How do you view sith lords?

[Chevron 7 locke]

Litofsky got it right on the button. that's exactly what it is

[Darth_Yuthura]

It doesn't mean TWO and only two. It could just as easily be a dozen and the ability to conceal the group would be just as effective. It is simply that the larger the group, the harder to conceal. Once you reach a certain number (Definitely much greater than two) you can easily hide a small group as you could two. This magic number of two just doesn't make sense at all.

[Litofsky]

I disagree: two allowed for a complete specialization between Master and Apprentice, whereas having even three would take away from one. With the Rule of Two, a level of communication/training-specialization between Master and Apprentice that had never been seen before was ushered in. In my opinion, this would allow the two Sith to better plot their actions and movements.

[Adavardes]

It's the issue of a large number of Sith consistently destroying other Sith. With only a master and an apprentice, once the Apprentice is strong enough, he kills his master, as Sith must, and becomes the Master to find an apprentice. It's a dead-end theory that leaves no more killing to be had. The Master has proven himself, the Sith live on, and he repeats the process with a new apprentice. Not only does it keep the Sith strong and based on a sort of pseudo-darwinism, it means that none other can threaten the master, but the apprentice becoming the Master.

 

The more Sith there are, the more they bicker and fight, slowing the overall progress to the goal of destroying the Jedi. With only two, it is a constant progression, and no bickering to get in the way beyond the replacement of the Master with a newer, stronger one. And if you give an inch, that inch may very well eventually turn into a mile, so two and only two keeps the imminent growth and expansion of an untamed religious order in check. It's a simplification to end the convalution of the Sith and make the work towards ending the Jedi speed along at the same pace all the time.

[Chevron 7 locke]

The only problem I can see with the Rule of two is that the apprentice may badly wounded in fighting the master and may not survive that long after the battle

[JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan]

in that case the master kills the apprentice and finds a new one. but, if the master is get weaker, he might keep the apprentice alive to make him stronger... after beating the snot out of him for failing.

[Chevron 7 locke]

I was talking about the apprentice killing the master but being so badly wounded that the apprentice dies soon after the battle. that would mean the end of the sith.

 

Sorry for any confusion

[JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan]

well, master would find a new apprentice. masters would live only so long.. but plapatine trained three in his life: maul, tyrannus and vader. pruney was quite old in RotJ yet he still had quite a bit of power.

 

Unless you count Greivous as a Sith, which he wasn't, then Palpatine never broke the rule of two. He came close with Starkiller, sure, but that was more of using a strong Force sensitive as a tool, not an apprentice.

Vader is the one who trained Starkiller, not Palpatine.

That is true, but Palpatine and Vader were working collaboratively the entire time, using him as a tool to fish out and defeat the emperor's enemies in the Senate. So, technically, Palpatine had a hand in his training.

Sort of. Palpatine didn't know that Galen existed until the confrontation onboard the Executor as seen in TFU. He wasn't working with Vader to find the enemies in the Senate until after Vader faked Galen's death - Vader altered his plans for Galen after he was discovered. Besides that, I don't really see how Palpatine could have been much of an influence on Galen's training, since the two only met each other twice.

I believe that the actions palpatine pulled off in the galaxay had a great influence on Galen's return to the lightside, So you could say that palpatine shaped Galen's destiny as much as vader did

spoilers

*gasp* *gasp*

[Chevron 7 locke]

Okay...what I was trying to say is that if both sith kill each other that would mean the end of the sith. that is the great problem with the rule of two, it's a oneshot deal, if a master and an apprectice fight it out and they both die, then thats the end of sith and all the knowledge that they managed to gather over the years

[JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan]

that *mustve* happened along 1000 years of two-ness.... i wonder how they got through that

[Ultimate Vader]

Because there's nobody like Palpatine in those 1000 years.

[Adavardes]

Okay...what I was trying to say is that if both sith kill each other that would mean the end of the sith. that is the great problem with the rule of two, it's a oneshot deal, if a master and an apprectice fight it out and they both die, then thats the end of sith and all the knowledge that they managed to gather over the years

 

It's much less risky than a Sith Empire constantly threatening to tear itself apart all the time. In terms of probability, the rule of two is more likely to preserve the Sith and allow them to push forward in their goals, as opposed to a Sith empire that does nothing for centuries but fight over who is the strongest. This way, the strongest is always very clear, and they can focus on other things.

 

Bane was of the opinion that the Sith had become convaluted, and had forgotten their true purpose in the quest for more power in their empire. Simplify things in this way, their goal becomes clear.

[Chevron 7 locke]

A sith Empire had a few advantages that trhe Rule of Two did not have. Even if there was infigthing within the sith the strongest sith would survive and lead the sith again, while with the rule of two, if both master and apprentice died that would mean the end of all the knowledge that the sith had gathered.

 

The rule of two was most likely to preserve the sith and the knowledge but it carried the greater risk.

 

The sith empire was more likely to have infighting, but after the infighting the strongest sith would most likely survive the battles

[Darth_Yuthura]

The idea behind an empire consistently building up and collapsing makes much more sense due to the sheer number of Sith who may fight and kill each other, but add competition to the mix as well. If an Empire falls, very rarely does EVERYTHING die. All you need are two survivors of hundreds or thousands to endure.

 

Do you know why terrorist work in cells? It is to spread and isolate themselves in order to ensure they aren't all wiped out at one time. The same would work well instead of two or one at a time (after the apprentice kills the master, there are times with a SINGLE sith alive) numbers just add assurance and two are WAY too close to oblivion.

[Chevron 7 locke]

But you have to admit the rule of two lasted alot longer then any of the sith empires we've seen so far

[Adavardes]

Exactly. And with less of the constant infighting, the rule of two kept progress moving constantly, and set the goal of the Sith at a more realistic distance. Otherwise, the Sith didn't really need to exist at all, in Bane's mind, because the goal would never be met. If they died with the two, then they died. It was a probability risk he was willing to take.

[Darth_Yuthura]

But you have to admit the rule of two lasted alot longer then any of the sith empires we've seen so far

 

Perhaps, but I don't see many Sith under the rule of two who brought the Jedi so close to defeat. Only when Palpatine broke the tradition did the Sith almost wipe out the Jedi yet again.

 

So it's not so much which one lasted longer, but how successful any Sith Empire was in comparison to the rule of two.

 

There's also a fatal flaw with the rule of two... what if you have a pathetic apprentice who just happens to take down the master due to chance or because he made a mistake? Look at Malak taking Revan's place as proof that the rule of two did not always work. Look at Palpatine killing Plagueus... that was a consequence of the rule of two that could have happened at any time to any Sith.

 

My idea... don't have an empire, but use a dozen pair of Sith masters and apprentices working independently, but ultimately towards a single goal. That way, they don't end up killing each other, but it ensure they can't just be wiped out due to a single mistake or person.

[JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan]

Perhaps, but I don't see many Sith under the rule of two who brought the Jedi so close to defeat. Only when Palpatine broke the tradition did the Sith almost wipe out the Jedi yet again.

prune didnt break the rule of two at the time he gave order 66. it was him and anakin.

 

My idea... don't have an empire, but use a dozen pair of Sith masters and apprentices working independently, but ultimately towards a single goal. That way, they don't end up killing each other, but it ensure they can't just be wiped out due to a single mistake or person.

nah, theyd find some way to kill each other.

for example, theyd fight for holocrons etc.

[Chevron 7 locke]

If Yuthura's idea came to pass the apprentices would pair up and defeat one master at a time, like the post above said, they would find something to fight about, it's what sith seem destined to do

[Darth_Yuthura]

Why would the Sith go against each other before the Jedi?

 

The whole Idea is to have a dozen separate pair of one master and apprentice that don't correspond with the others. They wouldn't have any reason for challenge one another unless their interests overlapped.

 

Given that the rule of two dictates that they remain hidden, there would not be much any one would gain by going against another.

[JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan]

unless their interests overlapped.

their interests are exactly the same afaik. thats bound to cause problems.

 

imagine master1 sends apprentice1 to go fetch a holocron of extreme power.

apprentice1 goes to retrieve it and finds apprentice2 there. they have a scrap, apprentice1 gets killed, and apprentice2 runs off with holocron. master1 is outraged, and goes to attack master2 (eve though apprentice1 deserved death because he was weak) masters 1 and 2 hate each other and have an ongoing cold war.

[Darth_Yuthura]

Answer: Master 1 doesn't know where Master 2 is. That's what I mean by independent of each other.

[Endorenna]

Sith have their ways of finding out...

[Darth_Yuthura]

Well with a huge galaxy to conquer, I think that a Sith Master would rather pursue the ones they hate (the Jedi) rather than go after another Sith, who could very well be too powerful to beat.

[Chevron 7 locke]

Your forgetting to factor in other sith who may not see the jedi as their ultimete enemy. for all we know one sith may be able to take down that entire system