Saga Why didn't Vader let Luke strike Sidious down?

This is what the RoTJ novelization has to say about Vader's thoughts early in that fight:

Vader was impressed by Luke's speed. Pleased, even. It was a pity, almost, he couldn't let the boy kill the Emperor yet. Luke wasn't ready for that, emotionally. There was still a chance Luke would return to his friends if he destroyed the Emperor now. He needed more tutelage, first — training by both Vader and Palpatine — before he'd be ready to assume his place at Vader's right hand, ruling the galaxy.
So Vader had to shepherd the boy through periods like this, stop him from doing damage in the wrong places — or in the right places prematurely.​

 

^^^
That seems to harken back to the ESB-era concept of Vader which is more apparent in the early drafts of ROTJ and some comments by Gary Kurtz - where Vader is far more in control of himself, rather than the slave to Palpatine/the Dark Side/the Sith that he would become in both ROTJ & the PT.

With the lines, "It is too late for me, my son. I must obey my master", Vader became a pawn in the struggle for control of the galaxy, rather than the ambitious Dark Lord who would see it all become his - something hinted at in the SW novelisation:

 

Vader is still being an idiot here, since there is no future in which both Palpatine AND Vader train Luke. Palpatine obviously didn't feel the same way. When Luke defeats Vader, Palpatine is ready for Luke to replace Vader right then and there.

Vader did all the work and took all the risk. Palpatine just sat there cackling. For whatever Vader's reasons in defending Palpatine, he was being a fool.

With Palpatine out of the way, Vader would be Sith Lord, with or without his son. By protecting Palpatine and drawing Luke into a fight, he was putting his own butt on the line. Either he'd kill his son, or his son would kill him. Either way Vader loses at that point -- he either maintains the status quo or loses his life.

 

Yeah its a real weird situation. I don't always bash the PT I have my qualms with the OT as well and this is one of them. I mean I love star wars or I wouldn't be on here.

That being said the movie didn't show what the book read. I have read all that before hense why I put in the choices of the poll. But we are hardcore fans and I don't think the casual fan could get it. To be honest I still don't and chose option 4 because the film is canon and the book is not.

From just the movie standpoint without the book would you guys get it you think?

 

Honestly, prior to the PT and the introduction of the "Rule of Two," I didn't even think Vader was going to die.

When Palpatine tells Luke to take his father's place as his side, back in the early 90s (when I would have seen the film for the first time), I did not interpret that to mean that Vader would be killed. More like Luke would become Palpatine's new favorite pet and Vader would be given some position on some ship that was less prestigious, while Palpatine groom Luke to be the second most powerful person in the Empire.

That at worst it would be like Vader being demoted and going back to being pushed around and talked down to like Vader had been in ANH, while Luke would lead the Imperial fleet.

I couldn't fathom the Rule of Two and there was nothing in the films to indicate that, IMO. Some scenes just sit awkwardly for me anymore after the PT:

-Vader proposing the idea of turning Luke in ESB. With the "Rule of Two" you can read between the lines and interpret it as Vader either saying

1. "**** you Palpatine, I'm going to kill you and Luke and I will be the two Sith."​

2. "I'll lay down my life, if you spare and train my son."​

​

and I never interpreted either of these things being implied. Merely that Luke would turn to the Dark Side and be a third Dark Jedi (I didn't know what a Sith was at the time).

-Another awkward scene would be in ROTJ when Vader tells Luke that Palpatine is his new master. Again, if you interpret that scene with the Rule of Two in play, that means Vader pretty much knows and is acknowledging that he's a goner.

-Under the Rule of Two... why the hell would Palpatine entrust Vader to be the one to track down Luke and trust Vader to bring Luke before Palpatine? Vader has zero incentive to do that and Palpatine would be an idiot to just sit back and let Vader handle everything. Under the Rule of Two, it would have been more logical for Palpatine to do everything in his power to get to Luke first and turn him before Vader could tempt him.

 

The rule of two offers problems and dilemas we could go on about for atleast 3657 pages but why beat a dead horse... other than that Vader did stay to it though since he said join me and you will destroy the emperor and we will rule the galaxy as father and son. I think that is where they got the hair brained scheme to say that there can be only two. Hell I don't know. There are so many holes now I can't fill them. We try because we love star wars but anyone being honest with themselves know we have problems and after E7 comes out I have a feeling we will have more.

Back on topic by what we see in the film. Vader wants Luke to kill the Emperor and even the Emperor has forseen it. Luke goes to do it and Vader stops him. Without reading the book what genius could say that he stopped him because Luke wasn't ready to completely fall to the dark side especially after Sidious said if you strike me down your journey will be complete.

Well? Vader has what he wanted. Lukes journey will be complete why the heck (see mods I can control my language) stop him???

I'm still stuck on option 4.

However just by the films with the PT included I would side with option 1. As a viewer trying to understand it. See Sidious says strike me down and your journey towards the darkside will be complete. Vader stops him. The book needs thrown out now because that tells me Vader doesn't really want him to turn and in fact is saving Luke from the darkside by stopping him and the point is valid since Vader does end up helping him and told him he was right about him. There was always good left in him. Pretty deep huh.

 

I think he says "it is too late for me, son" in the novel as well.

Not sure if he says "You don't know the power of the Dark Side- I must obey my master" in the novel though- at least, not in the same way.

 

Maybe the scene where Vader turns on the Emperor hadn't been written yet.

 

Because the Emperor's plan was that Luke would replace Vader so Vader tried to prove he was better than Luke

 

Or...

IF Vader did not intervene, Luke might have turned and killed him - after striking down the Emperor; completely consumed by the Dark Side. And instead of celebrating on Endor at the end of RoTJ, Luke might decide to recreate his fathers early 'achievements' and butcher anyone in sight.

 

The Emperor wasn't in real danger and would have just Sith Lightning'd Luke.

 

By the time of A new hope Palpatines been Emperor for 23 years. He probably felt the rule of two was not needed anymore and had served its purpose.

 

In reality, I think an excuse was needed for Luke and Vader to go from talking casually to having an intense duel, which was kinda necessary to the story for Luke to achieve Jedi status. A rematch was one of those things that when the George (or any other writers) sat down to write ROTJ that that was one of the things that had to happen. I think Palps taunting Luke to strike him and Vader defending him was the best they could come up with to start it under the circumstances.

In universe, I don't really have a good answer for Vader's change in tone from "You can destory the emperor... rule the galaxy as father and son" talk in ESB to "I must obey my master" and blocking Luke's strike on Palps in ROTJ. I think it's just an inconsistency in the story. But if I had to give an explanation I would say that Vader was just talking big in ESB when Palps was on the other side of the galaxy, but shut his mouth and became a lap dog again when he was around in ROTJ.

 

I'm scared to say anything else because I have people with more power than me that will ban me if I get going. 2005 all over again besides Sikara. I want to stay but my tongue is litterly tied gang.

 

It's the 2nd one though you don't have it explained on screen at all. In the novelization it states that Luke might not be ready yet, that he could strike down Palpatine and still not turn.

 

Locking thread. If anyone wishes to continue the thread topic, please feel free to start a new one.