Lit New, Powerful Force Users

So, we know who the big ones are. Bane. Plagueis. Sidious. Dooku. Yoda. Luke. Kyp, etc. Are we ever going to see more Force users that are just INSANELY powerful? Not like Abeloth or anything. I'm talking about an average sentient species that is either a rival to the power of Luke or even exceed's it. Don't get me wrong, I love that Luke is the top dog right now, but I want to see more beings that can at least meet the bar, if not raise it, good or evil. Thoughts?

 

Luke died and they got a new Sith Emperor, who brought himself back from the dead by sheer force of will.

 

*finger snap* galactic orgasms.

 

The problem is that trying to one up the franchise big boys always comes off as gratuitous ****ing on behalf of the authors. See Zahn, Karpyshyn, Avellone, or the chuckle-heads behind TOR.

 

Add in to that Anderson (see Kyp being in OP . . . ) and Reaves ("Kajin Savaros" supposedly being ridonkulously powerful)

Lol and the Force Unleashed! Don't forget that stain on Star Wars

 

Kun seemed powerful. He separated his spirit from his body by draining the life of the massassi slaves during the Jedi invasion to Yavin 4. I don't see Plagueis, Sidious, Dooku or Vader having that type of power.

 

Palpatine apparently sapped the life-force of the people of Byss to enable his rebirths and empower his minions with the Dark Side.
Exar also seems to have somewhat failed in killing them all as the timeline videos for TOR have Yavin still full of Massassi after Exars little force trick.

 

Judging from the climax of FOTJ: Apocalypse, Darth Krayt was Luke's equal in power, lightsaber skill notwithstanding. And that was Krayt at the beginning of his reign. The resurrected Krayt we saw in Legacy: War would be far, far stronger.

 

He probably was. Who can survive being electrocuted, being thrown off a cliff and being stabbed in the chest? Well, Krayt could. Still, I longed for a longer duel between Cade and Krayt in the last issue of War. Krayt seemed all powerful, but he was killed so easily.

 

I figure it's all ****ing, Even Luke and Palpatine, what makes Luke so powerful?

"he is the son of the chosen one."

yeaaaaah.

What makes papatine so powerful?

Seriously the guy conquerd the galaxy because the galaxy was stupid.

Luke, Vader, and Palpatines power comes from their fanbase, if fans didn't react to them the way the did and the writers didn't placate the fans, all three would have been surpassed years ago.

 

Luke, Vader and Palpatine are supposed to be the most powerful. According to Lucas. Nothing to do with the fans.

If anything it's the fans that go the other way and try to insist that their favourite video game character is more powerful (Revan, Vitiate, Starkiller)

 

I guy who needs be tossed into a Star to guarantee Death is generally pretty powerful.

 

Sidious remains top dog - his spirit has to be guarded by all the Jedi to stop him returning to life.

 

Ultimately such a discussion is not only a fan-influenced popularity contest it is also, based on the way Star Wars is structured - almost completely irrelevant. The Force does not function as a static entity, and neither does the relationship of any particular individual to the Force. Everything is in flux constantly. Therefore, one person can be more powerful than a person at one point and less powerful later on, completely without any change in skill or experience on the part of the participants, but based solely on their relationship vis a vis the Force. The many encounters of Obi-Wan and Darth Maul are a very good example of this.

Bottom line: Star Wars is not DBZ. Jedi don't have a 'power level' that can be used to comparatively quantify their abilities.

 

The varying sources make it impossible to decide "who is stronger" from books/comics/films/games, simply because characters abilities are so varied in different media and by different authors.

So the only real guide there is has been what Lucas says

 

so basicly fan ****. Maybe because my first Fan experince was Star Trek and I was Born in 82 so besides the occassional reruns at tv aired movies my first Experince was The Next Generation, in which Gene Roddenberry was quickly kicked "upstairs", I respect the great creators of SF franchises. I never gave them the deferece others have.

Lucas say's don't mean crap unless he is writing the stuff.

If there is no way to gage a characters attributes then there is just no way to gage them, especially if there is weak internal consitancy and almost nil retrospective.

Is Luke a "Strong Jedi" sure, is he the strongest there ever was, no way to tell other than blatant fanwanking. Same with Vader and Palpatine.

 

ok . . . I'm not really sure what you are trying to say this whole time

But the core if SW is the movies.
The movies are the gold standard in terms of continuity, and any author can write a book making their character super powerful. And it happens all the time.

 

I am saying if your argument comes down to Lucas Say's, you have a very weak argument.

The movies are the gold standard in continuity is the reason behind the crappy prequals and the lack luster Clone Wars tv show. A franchise unable to adapt and grow just ends of repeating itself weakly again and again. Mindless devtion without crtical thought is bad in real life, is bad in writing fiction, and it is bad in analying fiction, and is bad for franchises.

 

That wasn't my argument. I wasn't arguing anything . . .

And whether or not you like the movies, facts are facts, so either accept it, or go away and stop whinging

 

Judging from the climax of FOTJ: Apocalypse, Darth Krayt was Luke's equal in power, lightsaber skill notwithstanding. And that was Krayt at the beginning of his reign. The resurrected Krayt we saw in Legacy: War would be far, far stronger.

i resent that entire idea. Only luke fulfilled the full potential of Anakin Skywalker as the most powerful force user ever. Krayt was not at Luke's level in Apocolypse. You notice most of the punishmnet was directed towards Luke in the novel. Krayt was probably Luke's level at the height of his rein, but NEVER stronger.​

 

Leaving Krayt aside for a second, that statement doesn't have a leg to stand on. What about Abeloth herself? What about the Ones? Darth Nihilius?
You should recognize that statement for what it is: a weak attempt to retroactively apply the whole midichlorian/Chosen One business to the OT and 'legitimize' Luke. As if Luke, as a character, needed to be legitimized by having a high 'force potential' or midichlorian count.
That's what I'll never understand about fans who insist that the characters in the movies have to be the most powerful ever. As if the overall importance or quality of the saga is diminished if there are stronger characters in the EU. Why is that? The best Star Wars movies weren't even about that. Luke didn't triumph at the end of ROTJ because of his midichlorian count and force potential, but because of his strength of character, because he had the heart of a Jedi. And Vader's 'diminished' force potential didn't stop him from fulfilling the prohpecy. In fact his force potential didn't play any part whatsoever.

I beg to differ.

That's a...disingenuous way of putting it. You might (arguably) say that Luke recieved the most punishment, but that's his own fault. His inability to defend himself, or to weather the damage as well as Krayt doesn't make him stronger.

In fact, not only did Krayt defend himself better, he also was better offensively than Luke. Both Luke and Krayt grappled with her, and both attacked her with 'force blows' but Krayt's force draining technique was the single most important contribution against Abeloth in that fight.
And as a cherry on top, Krayt also regained consciousness and got back on his feet faster than Luke, and unlike Luke, he did it without any help.

So to sum up, the fight at the Lake of Apparitions was a duel of force essences, in which Krayt had the larger contribution, and after which he was back on his feet faster than Luke. Sorry, but this clearly he is at least Luke's equal, if not his superior.

I'll give the edge with lightsabers to Luke, because he has far more observable 'feats' given the dozens of works he's appeared in, but Krayt rivals him in terms of strength and skill in the Force, at the time of 44 ABY.
As for Krayt at his peak, well...

 

The inherent weakness of this argument is how easily it can be reversed: Why must the EU depict characters stronger than the films? Why must there exist some sort of metaphysical chasm; the films portray peak Force users throwing Senate platforms, the EU shows characters incinerate cities, kill worlds, etc.

No one has suggested that "movie characters have to be the most powerful ever," just that some movie characters need be. Lucas designed the prophecy to restore balance to the Force, imparting a far greater sense of "overall importance" to the saga than, say, KotOR. It raises the stakes beyond your standard EU wherein the entire Force is in jeopardy. Sidious, by virtue of what he accomplished, must simply be the best of the Sith. He must be smarter, stronger, and infinitely more dangerous than the legion of failures that preceded him. Anakin Skywalker's own strength in the Force, as the Messiah figure and Christ allegory, is thematically appropriate under these conditions. I'll grant you Luke, I've said the same thing myself; Luke must clearly be a figure of great power given the Emperor's/Vader's interest in him, but I see no reason why he must be the best ever.



The films are the bedrock of the franchise. With the exception of Luke, the hierarchy as depicted by Lucas is appropriate and believable, which puts the EU at a disadvantage, revealing their contributions to be little else than the petty need to make their characters seem better than they actually are. Style in lieu of substance, really.

 

Yeah we will.

 

They don't have to do it. But if they do, so what?
For one thing the EU is not bound by the same visual limitations the movies were. For another, it's precisely because "the films are the bedrock of the franchise". So each particular work has to add some gravitas, to make us care about the story. Overcompensate, as it were. One of the ways they do this is by scaling the threat up. Even BioWare, who does this all the time, made a bit of fun of this in one of their games.

But here's what I don't understand: what if they do? Are the movies, thematically, diminished in anyway because there was a stronger Sith than Sidious running around 3 thousand years prior to the movies?
The Original Trilogy, which is the best, didn't care about this. It was just a story about adventure, redemption, and a justified rebellion. So what if 3000 years before there was a Sith who could destroy entire planets? What difference should that make? Luke still had his adventures, Vader still had his redemption, the Empire was still overthrown.

In fact, I'd argue that Lucas himself is guilty of the petty need to make their characters seem better than they actually are. The prequels can drone on and on about unrivalled force potential, the force being unballanced, Stover can push all the flowery descriptions of Sidious being "beyond power", "the blackness of space", "a black hole", or what have you. That doesn't change the fact that the conflict in the OT ended as unceremoniously as an old man being thrown in a deep shaft. "Blackness of space" my rear end.


As long as different works don't directly contradict each other, I don't see what the big deal is in having characters who are stronger than the movie characters. But I do concede that some EU works cross the line and should be erased out of existence, cough The Force Unleashed cough.