear strongly in mind the concrete "facts" and sensibilities set down by Lucas wrt his universe (of course this is not always the case. Luuke...)

3. "They have their own kind of world. There's three pillars of Star Wars. I'll probably get in trouble for this but it's OK! There's three pillars: the father, the son and the holy ghost. I'm the father, Howard Roffman [president of Lucas Licensing] is the son and the holy ghost is the fans, this kind of ethereal world of people coming up with all kinds of different ideas and histories. Now these three different pillars don't always match, but the movies and TV shows are all under my control and they are consistent within themselves. Howard tries to be consistent but sometimes he goes off on tangents and it's hard to hold him back. He once said to me that there are two Star Trek universes: there's the TV show and then there's all the spin-offs. He said that these were completely different and didn't have anything to do with each other. So I said, "OK, go ahead." In the early days I told them that they couldn't do anything about how Darth Vader was born, for obvious reasons, but otherwise I pretty much let them do whatever they wanted. They created this whole amazing universe that goes on for millions of years!"

Still and all though, the EU must fit in and around the G-Canon. They aren't completely separate as GL would seem to want to believe.

Sometimes I think Mr Lucas would much rather all the Star Wars EU stuff be an entirely different IP set in a completely different universe from his creation, so long as he still got all the royalties from it, of course. (Roll in Disney)

GL isn't overruling "most powerful" declarations in the EU; he doesn't cares.

I'm not sure that he "doesn't care". I think he strives, or perhaps moreso strove, to ensure that his films were treated as concrete pillars of lore in the SW universe. I would think if something outright contradicted something he'd said or done he'd be annoyed, c.f. him saying Vader's birth is untouchable. I realise nothing like this has happened with Palpatine's power, it's a discussion rather than an outright contradiction. He is overruling those declarations by definition though. As much as you might like to completely separate the two "universes" and as much as it would seem he wants to distance his own creation from others', the fact remains Sidious is a character prominent in both G and C canon, and we have it on good authority that he's the most powerful "darth". The history of the G canon is the history of the C canon. By an author submitting a work under the SW "franchise" they're accepting certain things. As much as some may try to bend those things, I still think it's perhaps unfair to give things credence over what G-canon says.

Sidious was the ultimate bad@ss in G-canon universe/story; this doesn't implies that he is the ultimate bad@ss in the whole mythos. GL's statements shouldn't be treated like gospel for EU.

I think this is where we differ. I think GL's statements about the content of his own creation should, to be fair, be taken as final. If he came out in a press release tomorrow and said that the whole idea of Revan mastering both sides of the Force, or perhaps even something as simple as Light sided Jedi using red crystals, really didn't sit well with him and he didn't think that they had a place in Star Wars, I would respect that. I realise it's a huge jump and it's never going to happen (not least because most of it is checked off by GL anyway) but if that did happen I'd gladly accept that. The stories about Revan, for example, would take the role of very good fan fiction, to my mind. I realise this probably isn't the view of many on here, but sometimes I get the feeling people don't give enough credence to GL wrt his very own creation. Yes, the EU is largely unrelated to him but he did create the entire concept and law of the setting.

With respect to his saying that the canon story stops after RotJ, like I say above, I'm fine with that. I like a lot of the post-RotJ "lore" but I treat it more as a fanfic or perhaps conjecture. GL has said Luke doesn't get married. There are stories about him getting married, but it happened long, long ago, in a galaxy far, far away. There's nothing to say every detail we read about it all is going to be 100% accurate (unless of course the creator is telling us). I don't mean to discredit the work in any way, like I say I think a lot of it is very good, but I wouldn't say any of it was "true" if you will. Like you quote above:

The analogy is that every piece of published Star Wars fiction is a window into the 'real' Star Wars universe. Some windows are a bit foggier than others. Some are decidedly abstract.

If it outright disagrees with something GL has said, it's a very foggy, decidedly abstract window.

The bolded part is important and possibly the linchpin of my disagreement. I'd tend to think that Lucas would, to his mind, stick by his claim and vision that the period of time he chose to document in his movies encompasses the sort of "nexus" or real, key defining point in Galactic history. It does include 0BBY, after all.

 

So in his point of view, that is going to be true. I think we should lend a degree of respect to that.

Of-course, Lucas is expected to promote his works over works of others. However, why should fans be bothered by this?

I don't care about what Lucas says or does; I respect canon in its entirety. This makes it easier for me to roll on with canonical developments. From neutral perspective, it is debatable that which event is the most defining point in Galactic history. As per recent canon updates, events in SWTOR game represent the most defining point in Galactic history because Tenebrae's ultimate plan flopped due to these events.

You know about Tenebrae's ultimate plan? It would have permanently changed/altered the course of Star Wars mythos, but for continuity sake, such a plan had to flop.

I realise GL doesn't involve himself with the EU (although I suspect the line about him not reading any of it might be a porkie). I'm not sure this should discredit his statements though. He had, or has, control over what goes on in his universe to a lesser or greater extent depending on the medium we're talking about. All writers should, really, bear strongly in mind the concrete "facts" and sensibilities set down by Lucas wrt his universe (of course this is not always the case. Luuke...)

Authors (other then GL) do respect his (GL's) works and continuity of the Saga but they are free to do whatever they want to in their own stories as long as they do not interfere with G-canon works. Also, GL respects EU content as well; the celestials represent a tie-up between a storyline in both G-canon and C-canon works as an example.

Still and all though, the EU must fit in and around the G-Canon. They aren't completely separate as GL would seem to want to believe.

 

Sometimes I think Mr Lucas would much rather all the Star Wars EU stuff be an entirely different IP set in a completely different universe from his creation, so long as he still got all the royalties from it, of course. (Roll in Disney)

No comments here.

I'm not sure that he "doesn't care". I think he strives, or perhaps moreso strove, to ensure that his films were treated as concrete pillars of lore in the SW universe. I would think if something outright contradicted something he'd said or done he'd be annoyed, c.f. him saying Vader's birth is untouchable. I realise nothing like this has happened with Palpatine's power, it's a discussion rather than an outright contradiction. He is overruling those declarations by definition though. As much as you might like to completely separate the two "universes" and as much as it would seem he wants to distance his own creation from others', the fact remains Sidious is a character prominent in both G and C canon, and we have it on good authority that he's the most powerful "darth". The history of the G canon is the history of the C canon. By an author submitting a work under the SW "franchise" they're accepting certain things. As much as some may try to bend those things, I still think it's perhaps unfair to give things credence over what G-canon says.

I think you misunderstood my "doesn't care" point. GL is concerned about misrepresentation of his works and rightfully so; he is overprotective about his works and doesn't lets anybody else interfere with or redefine his works. Therefore, he wouldn't let another author decide about things such as how Anakin was born (at-least, not without consulting him). Star Wars: Darth Plagueis (a recently released novel) explores this part a bit by the way (the author of this novel may have consulted GL about this event); this novel suggests that the birth of Anakin might have something to do with Plagueis and Sidious trying to manipulate the Force itself with rituals. The Force possibly retaliated by creating Anakin (a being with extreme Force potential) to counter this threat.

I think this is where we differ. I think GL's statements about the content of his own creation should, to be fair, be taken as final. If he came out in a press release tomorrow and said that the whole idea of Revan mastering both sides of the Force, or perhaps even something as simple as Light sided Jedi using red crystals, really didn't sit well with him and he didn't think that they had a place in Star Wars, I would respect that. I realise it's a huge jump and it's never going to happen (not least because most of it is checked off by GL anyway) but if that did happen I'd gladly accept that. The stories about Revan, for example, would take the role of very good fan fiction, to my mind. I realise this probably isn't the view of many on here, but sometimes I get the feeling people don't give enough credence to GL wrt his very own creation. Yes, the EU is largely unrelated to him but he did create the entire concept and law of the setting.

GL have never dictated about what characteristics an EU character should have; he doesn't bothers with these developments. GL respects EU content actually; he may interfere rarely as he objected to character of Anakin Solo (as an example), so this character was canonically killed as part of his story. Reason of GL's intervention was name of this character but the character and his story weren't retconned; the character's story arc was changed though.

As far as Revan is concerned, GL knows about him; this character was originally proposed for Mortis episode of The Clone Wars animated series (and GL was reportedly very impressed by Revan's depiction and characteristics) but he ruled this character out in favor of the Celestials (one of the reasons would be to avoid potential backlash from fans, if this character was supposed to be killed during G-canon events). Antagonizing Revan's fan-base is something not even GL would try. (Bioware writers learned this the hard way themselves.)

With respect to his saying that the canon story stops after RotJ, like I say above, I'm fine with that. I like a lot of the post-RotJ "lore" but I treat it more as a fanfic or perhaps conjecture. GL has said Luke doesn't get married. There are stories about him getting married, but it happened long, long ago, in a galaxy far, far away. There's nothing to say every detail we read about it all is going to be 100% accurate (unless of course the creator is telling us). I don't mean to discredit the work in any way, like I say I think a lot of it is very good, but I wouldn't say any of it was "true" if you will. Like you quote above:

 

The analogy is that every piece of published Star Wars fiction is a window into the 'real' Star Wars universe. Some windows are a bit foggier than others. Some are decidedly abstract.

 

If it outright disagrees with something GL has said, it's a very foggy, decidedly abstract window.

Well, the point is that GL's statement doesn't makes EU content (featuring events beyond Episode 6 movie) null and void. He never attempted to retcon this content officially. Yes, he possibly have different ideas about events beyond Episode 6 and might propose some changes accordingly in existing content in upcoming movies but this is just a speculation at the moment. In contrast, ancient era lore is relatively much safer to be explored and expanded; Disney is likely to respect current ground realities of Star Wars lore. As a hint, Disney hired GL for a reason and might hire more authors in the future.

"Always in motion is the future." (Jedi Master Yoda)

"The future is always in motion." (Jedi Master Revan)

S_W_Legend, your getting the completely wrong idea here.

For me, G-Canon is always secondary. Whenever someone makes the statement that the Sith Emperor is more powerful than Sidious I direct them to the myriad of feats that Sidious had performed over his life-time, and that Sidious surpasses the Sith Emperor in anything other than his knowledge of Sith Sorcery - which in turn owes much to an innate ability. Take a moment to comb this entire thread and you'll notice that before your entrance, I never mentioned G-Canon as an argument once. Yes still am referred to as a 'George Lucas fanboy'.

No, it is you who are bringing the canon system into this. And I'm not even talking about G-Canon here because as far as I'm now aware those statements aren't even G-Canon, they are just canon. However you are telling us to disregard them on the sole basis that they are outdated, yet none of those particular texts have been superseded.

So yes, if someone decides they can make up there own rules about the canon system, I will defend it. Because as far as I'm aware those statements pertaining to Sidious are valid until prove otherwise. Regardless of age, those books have not been replaced, and they have not been rendered non-canon.

They are still canon, simple as. We are not at liberty to decide what is valid and what is not, that is up to George Lucas, Leland Chee, and Disney - none of which neither you or I represent.

As far as I'm concerned, any statements made in reference to the Sith Emperor are only valid up until the era in which the Sith Emperor exists. Not after. And as far as I'm concerned being able to dispatch multiple storms of pure dark side energy across the very fabric of space with the capability of destroying armies, fleets and entire planets, at a moments notice, unassisted. is greater than being able to drain the life forms of an entire planet over the course of ten days with the help of 8,000 Sith Lords - taking into account the fact that Sidious is capable of a planet-wide Force drain himself. And don't tell me that he could do it without aid after consuming their essences, else he wouldn't have dispatched his minions to take out a bunch of other planets.

And as far as I'm concerned, being more powerful than Sidious is just plain silly. I'm going to assume that the EU is not so susceptible to petty one-upmanship. Sidious is top-dog, and deserves to be, deal with it.

Simpy put, when I look at the Sith Emperor, I don't see a being more powerful than Sidious. And there are no canon statements that compel me to believe so. You can rail against me all you like but in the end the rules do not dictate that statements regarding the Sith Emperor outrank those regarding Sidious. Out-of-universe timescales are irrelevant.

Seriously, bro, stop promoting/spreading invincibility myth about characters such as Yoda, Luke and Sidious. All of them can win or loose against TOR era elites depending upon various factors and their own strengths and weaknesses. You loose credibility, if you think otherwise.

 

Terms such as "most powerful" are promotion tactics used by authors to convey to readers that the affiliated characters are not to be underestimated in the light of the whole mythos. This is it. FULL STOP.

 

Never would any author stubbornly insist that his/her creation is unbeatable or such. End of argument.

Really, this is just pathetic. Don't lower yourself to the level of the other trolls on this thread.

And no, I don't believe any of this is true.

And seriously, how can you stand there and say 'most powerful' is just a promotion tactic and then go and use it as an argument against us, do you realise how hypocritical that is?

The only person who needs to stop with this ridiculous charade is you. Don't bother replying, good day.

He lived for 1,300 years at a time when there was thounsands upon thousands of sith lords all fighting for power. Most of them were trained in the dark side since childhood. But for 1,300 years not one of these thousand of sith lords trained in the dark side form childhood could even come close to Vitate's power.

And Sidious did not manage to overcome (both physically and fully conquering his mind) at last one crippled sith Vader :-)

S_W_Legend, your getting the completely wrong idea here.

 

For me, G-Canon is always secondary. Whenever someone makes the statement that the Sith Emperor is more powerful than Sidious I direct them to the myriad of feats that Sidious had performed over his life-time, and that Sidious surpasses the Sith Emperor in anything other than his knowledge of Sith Sorcery - which in turn owes much to an innate ability. Take a moment to comb this entire thread and you'll notice that before your entrance, I never mentioned G-Canon as an argument once. Yes still am referred to as a 'George Lucas fanboy'.

Beni, I have noticed you pulling out G-canon card in your debates for favoring Sidious numerous times in different threads. At least, be honest about your own debating history.

Your assumption is misplaced if you believe that Sidious surpassed Sith Emperor in everything barring Sith Sorcery. Sith Emperor have demonstrated extreme proficiency in conventional aspects of the Force such as Force Drain (he siphoned energies from countless souls/individuals on multiple planets simultaneously), Sith lightning (he could overwhelm even the strongest Jedi with this talent), Telepathic abilities (he could break even the strongest Jedi and simultaneously controlled thousands of individuals from lightyear distances with this talent) and telekinetic applications (he was capable of collapsing buildings, nearly atomize metal, perform telekinetic feats without gestures). Full extent of his abilities are actually unknown. Heck, Sith Emperor prevented his original body and even avatars from negative effects (accelerated aging/decay) of dark side practices in comparison to Sidious who couldn't do the same to his clones.

No, it is you who are bringing the canon system into this. And I'm not even talking about G-Canon here because as far as I'm now aware those statements aren't even G-Canon, they are just canon. However you are telling us to disregard them on the sole basis that they are outdated, yet none of those particular texts have been superseded.

Beni, I didn't brought canon system on my own; http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=626813&page=17

Many debaters rely upon canon system to lend credibility to their arguments so it is natural for me to respond in kind.

Also, it is good to note some flexibility in your opinion in this regard.

So yes, if someone decides they can make up there own rules about the canon system, I will defend it. Because as far as I'm aware those statements pertaining to Sidious are valid until prove otherwise. Regardless of age, those books have not been replaced, and they have not been rendered non-canon.

 

They are still canon, simple as. We are not at liberty to decide what is valid and what is not, that is up to George Lucas, Leland Chee, and Disney - none of which neither you or I represent.

Nobody is making any rules about canon system here! My point is to respect canon in its entirety. You focus on black and white concepts and not on the grey concepts of canon. Retcons and/or contradictions are frequent occurrences in a lore which is continuously expanding and have lot of authors contributing to it. It is up to us (fans) to make sense of it all instead of being selective in our debates. Several top tier dark side masters have registered their attendance in the mythos thus far. Debating about who is strongest among them is not easy and rather an exhausting exercise. When you are so powerful; you can hold your own against any opponent, if well prepared. It doesn't matters who secures the top spot in this kind of scenario. Simple.

By the way, Lucas doesn't bothers with "most powerful" declarations in EU and neither he overrules them officially at personal capacity.

As far as I'm concerned, any statements made in reference to the Sith Emperor are only valid up until the era in which the Sith Emperor exists. Not after. And as far as I'm concerned being able to dispatch multiple storms of pure dark side energy across the very fabric of space with the capability of destroying armies, fleets and entire planets, at a moments notice, unassisted. is greater than being able to drain the life forms of an entire planet over the course of ten days with the help of 8,000 Sith Lords - taking into account the fact that Sidious is capable of a planet-wide Force drain himself. And don't tell me that he could do it without aid after consuming their essences, else he wouldn't have dispatched his minions to take out a bunch of other planets.

That ritual lasted 10 days but the power was released on moments notice and Tenebrae controlled it right on the spot; his transformation didn't took 10 days. After this transformation, Tenebrae had galactic reach with his Force abilities. As explained above:

- Sith Emperor simultaneously siphoned energies from souls of countless beings trapped in the void of Nathema, many individuals on Dromund Kaas and also Revan trapped in another region. All of these locations are many lightywears apart from each other.

- Sith Emperor simultaneously controlled his children who were deployed in many worlds under Republic control with his telepathic abilities; another indication of his powers having galactic reach. Sith Emperor could activate his children in any part of the Galaxy with sheer force of his will whenever he wished to do so.

- Sith Emperor manipulated the weather of Dromund Kaas on planetary scale and continuously.

- Sith Emperor eventually acquired the capability to control dark side power of galactic proportions to complete his final transformation (ultimate plan). Also, Sith Sorcery based powers are among the most destructive and lethal in the mythos and controlling such powers is indication of remarkable strength and affinity with the dark side.

- Combat wise, he had answer for any kind of threat under fair circumstances and/or when prepared. His Sith Sorcery talent granted him lot of options in this regard.

As far as timeline is concerned, this is lame argument. You think that Sidious had no equal during his era? Dark side masters such as The Son and Abeloth existed during his time as well. In addition, their have been other extremely powerful entities that have existed for a very long time. Sidious could be the most powerful among the followers of Sith philosophy among the dark side practitioners but individuals such as Nihilus and Tenebrae abandoned this track. So you need to focus on grey shades of canonical developments and not just stick to old (outdated) views/canonical revelations. Understand?

And as far as I'm concerned, being more powerful than Sidious is just plain silly. I'm going to assume that the EU is not so susceptible to petty one-upmanship. Sidious is top-dog, and deserves to be, deal with it.

 

Simpy put, when I look at the Sith Emperor, I don't see a being more powerful than Sidious. And there are no canon statements that compel me to believe so. You can rail against me all you like but in the end the rules do not dictate that statements regarding the Sith Emperor outrank those regarding Sidious. Out-of-universe timescales are irrelevant.

I am not outright declaring who is strongest; I am open to possibilities. However, I believe that Sith Emperor does have credentials to be on the top or up with the top Force-users and my belief is based on merit.

Please, point me to a statement made by myself that says anything about this. Right now.

Your arguments are always in favor of Yoda, Sidious and Luke; when these characters are involved in a debate, they automatically win.

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=651297

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=651536

Here is a gem:

In this case its more than just quotes. Quotes like 'the dark side of the Force is a cancer' I take with a heavy heaping of salt because he says the opposite the next day.

 

However this notion is imprinted in just about every source book that makes mention of him, and accepted by every author who writes about him and likely those that don't. So it is G-Canon in a strong sense. And the very notion of G-Canon is basically telling us: take these comments seriously.

 

But I, personally, would not want to see an EU character become more powerful than Sidious. That for me would be the line, the moment were the EU has grown to corpulent and sure of itself. That's the point where it needs to be shot. Forgive the dramatism but what I'm saying here is that the EU need to respect the original concept of Star Wars.

 

Sidious is the pinnacle of the Rule of Two, the only Sith in the history of the galaxy who has succeeded in destroying the Jedi. He is evil incarnate and a symbol of the darkside in the movies. So, he cannot help but be the most powerful Sith ever. To have another more powerful than him would suggest they are more evil than him and in turn degrade his character and the symbol he represents as a whole and that in turn would degrade the whole original trilogy.

Taken from this thread: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=649417&page=2

Please keep in mind that Sidious isn't the only Sith Lord in the history to nearly destroy the Jedi Order. This have happened before during Old Republic era.

And I am surprised by your assumption that a powerful Dark Side Master would devalue Sidious. Seriously?

I am certain that their is more...

Really, this is just pathetic. Don't lower yourself to the level of the other trolls on this thread.

 

And no, I don't believe any of this is true.

You are denying your own claims?

And seriously, how can you stand there and say 'most powerful' is just a promotion tactic and then go and use it as an argument against us, do you realise how hypocritical that is?

My point is about artistic license; Star Wars saga isn't supposed to promote only Sidious as the top dog among the dark side practitioners of the mythos. "Most powerful" accolade is not exclusive for Sidious for a reason; several other characters have received this accolade as part of their official representation in the mythos. Now who is stronger then who is a matter of interpretation and perspective; in case of some characters, it is easier to determine who is stronger then who (Examples: Sidious > Plagueis; Abeloth > The Son) but not with every character. I advocate TIER based ranking over selective ranking due to this reason; it minimizes arguments in these kind of topics/debates.

The only person who needs to stop with this ridiculous charade is you. Don't bother replying, good day.

Do I need your permission to reply, Beni? This is a public forum where every member have the right to voice his/her opinion. Take it easy and address the concerns at hand.

I've never read any of the books or anything like that so this is just based apon how sidius is in the movies vs how the emperor in the game. And honestly you'd have to know most people have only seen the movies. Not saying your wrong you made perfectly clear points how sidious it stronger, but from people who aren't familiar with the books an only seen the movies then play the storylines in this game they make vitiate look way stronger than sidious in the movies.

Like how vader wa able to kill sidious so easily I mean vader did sacrifice himself to do it but that shouldn't have even been possible if sidious is the strongest Sith Lord ever. He should of just been able to kill vader with one shock instantly.

And this game makes vitiate basicly invincible he can just take a new host he can't die. You just kill his voice only. And he can just take over people minds so easily. And he can just devour a world of life and get more powerful.

I mean come on even malgus seems more powerful than sidious from the movies.

Again I'm just going off the movies compared this game. But sidious seemed awefully weak in the movies.

....

See I could, but then that would just be bottling it all up which isn't healthy. .

People considering Vitiate being stronger is really bothering you huh? xD

Relax,enjoy swtor and don't bother yourself with these matters..Not everyone shares your view,specially if it is so biased and prejudiced.If someone disagrees with you and your SW world view,it doesn't mean the end of the world.

To add just a little to the debate:

The scenes in the Revan book,when Scourge and later Revan were in Vitiate's pressence and his effect on the enviroment and their perceptions is a clear indicator that Vitiate is beyond anything we have seen so far in Star Wars.

Another reason for you to breath easier is that Vitiate is not exactly a sith lord,he doesn't fit the description fully,so from a certain pov Sidious can still be the most powerful sith lord.

People considering Vitiate being stronger is really bothering you huh? xD

Relax,enjoy swtor and don't bother yourself with these matters..Not everyone shares your view,specially if it is so biased and prejudiced.If someone disagrees with you and your SW world view,it doesn't mean the end of the world.

 

To add just a little to the debate:

The scenes in the Revan book,when Scourge and later Revan were in Vitiate's pressence and his effect on the enviroment and their perceptions is a clear indicator that Vitiate is beyond anything we have seen so far in Star Wars.

 

Another reason for you to breath easier is that Vitiate is not exactly a sith lord,he doesn't fit the description fully,so from a certain pov Sidious can still be the most powerful sith lord.

His view isn't "Biased and prejudiced." His view is correct. Sidious IS the most powerful Sith Lord in history, people only say the emperor is stronger because they like his background story :roll:

Now THAT is biased/Prejudiced...

Another thing is, the Vitiate destroying the strike team... Kk great. Sidious slaughtered three incredibly powerful Jedi within seconds, simply because of his incredible blade work, and the fact they couldn't sense him by precognition...

And that's not even his most powerful feat, just showing that he can do something Vitiate can but better.

Oh. And Sidious literally created a force power. His force storm could destroy fleets, and planets if he tried and wasn't stopped by the Skywalkers.

That's pretty boss indeed

People considering Vitiate being stronger is really bothering you huh? xD

Relax,enjoy swtor and don't bother yourself with these matters..Not everyone shares your view,specially if it is so biased and prejudiced.If someone disagrees with you and your SW world view,it doesn't mean the end of the world.

 

To add just a little to the debate:

The scenes in the Revan book,when Scourge and later Revan were in Vitiate's pressence and his effect on the enviroment and their perceptions is a clear indicator that Vitiate is beyond anything we have seen so far in Star Wars.

 

Another reason for you to breath easier is that Vitiate is not exactly a sith lord,he doesn't fit the description fully,so from a certain pov Sidious can still be the most powerful sith lord.

Yes...yes of course I am being biased, its not like I haven't used facts to support...well what is fact.

Yes...yes of course I am being biased, its not like I haven't used facts to support...well what is fact.

Some of the things you quoted and usually quote were/are not from an actual SW franchise,but outdated encyclopedias and other similar stuff.Fact is something that happened in the SW universe,not a third party work, describing a character.

And this is where it gets interesting,Sidious needs third party works to describe him,while Vitiate on the other hand radiates power from the actual events you see him in.You don't need to read somewhere else that his is this or that.You can figure that out for yourself.

Most of the things you quoted were not from an actual SW franchise,but outdated encyclopedias and other similar stuff.Fact is something that happened in the SW universe,not a third party work, describing a character.

And this is where it gets interesting,Sidious needs third party works to describe him,while Vitiate on the other hand radiates power from the actual events you see him in.You don't need to read somewhere else that his is this or that.You can figure that out for yourself.

*cough* Dark Empire, cus the Force Storm clearly isn't the most powerful display ever.

Some of the things you quoted and usually quote were/are not from an actual SW franchise,but outdated encyclopedias and other similar stuff.Fact is something that happened in the SW universe,not a third party work, describing a character.

And this is where it gets interesting,Sidious needs third party works to describe him,while Vitiate on the other hand radiates power from the actual events you see him in.You don't need to read somewhere else that his is this or that.You can figure that out for yourself.

Ok so tell me, where is it said that my sources are outdated?

*cough* Dark Empire, cus the Force Storm clearly isn't the most powerful display ever.

Never said Sidious lacks impressive stuff.If he did not,this long debate that is in several threats,would not exist.

Whilst I don't know much about Vitiate, I know enough to say that, in all honesty, Vitiate was stronger.

However I think Sidious use his power much more wisely. Which makes him the more powerful of the two.

It's not the amount of power you have, it's how you use it.

I am not saying Vitiate was weak, but comparing accomplishments/feats and the like, though the main goal for the Sith was the eradication of the Jedi Order which Sidious did accomplish, immortality(which Sidious did accomplish) was only something a couple of Sith Lords wanted. Sidious has done far more, as per the EU...a side note. People need to stop acting like the movies =/= EU, its all one connected universe the movies only show a small portion to a character overall.

 

 

 

Ok then Swiss, give me a list of Vitiate's accomplishments/feats.

I would point out one giant glaring hole in your statement. George Lucas with the prequels pissed all over the EU in multiple areas, destroying the very idea that it is all one connected universe and leaving the literary arm of Lucasfilm bending over backwards to try to explain the inconsistencies left in its wake - the retconning of Boba Fett not being Jaster Mereel from Concord Dawn comes to mind off the top of my head.

Movies trump all, no matter how good the EU is - and I say this thinking the Thrawn Anthology is the best SW literature of all time, and having that undone by the prequels in terms of context.

And with the upcoming movies, you potentially are going to have the entire EU turned upside down as the children of the movie heros are going to allegedly be redefined - no more Jacen, Jaina, Anakin, or Ben - new kids and a daughter of Skywalker, allegedly; the framework of the new movies, set in a time that also would make the Yhuzaan Vong invasion as something that never happened.

So you going to be in denial of all that when it comes to "one connected universe"?

I am hoping with Disney at the helm, they have the balls to do what the Lit arm of Lucasfilm was too scared to do - acknowledge that the books or parts of them are no longer canon and cut their losses instead of trying to retconn everything in a messy heap.