1. Welcome to the new boards! Details here!

Lit Why do Sith Masters encourage their apprentices to kill them?

Discussion in 'Literature' started by Why_So_Serious, May 7, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DarthJenari

    DarthJenari Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 17, 2011
    The risk of weaker members banning together at any moment to take down the Dark Lord is too great, and an Order with multiple factions to manipulate is already weak and will fall to infighting anyways.

    The only benefit of a large order is strength in numbers. It can never operate from the shadows, and what is the point of greater numbers if each member is so much weaker? Quality over quantity.

    It's what he claimed, what he enforced, and pretty much what existed to make sure that no Sith would turn against the other, and in the end it left each Sith weaker than they could've been. At any time Kaan got too confident and attempted to place himself above another he was called out on it and slapped back down to everyone being equal.

    Except once again it did work, and it was that ideology that actually led to the Sith finally conquering the galaxy.

    Goals of the Sith:

    Destroy the Jedi- Achieved

    Conquer the galaxy- Achieved

    Yes it did work, it simply didn't last. Doesn't change the fact that the Order was the most successful out of any other Sith Order in history. The Sith were rewarded with the destruction of their greatest enemies and control of the galaxy.

    Bane didn't violate the Rule of Two.
    Jedi Merkurian likes this.
  2. VanishingReality

    VanishingReality Jedi Knight star 3

    Apr 21, 2013
    Agreed. Quality and stealth are what separates the Sith from the Jedi. Sith can easily take out entire planet's governments with just a few words here and there in record time. They excel at stealth and subterfuge, so if an army wants to contract out to a Sith, there's the added bonus that the Sith Lord would do ALL the dirty work but take none of the credit for it. (Like Pre Vizsla did with Maul)
  3. Darth_Pevra

    Darth_Pevra Force Ghost star 6

    May 21, 2008
    A true dark side master wouldn't display all his assets and keep a lot of aces up his sleeve, he might even want to appear weak as to not attract too much attention. And like I said he/she would use sock puppets if he/she isn't dumb. What you call infighting is what the Sith believe in, social darwinism, the strongest (or smartest most likely) will rule.
    Kaan is a poster child of a very intelligent Sith who fooled everyone and therefore could rule with total power over his sheep.

    Besides, infighting also exists in the RoT order. Infighting is inevitable with Sith. Infighting lead to their destruction in RotJ.

    Of course a larger order could work from the shadows! It would just use an "army" branch and a "secret organisation" branch like the US or really any other country does.

    Plus any strategist knows that yes, most often quantity is more important than quality.

    Of course they turn against each other. The RoT-Sith take secret apprentices all the friggin time! Vader did, Tenebrous did, Palps did (all the hands), Bane wanted to and so on. Basically everyone breaks the RoT whenever the option is there, including Bane himself!!

    Kaan was always above the others, pulling their strings. It is clear from the events that he had almost total power over his followers. They all blindly participated in his crazy thought bomb ritual. Whether he had to hold up a pretense or not is irrelevant.

    A lot of Sith empires conquered the galaxy. Besides, Palpatines short rule was bought with the bodies of all the Sith who lived before him. He benefited a lot from their work and when he actually hold the power he let it all go down the drain with stupidity. He was simply put not fit to be an Emperor. In many books you can see that he was more interested in playing mind games instead of doing something productive. People like Mon Mothma were heads and shoulders above him when it comes to leadership skill.

    Bane was searching for an alternative Padawan in book three because he thought Zannah could be to weak to challenge him. I've read it. It is right there.
  4. DarthJenari

    DarthJenari Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 17, 2011
    The strongest can't rule if they're overpowered by a larger amount of the weak.

    How exactly did he rule with total power? LOL he issued orders and every other Sith Lord chose whether or not to follow, and challenged them as they saw fit. He couldn't even walk into a room and ask others to submit without being questioned.

    Infighting that serves a purpose, and can only end with the strongest of the Sith surviving.

    Yet it has yet to happen, and has only been successfully achieved by a smaller order.

    Yet once again, that isn't the case in the universe we're discussing, with the Order's that have valued quantity having failed time and again.

    No they don't. A few people doing it over 1,000 years isn't all the time so don't exaggerate. Bane didn't, Vader and Tenebrous did, and Palpatine taking on the hands doesn't count as when Bane first created he directly said that both Lords in the Order should be allowed the use of pawns who could be given a small sampling of power, but would never be fully trained Sith, and none of the hands were.

    The Thought Bomb's the only instance of him placing any type of control over the others, and that was backed by the Force where they were all being driven along into a frenzy. That's not even close to how things worked on a daily basis.

    Really? Name them by all means. I can personally only think of two others that came close. (Darth Krayt's One Sith, and the Sith Emperor, neither of which conquered the entire galaxy)

    How exactly does it matter that Palpatine's rule came about due to generations of other Sith? That was the entire point of the Order, for each duo of Sith to be working towards one final goal, as I already stated, and it's the only one that worked. His rule may have indeed been short, yet it's the longest time the Sith have ever ruled the galaxy so it's still the most successful. Again you say Sith with an ideology of a greater goal can't work, yet it did work so it's once again validated by actual canon facts.

    Searching for an alternative Padawan is no different than Zannah searching for a Padawan. It's a preemptive measure so that the newly christened master won't have to spend years after the death of their own master searching for a student, and can automatically begin continuing the Rule of Two, and it makes perfect sense, as since they're now a master anyways they should have nothing left to learn and should be fully ready to pass on their own teachings. Bane was fully planning on doing away with Zannah, meaning there would still have only been two Sith, keeping with the Rule. It's also no different than Palpatine planning for Anakin to be his apprentice after Dooku.
  5. Likewater

    Likewater Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 31, 2009


    25,000 years of near continuous power holding/ for the jedi?

    the Sith, hiding, building power, and losing all the accumulated powers within a generation, for the sith? how is that quality?

    The most successful sith were the Dark age rabble. No Unity, but they managed to keep the Republic bottled up in the core for a millennium. A lot better than the banaites, hell better than the Cold war era sith empire.
    Darth_Pevra likes this.
  6. Darth_Pevra

    Darth_Pevra Force Ghost star 6

    May 21, 2008
    Kaan ruled the same way Palpatine ruled as chancellor, by pitting enemies against each other and fooling most of the Sith into believing he was an idealist.
    He had enough power to order pretty much all the Sith to commit suicide. That is no mean feat right there.

    That is also true of a larger order. Infighting is a part of the Siths nature, it can't be totally eliminated.

    I also want to point out that in the Bane trilogy alone the Sith were close to extinction multiple times. It is almost a miracle they weren't totally eradicated.

    The Rakata and Darth Vitiate have ruled "Sith empires" too.

    Point is: Palpatines predecessors gained nothing at all from Palpatines rule because they were dead.

    Using pawns is also circumventing the intent of the rule as the rule states there should only be two. There's no real difference between dark side pawn or apprentice anyways, as both are trained in the dark side and taught as much as the master sees fit.

    So you simply ignore it or what?
    We don't know how things worked on a daily basis or not because we haven't seen it. What we have seen is Kaan exerting massive power over his underlings. Fact.

    It does matter, because again, Palpatines predecessors gained nothing from following the RoT. The Sith are supposed to be about advancement and evolution of oneself, breaking your chains. The only Sith who could do that was Palps, all the others very much remained in chains as they had to hide themselves like vermin. Nowhere in the Sith code does it say that you should sacrifice yourself for some noble goal. If you look at the Banites individually, only one of them could fulfill his potential, all the others were failures.
  7. DarthJenari

    DarthJenari Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 17, 2011
    Uhh, 25,000 years is the entire history of the Jedi Order. 20 years of rule is only the Order of the Sith Lords. My point being if you're going to count the entire history of one order you have to do the same for the other, in which every Sith Order has in the end fallen, so I don't really think it's fair to act as if the Banite Sith are some how responsible for 25,000 years of Jedi rule. If you're going to criticize them for that, you have to place that failing on the shoulders of every other Sith in history, and if you do that I then think it's pointless to criticize them for that at all. However the Order of the Sith Lords is again the only one that's actually destroyed the Jedi and controlled the galaxy.

    Darth_Pevra As I already pointed out him ordering them to commit suicide was backed by the force. That's a little different from them being like the Clone Army and just choosing to do what he said.

    No it can't, but it can be curbed and put to use as it was with Bane's Order.

    Which is simply one of the downfalls of a smaller order. I'm not in any way saying the Order was without flaw, as no group is, but it is the one that succeeded.

    The Rakata aren't/weren't Sith, and I acknowledge the Emperor and Darth Krayt as being Sith who did succeed. However, Krayt's Empire didn't control as much of the galaxy or last as long as Palpatine's, and the same goes for the Emperor who also didn't manage to get rid of the Jedi Order.

    Agreed, however I don't see how that really matters when that is again one of the main points of the rule i've been stating.

    Yeah there is, and no it's not. Using Pawns is directly part of the Rule as dictated by its creator. And Pawns are in now way the same as apprentices, where one is trained to actually succeed the master and the other isn't. The point of the Order is that the master teaches the student until the student decides to challenge him. If the student wins then he is the more powerful and has nothing left to learn.

    I'm not ignoring anything, simply acknowledging it for what it was. People followed him when he exerted massive power through the Force. We've seen him trying to place himself above others without the Force and it failing. Fact. That's far different from what you're saying whereas he manipulated others and they followed him without question. That's the difference between him and Palpatine.

    Depends on what group of Sith you're looking at. Each Order is quite simply different. Bane's Sith were in the end all about achieving a final goal, they were created around it, with each Master having to be willing to teach an apprentice, knowing they could one day be killed. The fact you personally don't see that as what a Sith should be doesn't change the fact that that's exactly what they were. And once again this is still the only Order to actually succeed.
  8. Darth_Pevra

    Darth_Pevra Force Ghost star 6

    May 21, 2008
    Are you claiming their will was totally controlled by the force? I don't believe that. Might as well say Palpatine became emperor because the force willed it.
    Kaan used his mind control powers and persuasion skills. If the Sith were too weak to resist - their fault.

    That is putting it ... mildly. I already pointed out the many, many worst case scenarios.

    All the Rakata are missing for being Sith is their name. They act totally Sith.
    So, then, we have one Banite empire (and even that is questionable as Palpatine did away with the RoT through Maul) and a couple of non-Banite empires.

    What? When? Where?

    And in praxis a Sith pawn is extremely similar to a Sith apprentice, the difference seems to be only in name. Some of the lesser Sith of Kaans order would probably be called pawns or hands during Palpatine rule.

    But a weakened rule of two that allows pawns is quite a bit more clever than the real version.

    What does it matter whether Kaan mind controlled them or not? He could, that's important. Without the force he was still the leader of the Sith, even if he had to keep pretenses up about only being equal to them. He played them.

    Vader didn't follow Palpatine without question. He manipulated and played him during TESB and was a "bad" pupil at a lot of other occasions.

    The original Sith of the movies were shown as extremely selfish beings and almost all Sith of the EU are also portrayed as 100% selfish psychopaths.
    Something like the RoT just don't fit Psychopaths evidenced by everybody and their momma breaking it.
  9. DarthJenari

    DarthJenari Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 17, 2011
    What do you mean? LOL you just said he use his "mind control powers". Those are the Force. And it is their fault they were too weak to resist it. Doesn't change the fact it was something he had to accomplish through the Force.

    And there are many problems with a larger order, both have downfalls i'm not denying that. As I said, no group is perfect, and with the Dark Side it's pretty much impossible for them to be.

    Doesn't matter, they're not Sith, just like no Dark Jedi is a Sith, and other Dark Side using groups aren't Sith.

    With the Banite Empire being the only one to fully succeed.

    In Darth Bane Path of Destruction if I remember correctly, sometime during his stay on Tython when Bane is creating the concept for the Rule of Two. Don't have my copy of the novel on me so I can't tell you anything more than that. (Shame too, as I was just near it earlier, but picked up my copies of Dynasty of Evil and Vortex instead.)

    The difference is in the intentions of the Master, which directly effect the training one undergoes.

    It matters because it changes the entire outlook of what was going on. As I pointed out, controlling someone with the Force is far different from what you stated he was doing. It also requires an amount of effort that can't be put forth all the time, as we've seen with Kaan himself. There's nothing inherently wrong with controlling people with the Force, but if that's what happened call it what it was and don't act as if he had people convinced of something else and that he didn't coerce them into walking towards their deaths. Again, that's the difference between them and the majority of the Clone Troopers who didn't need anything but an order to slaughter the Jedi.

    Didn't say he did, I was speaking of the senate, not Vader. Of the entire Republic he tricked by keeping up the face of Palpatine.

    As I already pointed out, you're exaggerating on the amount of people that broke the Rule of Two and I still fail to see how it matters how other Sith were portrayed, in terms of Banite Sith. If your point is that Bane's Sith weren't exactly like previous Sith then you're correct, which is exactly why they're the Order that succeeded and the others didn't.
  10. Darth_Pevra

    Darth_Pevra Force Ghost star 6

    May 21, 2008
    I think we just misunderstood each other. I thought you meant the Sith were controlled through the Force itself, outside of Kaans influence.

    The problem with a large order is the infighting, the same problem you also have with only two Sith at the helm. Just that with RoT there are many additional problems.

    I don't agree with the definition. A name doesn't a Sith make.

    No, Vitiate and Rakata were more successful. What you also still conveniently ignore: Palpatine wasn't a Banite. He trained Darth Maul while under the rule of Plagueis. And yes, Maul is a Sith as per movie which overrules everything.

    I think you misremember. Bane never used force pawns himself and he definitely didn't want anyone to undermining his beloved rule. Pawns could also band together to take down the master.

    I still don't see much of a difference.

    I think I don't get your point. Is power for you only when it is exerted completely openly and everyone falls on his knees and calls you master? I find that an extremely limited perspective. Lord Odion was extremely powerful but he didn't give a **** whether his underlings bowed or not. Not every Sith has to be such a megalomaniac as Palpatine.

    Bane tried to overtake Zannahs mind which is a violation
    Tenebrous had a secret apprentice
    Vader had a secret apprentice
    Palpatine had a secret apprentice
    Palpatine attempted to live forever, also violation
    Plagueis I think openly stated he didn't believe in the RoT

    And, well, we don't know much more Banite sith. There are probably more but I can't think of any.
  11. DarthJenari

    DarthJenari Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 17, 2011
    The large order also has problems that stem from the infighting, and as I keep saying the difference between infighting in the Rule of Two is that it's use to ensure the strongest Sith survives.

    Then we'll have to agree to disagree, as I certainly don't count the Rakata as Sith.

    My point is that you were the one who said Kaan's rule was unchallenged and that he'd ruled in the same way Palpatine had, which isn't true. That's the only point i'm making, not saying anything about whether it matters or not.

    Bane isn't a violation. The entire point of the final battle between Master and Apprentice is for the Master to use every scrap of power, every ability they have against his student, and for the Apprentice to overcome it. If the Apprentice dies, then they weren't the stronger of the two and deserved to die. If Bane hadn't used the ability, he'd have been holding back, and it would've therefore been unknown whether or not Zannah was actually stronger than him and deserved to win. In that instance he would've been breaking his own Rule. By the rules of his order, once he knew Essence Transfer, he was required to use it when his fight with Zannah came.

    Two violations, in 1,000 years isn't all the time. Both Sidious and his master also have to be noted as thinking that the Rule of Two itself had become obsolete by that point, as they were on the verge of accomplishing the Order's goals, and after that there truly wouldn't be any reason for the Sith to hide in the shadows any more, and a new Rule could've then been instated, which is what Palpatine planned to do with his Dark Empire, an empire controlled entirely by Darksiders. Dooku also had a similar vision. If the end goals are accomplished a new rule can be instated to deal with the universe as it would exist from that point on.
  12. Ulicus

    Ulicus Lapsed Moderator star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Jul 24, 2005
    The Rule of Two isn't about self sacrifice.

    I quite disagree with some of the earlier assertions made that all Banites inevitably come to place the success of the Sith Order as a whole above themselves. Some did, certainly, but many others would identify the Sith Order with themselves, and that was that.

    The only thing truly shared by every Banite is a belief that the (ostensible) adherence to a policy of one true master, with one true apprentice, is the best environment in which they can become the most powerful Sith they can possibly be. That is what they care about above all else. And, yes, they're trained to believe that the slow and steady accumulation of secular power is preferable to openly seizing control of an army and storming the Jedi face on... because it is. They've learnt from history.

    Palpatine's predecessors "gained nothing" from following the Rule of Two only insofar as they were ultimately each too weak to satisfy its demands. The Order of the Sith Lords is the BIG LEAGUES. Hardcore mode. You either conquer the galaxy and become the greatest Sith in history, or you die. None of these guys (except maybe Bane, and even he changed his mind by the end) saw themselves as a caretaker for future generations, even though that's exactly what they ended up becoming.


    I think it's also worth a mention that, before Path of Destruction ignored it entirely, Bane's motivations in establishing the Rule of Two were partially -- maybe even primarily -- driven by a belief that the strength of the dark side was literally diluted when spread across too many Dark Lords. I don't think that's to say he viewed it as a finite resource (remember kids, "UNLIMITED POWER!")... but he seemed to think it was a beast that could never possibly unleash its full potency so long as it was at the beck and call of a multitude of masters.

    Bane's understanding, then, was that having too many powerful masters of the dark side, each trying to direct it towards their own ends, inevitably fractured its true potential and was essentially responsible for every single defeat they'd ever suffered at the hands of the Jedi.

    So, in hoarding all of the most potent Sith lore for themselves, the Banite Sith were each actually (rather than just relatively) far more powerful than they would have been in other eras and able to focus the dark side towards a very specific end. Which was a fairly decent way of explaining why the Banites, specifically, threw the Force out of balance and necessitated the emergence of the Chosen One.

    Though, sadly, that's pretty much apocrypha, now.

    Hah. "Apocrypha Now".
  13. Darth_Pevra

    Darth_Pevra Force Ghost star 6

    May 21, 2008
    Essence transfer didn't cause him to win the battle. It only meant that now there would be three personalities around when Zannah trains her apprentice. In any case he didn't achieve the desired outcome which was that either himself or Zannah died. Meddling with Zannahs rule makes his idea of the RoT look absolutely absurd.

    What!? Two violations? Having a secret apprentice is a violation too. Plus we just don't know enough about Cognus and so on to say whether they closely followed the RoT or not. What we do know is that every Banite in the limelight broke it in some way or another.

    I agree with Plagueis and Sidious idea to do away with the RoT of course. I just think it was a stupid idea from the get-go.
  14. Darth_Pevra

    Darth_Pevra Force Ghost star 6

    May 21, 2008
    They've drawn the wrong conclusions from history is more like it. The downfall of the Sith order was, sadly, pretty pathetic and in part caused by the inherent weaknesses of the RoT.

    That was what Bane thought. In his limited mindset, you either conquer the galaxy or are a nothing. Truth is that in the Sith code not a single word is written about "having to conquer the galaxy". Sure, most Sith want to but it isn't a rule or anything. A rule would be shackles and shackles are meant to be broken. You get the picture...
  15. Ulicus

    Ulicus Lapsed Moderator star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Jul 24, 2005
    The downfall of the Sith Order was brought about because "A single candle is enough to keep the darkness back. Love is more than a candle; love can ignite the stars".

    The Sith are wrong and don't even begin to truly understand the Force. And that is why they will always, always fail.

    But the RoT was as close to perfect as they could get within their own daft framework.

    Well, I think it's more accurate to frame his viewpoint as: "You either destroy the Jedi, or you may as well have accomplished nothing".

    As 'Darth Morpheus' might say, "as long as the Jedi Order exists, the Sith can never truly be free". They are the ultimate manifestation of "chains" and "shackles" weighing down upon the Sith.
    Mia Mesharad, Zeta1127, Havac and 2 others like this.
  16. DarthJenari

    DarthJenari Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 17, 2011
    No it didn't, because he failed. He was weaker and unfit to rule. So as his Rule dictated and died and Zannah became the master. And there aren't three personalities. There's only Darth Zannah. What are you talking about? That's exactly what he achieved. Darth Bane died, Darth Zannah lived and then trained Darth Cognus, who killed Darth Zanna and so on all the way down to Darth Sidious and Darth Vader. Bane didn't meddle with Zannah's rule because he was dead and unable to.

    Yeah, two KNOWN violations of the Rule isn't enough to say that 30 generations of Sith broke it or that it was constantly happening. That's ridiculous.

    As do I, i'm simply pointing out, and part of the reason I agree with is, that it came at a time where the Rule itself wasn't needed anymore anyways.
  17. Ulicus

    Ulicus Lapsed Moderator star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Jul 24, 2005
    Y'know, I don't even really consider taking on a secret apprentice as a true violation. The apprentice shouldn't be able to hide anything from the master. Especially not a full Sith apprentice of their own. If they can, well, it's only right that the master doesn't remain the master for long.
    Jedi Merkurian likes this.
  18. Mechalich

    Mechalich Jedi Knight star 4

    Feb 2, 2010
    Indeed. To expand upon this: the dark side is not simply a power source. It is an entropic power source. It is utterly chaotic and holds loyalty to no one and nothing. All dark siders are competing against the light side, but they are also competing against every single other dark sider in the galaxy. The further the dark side spreads across different vessels, the greater the proportion of the energy those individuals expend is direct against other dark siders and not light siders, until it eventually becomes a greater hindrance than a gain (the Battle of Corellia in TOR is an excellent example of this in action). This is a sufficiently secure principle that you could probably model it mathematically.

    That is, in fact what Bane attempted to do. His conclusion was rather simplistic, he simply chose the minimum possible number, but he certainly fully understood the principle at work here.

    By the way to those objecting to Palpatine's rather short stint on the galactic throne - you're missing the point. Ruling the galaxy is not the Sith objective, it is merely the means to an end. The ultimate goal of each Sith is unlimited power, including the power to defy death, gravity, space, time, and pretty much any other barrier. Palpatine seized control of the galaxy because he needed to eliminate the Jedi in order to pursue these goals - which required the life energy of billions - fully. In the same fashion Vitiate ignored his Empire's war efforts in the attempt to feed off a massive galaxy-wide cataclysm instead. The Sith seek godhood, hegemony is merely a stepping stone.
  19. Jedi Merkurian

    Jedi Merkurian New Films Thread Reaper and Rumor Naysayer star 6 Staff Member Manager

    May 25, 2000
    LOL at everyone talking about Sith violating rules. As I said earlier, any Dark Lord worthy of the title would never deign to adhere to any sort of rule. Moreover, the RoT is a mind job that Master and apprentice variably pull on one another.

    A Master who catches an apprentice training another apprentice? The response is either:
    -Master: Nope, there's can only be two of us, one of you needs to go.
    -Apprentice: Nope, he's not a "real" Sith like you, Master ;)

    A Master wants to lull his apprentice into a false sense of security?
    -Oh, don't mind him. The two of us have evolved beyond the need for the Rule of Two...[face_devil]
    rumsmuggler and VanishingReality like this.
  20. Sable_Hart

    Sable_Hart Jedi Master star 4

    Nov 28, 2009
    Darth_Pevra, how is Vitiate more successful than Palpatine? Vitiate had 1.4 millennium and millions of Sith to achieve victory. Sidious had 40 years and 3 apprentices and beat Vitiate's gains by double.
    Jedi Merkurian likes this.
  21. DarthJenari

    DarthJenari Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 17, 2011
    I never liked the idea that the Dark Side was somehow diluted due to so man people using it. I always viewed the Force as infinite and therefore didn't think it should matter what amount of people was using what side of it.
  22. Likewater

    Likewater Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 31, 2009
    The Jedi order, is not 25,000 years old. It is older. After helping found the republic it has stayed in power longer than human civilization on Earth. The Sith are not responsible for the jedi orders success, they are insignificant compared to it. A Bunch of upstarts who continually try and fail to replicate what the Jedi did 25,000 years from the founding of the republic till each set of idiots with yellow eyes said "And this time we will do it right!"

    Like En Saba Nur aka Apocalypse of Marvel comics the Sith constantly fail to live up to their own self hype and 'philosophy'. While individual darksiders have their own goals, some achievable and others just as deluded as the sith's. The sith claim to be destined for greatness but only constitant trait of every sith 'order' is failure.

    To quote the Joker "I'd laugh if it wasn't so pathetic."
  23. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Force Ghost star 7

    Jul 2, 2004
    I don't know if this really qualifies as ignoring it entirely:

    "Poison should not harm a Dark Lord," he told her. Then he admitted, "Yet it almost killed me." He paused, but she didn't say anything. "There are too many Sith Lords in the Brotherhood," he went on. "Too many who are weak in the dark side. Kaan doesn't understand this."
    Ulicus and Esg like this.
  24. Darth_Pevra

    Darth_Pevra Force Ghost star 6

    May 21, 2008
    And because you call it close to perfect it is so? That's circular logic if I have ever seen. How often must I point out all the logical and strategical flaws inherent in the RoT?

    One conversion to lightside shouldn't bring about the downfall of the entire order.

    That is really a meta point of view. You might as well argue that the need to breathe shackles them.

    There were quite a few Sith who couldn't care less about the existence of Jedi and/or infinite power. Bane thought absolute control of the galaxy was the only worthwhile goal and this I find an extremely limited viewpoint.

    No, he was in her brain right after the battle.

    All the evidence points to that the Sith tend to violate the RoT whenever it suits them as every Banite master in books or so has done. Since we have limited knowledge of the rest 25 or so generations, it is hard to analyze them, but why should they be so much different than the Sith portrayed?

    If you would look at a system with lets say 100 strong dark siders at least ten or so would focus on the Jedi, rather than each other, a greater number than two.

    You're forgetting the shackles of the mind. Palpatine is driven by fear. Inside he knows he is a little nothing and if anyone would notice that they would pity him or laugh at him. He is so absorbed by his own paranoia and mental illness that he would build death stars and all kinds of other toys. In the novelization of RotJ Vader is proud when Luke notices Palpatines fear. If Palps ever felt the need for companionship, he wouldn't allow himself that luxury as his paranoia would keep him from trusting anyone.

    The irony is, if he ever got rid of those shackles he wouldn't care for godhood anymore. He would be free.
  25. DarthJenari

    DarthJenari Jedi Master star 4

    Dec 17, 2011
    Likewater Ok....So I have absolutely no idea why you brought up the Jedi ruling for 25,000 years then. I mean it really has nothing to do with the current discussion at all. Your point seems to be that the Jedi have been around longer or have had more of an effect on the galaxy and that the Sith always fail, which is true. However it doesn't really change the fact that the Order of the Sith Lords defeated them for a time, making them the most successful Sith Order in Star Wars history.

    Darth_Pevra No he wasn't. All we saw was her hand twitching, a symptom that Bane had in the novel due to events from Rule of Two. That's not the same as him being inside her head, as Karness Muur was with Rae. On this subject, there's not even any room for debate as Drew Karpyshyn came out a while ago and outright stated that Bane was gone.

    All the evidence points to 2 violations having occurred throughout the history of the order, nothing more. Saying from that that it happened all the time is a major assumption. You're saying that because we saw two people do it that everyone else must've done it as well. Bane didn't do it. We know a bit more about Cognus than the others and she hasn't been mentioned as having trained another apprentice until her first one was deemed a failure. Plagueis didn't do it. Maul didn't do it. Tyranus didn't do it, if we're going to count her Lumiya didn't do it, etc.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.