Most corrupting: dark side(star wars), one ring(lotr) or chaos(wh40k)

[SonOf D.]

Which of these is the most corrupting force and how evil would a one ring bearing sith with the psyker gene be?

[Sharpandpointies]

If we're talking volume, Chaos probably has the greatest effect...

[SonOf D.]

But with chaos there are individuals who have been known to use its power and remain on the good side, chaotic good but good. With the one ring on the other hand im lead to believe that unless you are more powerful than sauron you're doomed

[cosmic eagle]

Originally Posted by SonOf D.

But with chaos there are individuals who have been known to use its power and remain on the good side, chaotic good but good. With the one ring on the other hand im lead to believe that unless you are more powerful than sauron you're doomed

No. If you are talking about 40K Chaos, you ain't coming back from becoming the blackened plaything of the Warp gods. Psykers are not necessarily Chaos tainted. The Chaos psykers are called Sorcerers. Major difference there.

And yes, Chaos wins in a stomp here.

[Wavemaninawe]

One detail I've always felt a bit uncertain of regarding SW... is 'the Dark Side' the practice of Force users expressing their powers in negative ways, or is it some kind of separate entity that actively corrupts Force users?

Logic would suggest the former but I get the impression that it's usually described as the latter.

[mailedbypostman1]

The Ring has better feats with some individuals perhaps, but Chaos spans the galaxy.

[Siriel]

If we're talking effectiveness, then the One Ring never failed to get the person. It just took longer for some. (Tom doesn't count)

If we're talking number, Chaos stomp.

[BlindSquirrel]

Originally Posted by SonOf D.

But with chaos there are individuals who have been known to use its power and remain on the good side, chaotic good but good. With the one ring on the other hand im lead to believe that unless you are more powerful than sauron you're doomed

Originally Posted by Siriel

If we're talking effectiveness, then the One Ring never failed to get the person. It just took longer for some. (Tom doesn't count)

Frodo and Bilbo had the ring for decades, and the worst it did to them was make them paranoid and unable to throw it into the volcano. Neither was actually corrupted to the point of doing anything actively malicious.

By contrast, simply being in areas where the divide between the warp and the materium was weak has led to people being completely taken over by demons in a matter of minutes. In Fulgrim, all of the remembrancers who go into the chaos temple one time wind up being corrupted, and begin doing things like murdering people to use their blood in paintings.

Chaos would probably wind up corrupting Sauron anyway.

[Darth Joker]

I'm not familiar with wh40k, but of the other two... Dark Side doesn't win this. Vader alone showed that even after being in the grips of the Dark Side for decades you can come back from it (as Vader did by saving his son from the Emporer). The One Ring is definitely harder to come back from than that.

[yeoman]

Originally Posted by cosmic eagle

No. If you are talking about 40K Chaos, you ain't coming back from becoming the blackened plaything of the Warp gods. Psykers are not necessarily Chaos tainted. The Chaos psykers are called Sorcerers. Major difference there.

And yes, Chaos wins in a stomp here.

Not even close. Gaunt spent a year and a half on a chaos world when most humans should be corrupted in a month. He was fine. So were the nine Ghosts with him. So properly prepared/motivated people can withstand chaos corruption.

The One Ring? The dude who was in the chorus that sung the world into creation refused to touch that thing.

It corrupted people just by being near them.

The Dark Side is the weak sauce of the three, the other two corrupt the soul with subtlety. The Dark Side takes conscious choice and you can be redeemed. Granted, it makes for better heroic fiction, but it's the least corruptive of these.

[yeoman]

Originally Posted by BlindSquirrel

Frodo and Bilbo had the ring for decades, and the worst it did to them was make them paranoid and unable to throw it into the volcano. Neither was actually corrupted to the point of doing anything actively malicious.

IIRC, Both had their souls permanently stained by having possessed it at one point or another. Though to varying degrees.

And both, as hobbits, have genetic tolerance for the ring's corruption. And Sam had that thing for, what? A couple days? A few weeks?

In Fulgrim, all of the remembrancers who go into the chaos temple one time wind up being corrupted, and begin doing things like murdering people to use their blood in paintings.

Speaking of Fulgrim, hasn't he been possessed by a chaos deamon for 10,000 years and not submitted?

[cosmic eagle]

Originally Posted by yeoman

Not even close. Gaunt spent a year and a half on a chaos world when most humans should be corrupted in a month. He was fine. So were the nine Ghosts with him. So properly prepared/motivated people can withstand chaos corruption.

But they had the benefit of having the protection of Sabbat beati herself.

You usually needed to have some form of Warp protection to resist Chaos. And once you accepted, the corruption is irreversible.

[cosmic eagle]

Originally Posted by yeoman

IIRC, Both had their souls permanently stained by having possessed it at one point or another. Though to varying degrees.

And both, as hobbits, have genetic tolerance for the ring's corruption. And Sam had that thing for, what? A couple days? A few weeks?



Speaking of Fulgrim, hasn't he been possessed by a chaos deamon for 10,000 years and not submitted?

If you consider most likely nuts beyond all recognition "not submitted" then yes. And it's actually unknown for sure what happened to him untill we get to the end of the series.

[yeoman]

Originally Posted by cosmic eagle

If you consider most likely nuts beyond all recognition "not submitted" then yes. And it's actually unknown for sure what happened to him untill we get to the end of the series.

If he ain't got soul stain, he ain't corrupted by it. Crazy and chaos tainted are two different things.

But they had the benefit of having the protection of Sabbat beati herself.

Is this flat out stated later, cause I'm only halfway through "The Armor of Contempt." "His Last Command," implied it was either small doses of poison moth dust, or that they were too pure of mind to be corrupted. I'm inclined to go with the former given they had Feygor with them.

[Siriel]

Originally Posted by BlindSquirrel

Frodo and Bilbo had the ring for decades, and the worst it did to them was make them paranoid and unable to throw it into the volcano. Neither was actually corrupted to the point of doing anything actively malicious.

So, Frodo proclaiming himself the new Lord of the Ring and generally being ready to kill anyone that so much as tried to get near it is not something malicious in your book?

Bilbo(and Frodo for most of the time), had the Ring when it was not nearly at full power and still took it back whitout even noticing, to the point that Gandalf had to basically force him to put it down and walk away.

Also, as mentioned before, hobbits have an explicit resistance to the thing. Compare what happened to Boromir, who never even touched it.