View Single Post
Old 06-05-2011, 01:44 AM   #94
SmootheOperator
Rookie
 
SmootheOperator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 156
Current Game: Replaying Gears Of War trilogy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klw View Post

I suppose a related point to make is that Sidious used his own genius to destroy the Republic while Plagueis needed his force powers to do whatever you think he might have done. In that way, his accomplishment being the will of the Force and not only his own will does somewhat make it less impressive. For example, if a Sith warrior kills a Jedi using a combination of force powers and a bounty hunter kills a Jedi of equal ability without using any force powers, whose accomplishment is more praiseworthy? On a simpler level: Someone defeating you with a trick is more impressive than someone defeating you using some sort of tool (in our case, this tool being force-sensitivity).
It also counts on how it was done, if a Sith warrior kills a Jedi in a lightsaber battle, but the bounty hunter kills a Jedi while he is on the toilet from a distance with a planted bomb, i count the more difficult kill as the more impressive, and give the point to the Sith for standing his ground like a man, and not taking a "cowards" way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klw View Post
Another point I could make is that because the Sith evidently lost track of Anakin Skywalker even if they did create him, the whole thing may well have been an accident. If your greatest accomplishment was an accident, how is it so great?
Just because it wasn't the intended outcome, doesn't mean that it wasn't an extraordinary accomplishment. The invention of gun powder was an accident, and it cannot be said that because it was an accident, it is less momentous in history. And yes, i did compare the invention of gun powder to the creation of the most powerful force user on record.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klw View Post

I'm glad you now seem to agree that accomplishments mean more than ability. If it were only based on ability I would nominate Darth Vader for this honor.
I do agree that accomplishments are important, but i see Palpatine's accomplishments were more political than anything. He used his "mind trick" to have critical decisions made and used the system itself to ascend to power. Darth Krayt didn't use "as much" politics to come to power in the empire. He walked into the meeting chambers of the head of the government, and killed the emperor without a second thought. (it was later found out that the man he killed was a decoy, not the real emperor, but that's beside the point) Darth Krayt's empire was not as stable, and not as long as Palpatine's (i know i was wrong about the 17 years bit), but the fact that he took it by force, instead of by politics counts higher in my mind. But again, not saying Palpatine did not have an amazing accomplishment by taking the republic from the inside, i keep getting in trouble because i don't like the politics of business so i avoid them as much as i can, politics is a fickle bitch.

If i was going for potential skills and power, i would definitely go with Darth Vader, he was the most powerful sith ever recorded, was never trained to his full potential, never lived long enough to take control and be an Emperor, he just didn't have the tools to live up to what he could have been.

And if i were going for skills and power that were there, but never truly used to their full potential, i would say Darth Plagueis. He had the power to do as he please, he was a Muun, and as a species, are some of the most intelligent and controlled species in the galaxy, the potential is there for him to do a lot, he just wasted his talents. He possibly created the most powerful force user on record, but he didn't rule the galaxy, he had no army, and had his name on nothing but a legend, but as a Sith, there was no one who could control the power of the dark side like he could, he had the skills and intelligence to do a lot, but just never did it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klw View Post

P.S. I think the idea of "balancing the force" can still be true if you just define it as "destroying the Sith." Anakin Skywalker did do that. There were temporarily no Sith masters or apprentices left after Palpatine died and Vader converted as far as I know.
Palpatine never completely died, his "essence", or soul, not sure exactly what to call it, survived and manifested itself in clone bodies, Vader did die, but Palpatine kept the sith going for a very long time. Seperate from that, Darth Krayt (not by name, but still was fading to the dark side) existed before the rebels began fighting the empire. Before ROTJ, the man that was to be Darth Krayt was exiled from tattooine, and while chasing a bounty, ended up on Korriban. Where he found a Sith holocron, and was moved fully to the dark side. It wasn't until a short time later that he called himself Krayt, and began his "One Sith" empire.

The sith were never truly destroyed, only disrupted for a short time, but they have always existed

SIDE NOTE: not worthy of its own thread, but just a question. Who has the entire Star Wars Saga on Blu-Ray pre-ordered?


The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin

Last edited by SmootheOperator; 06-05-2011 at 02:12 AM.
SmootheOperator is offline   you may: quote & reply,