Does anyone know about the rule of two besides Yoda and Palps?

Okay, I don't want this to seem redundant, but the whole Rule of 2 thing has some problems.

1) Lets start in ESB. Vader talks to the Emperor and says if Luke could be turned, he would make a valuable ally. The Emperor agrees. If Vader knew that this rule of 2 thing was so hardcore then why ask? For that matter, if he was planning on turning on the Emperor, why say anything to him other than "Skywalker's a dead man!" Why give him the heads up?

2)In ROTJ, Palpatine remarks to Vader, "Soon Skywalker will be one of "us". To me this means Sith. Now I spose this could be true because even if Vader is dead he was still a Sith and Skywalker would be one. Maybe this was just to decieve Vader about his true intentions. But still, Vader obviously doesn't know seem to have a problem with this Rule of 2 business.

3)Also in ROTJ, even after Palpatine has been trying to get them to fight and all that, Vader still says that if Luke will not turn to the Dark Side, then perhaps Leia will. Again, it seems they are still hellbent on converting someone else to the darkside. It seems like the Emperor and Vader are still in on it together.

4)In ROTS, it seems obvious that kidnapping Palpatine was a plot to lure Anakin to the ship. Dooku knocks Obiwan out of commission then starts taunting Anakin. This could have only had two purposes, to turn Anakin to the Dark Side OR perhaps if a Jedi starts to get close to the Dark Side without going over he becomes weaker as the confusion grows, etc. But when Palpatine orders Anakin to kill him, Dooku obviously has a WTF look on his face, as if this betrayal was unexpected.

5) In AOTC, Dooku tries to get Obiwan on his side to overthrow the Emperor. This seems to support the Rule of Two thing as he doesn't want him to join them. But it also adds confusion to the whole mix.

 

you have good points, and beside of yoda and palpatine mace windu knows, i dont think anyone beside they know the rule of two. maybe dooku dont know the rule, but he wants to rule all, and for that has to overtrow the emperor.

 

I've wondered about that rule of two business myself. It makes sense in theory, but in practice? It'd mean an apprentice having to kill his master before becoming one himself, unless an enemy got there first.

 

It really depends on how you see the "rule".

1) It's not a "rule" in the traditional sense. It's not written in a book or anything. It's mentioned by Yoda, not as a "rule" anyway, he just says that's the way it is. So it could be his way of describing what the Sith are naturally going to do.
A master takes an apprentice, the apprentice grows in power, he kills his master and takes his place. Repeat.

2) It actually is a rule, set down by some ancient Sith lord. The EU does this, and attributes the rule ot Darth Bane (I think).
In this case, the whole purpose of the "rule" is to keep the Sith hidden.


If it's #2, then as of ANH, the rule in invalid since there is no reason to hide anymore.

If it's #1, then it's likely that the Sith never consider it at all. It's not something they ever intend to do, it happens.

 

Is it possible to have Luke as a Dark Jedi ally, and not a Sith Lord?

 

Exactly... not every darksider is a Sith.

 

I don't think the rule of two is an actual rule that the Sith consciously observe. Rather, it's just the nature of the darkside.