How do you view sith lords?

[Chevron 7 locke]

Good point. the only reason the jedi drew their sabers was because they recognized kreia and they must have known what she had become

[JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan]

imo vrook wasnt corrupted. he was a jedi who had no time for beating around the bush or watering down stuff to make it easier to take. he was just grouchy.

 

at DY: imo atris was corrupted. vrook wasnt.

in the conversation between him and revan, he admitted that the council made a mistake concerning revan. when asked why he was so grouchy he responded by saying that the masters have a great responsibility concerning their students, since sith almost always come from jedi. after which he said:

 

"Only through strict training and relentless lessons can we prevent the Dark Master (Revan) from being reborn.

 

That is why the Order can brook no failure in our apprentices and pupils. That is why I can accept nothing but perfection from you"

that does not sound corrupted (to me).

that said, it does not mean i like him. Its his personality, and thats wound i find annoying. but i wouldnt want him to become all soft and nice. because then he wouldnt be vrook.

 

imagine this:

Vrook is on a desert world (say, tatooine) and he's been wandering around the desert with no water or transport, and he's dead thirsty.

on the other side of the planet, a dark jedi master (lets call him 'Crook') is in the same situation.

after wandering for ages, vrook randomly encounters a boy who has a large canteen of water.

on the other side of the planet, the same thing happens to crook, he finds a boy with a canteen of water.

Vrook would probably question the boy (what are you doing out here?, are there any settlements nearby? etc) and possibly ask him for a bit of his water.

Crook, on the other hand, would demand the boy to give him his water, and if the boy refused, he would kill him and take the water and whatever else the boy may have had.

If Vrook's boy refused him any water, do you think vrook would intimidate him into giving it or kill him for it? imo he wouldnt.

because Crook is corrupted, but Vrook is a jedi. Crook wouldnt care one bit for the boy, but if the boy was lost, Vrook would probably travel with him. (there could be krayt dragons around)

[Adavardes]

"Only through strict training and relentless lessons can we prevent the Dark Master (Revan) from being reborn.

 

That is why the Order can brook no failure in our apprentices and pupils. That is why I can accept nothing but perfection from you"

 

I see a lot of issue with that quote. Not corruption, perhaps, but the quintessential point of argument for why the Jedi have failed in the past. They have unrealistic ideologies on what a sentient should be able to do. We are imperfect. We have emotions. Not allowing ourselves to accept that, and embrace that, is a surefire way to lead to bottled emotions erupting in a violent manner, leading them down the first step on the path to the "dark side".

 

Expecting perfection from pupils is unrealistic, and bordering on arrogant. The Jedi attitude is in no way perfect in and of itself, so how can the "perfect student" of a Jedi master actually be perfect? The answer: he simply cannot. That said, the Jedi denial of such things is what leads to their failures, and the rise of the Sith.

[Chevron 7 locke]

In case you haven't noticed, Vrook was the essence of arrogence, he expected his pupils to be perfect.

[Ultimate Vader]

Vrook = arrogant, yes, but he doesn't use the dark side or the Sith teaching. SO he's not corrupted. Think, if he's corrupted, what corrupts him? Not corrupted, but he thinks he's right and everybody that disagree with him are wrong. Remember, "even the older, and more experienced one".

 

Atris, on the other hand, is corrupted by the Sith teaching. Atris is A FALLEN JEDI. She has a crazy view, but she still retains her calmness.

 

Anakin is an arrogant Jedi, but he's corrupted because of Sidious.

 

 

 

Btw, I like your avatar. Naruto-Hinata is a very good couple.

[True_Avery]

It should be kept in mind that when you use Force Sight on the Masters, Vrook has the lowest Light Side glow, nearly onto Gray.

 

So, either he was Gray or his arrogance has been causing him to slowly fall.

[Chevron 7 locke]

I never knew that. It must have been his arrogence that caused that, because i just can't see vrook of all people falling to the darkside.

[vanir]

I'm having a difficult time definitively illustrating the clear difference between philosophical good and evil as distinctly physical, medical conditions on a PG13 site, being I can't reference certain criminology study, related to serial killers most specifically.

 

Without such real world examples to draw from it is hard to make a self evident argument for the physical nature of poor psychology claiming to be politics. I could say it is like a terrorist calling himself devoutly religious, compared to a philanthropist calling himself compelled. But you could say, no it is more like Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse, unless you've had a lot to personally do with terrorists and philanthropists. I know women who've ignorantly said they're excited by criminals, until once in a relationship they realise that most criminal law is related to violent tendencies and the sheer wont to damage others,..the hard way. But you can't tell them that at the onset, they won't listen.

 

This is probably the illustration of the light and dark side of the Force given in Lucas theatre. Yoda understands the nature of the Force, but you can't tell Jedi because they just don't get it until it's too late.

 

How about this for another example of the morality play. The movie Constantin. Keanu Reeves is damned because he didn't arrive at his knowledge of God by faith, but by process of elimination. By sinning he realised there were devils and a Hell. Conversely therefore he gained knowledge of God and Heaven, but was excluded from Grace because he did not arrive at this conclusion by faith. In effect the road disqualified the destination, ergo he was not upon the right road for the destination. Fortunately there are many roads to Grace (the moral).

 

As a good vs evil morality play, the theme of the light and dark side of the force are identical in nature. Revan is at best like Constantin. Malak, one of the devils. Palpatine some sort of satanic high priest. These aren't neutrals who stand on the sidelines by any means. Generally speaking, in any morality play neutral means ignorant.

[Ultimate Vader]

For True_Avery :

Indeed. But that doesn't mean he's corrupted. He's more like "lose his lightness and become neutral". He isn't corrupted, he's more like "Jedi with his own view, his own believe". Maybe something like autistic (no offense to his fans). He believes he's the right and good Jedi Master, but in fact he becomes too arrogant to even lend a hand to the galaxy. He believes in pacifism, and that's why Mandalorian go unopposed. What he knows is perfection in his own definition. That's why he should die at Kreia's hand, because he learned nothing at all.

[True_Avery]

True enough. It very much puts him in his own little world, yet he still seems to have access to the "light" side of the Force.

 

Coming back to my point that the Force is just kind of there, chilling. Caring about the Universe as much as a fire, or drug does. Vrook may have been an arrogant ****, but yet he still managed to pull on the "light" side.

 

I think Vanir described my drug comparison better than I did. The "Dark" Side is something that is just now supposed to be played with by people, or I'm guessing life in general. Seems like a fantastic idea at first, but its only worth it if you are willing to accept all of the negative side effects fully. Sidious, for example, held onto the Dark Side as the truth even though it ate him alive, while Vader fell and saw no other alternative even though it had also destroyed him.

 

It seems to take you far if you've got a goal and you -need- to reach it. If you are falling in order to find a goal, you seem to get lost in it.

 

But, again, this is all speculation. Going back to G-Canon, the Dark Side and its users unbalance the Force and by all means that is a very bad thing. Regardless of intentions, using it makes you an abomination against life and the Force. Its evil, and so pretty much are the people that use it.

 

End of Story really.

[Chevron 7 locke]

In regards to true_avery's first comment: It appears that even if one is a gray jedi, then one has access to basic light side force tecniques, so we shouldn't be suprised by that

[TKA-001]

he thinks he's right and everybody that disagree with him are wrong.

Are you trying to say that most people don't think that they're right, and/or don't think that people who disagree with them are wrong?

[Darth_Yuthura]

at DY: imo atris was corrupted. vrook wasnt.

in the conversation between him and revan, he admitted that the council made a mistake concerning revan. when asked why he was so grouchy he responded by saying that the masters have a great responsibility concerning their students, since sith almost always come from jedi.

 

that does not sound corrupted (to me).

that said, it does not mean i like him. Its his personality, and thats wound i find annoying. but i wouldnt want him to become all soft and nice. because then he wouldnt be vrook.

 

There is a difference between SAYING such words and following them. Vrook demanded perfection, but how could he say such things if he were far from a model Jedi? Some of my opinions come from dialog he spoke in the non-cannon version of TSL, but that shows more of who he was.

 

Arrogance is one of the key things Vrook said lead people on the path to the darkside. He is THE most arrogant Jedi apart from Atris. Although he DOES have experience to back his side, he was so arrogant the he never considered that he or the Council could have been wrong. While he was lecturing about the Exile's failures and the consequences of the Mandalorian Wars, he seemed to overlook HIS failures as he watched the entire Order crumble under the Council's leadership. If they had been so strong, the Jedi would have always backed them, but instead they chose Revan.

 

Vrook isn't like a Sith, but he is very emotional, biassed to those who don't agree with him, and hypocritical for faulting others for his mistakes. One of the lessons Kreia(Trayas) had taught the Exile was that the Jedi Civil War was caused by the improper training of the Jedi by their masters.

 

Either way you look at Vrook, he believed himself and the Council to be so divine that everything they did or thought was right. That is NOT like a Jedi, let alone a member of the High Council.

[Adavardes]

But, again, this is all speculation. Going back to G-Canon, the Dark Side and its users unbalance the Force and by all means that is a very bad thing. Regardless of intentions, using it makes you an abomination against life and the Force. Its evil, and so pretty much are the people that use it.

 

End of Story really.

 

Not really.

 

I'm fairly sure the Dark Side is just the Force, which is passive and lacking in moral alignment, in a higher concentration and potency than the Light. It deterioriates them from use because of how powerful it is. It's like electricity, in a sense. We draw on it in small, controlled ways, for lights and electronics, that help make up a better, more progressed society. However, when a single person has ever tried to harness the raw natural force of lightning, they've been shocked, usually several times.

 

Dark Side users are basically those that use the power, but are continuously shocked, until it begins to erode their physical bodies, and their sanity. If they were truly "an abomination to the Force", then they wouldn't have such easy access to so much power. I know some of you like cutting your Force philosophy down the middle and calling things good and evil, and in the "simplistic theatre" prepresented by the movies, etc., that would be fine. However, TSL made huge strides in establishing that the Star Wars universe is not so clear-cut.

 

I never argued that Vrook was not corrupt. That is neither here nor there, to be perfectly honest. His ideas are great, beautiful, and would be wonderful if they were realistic. But they aren't. Human beings, for lack of a better term, are emotional. It's one of the characteristics that define us, make us different from beasts. Emotion, and the ability to accept it, temper it, and control it. But to deny it completely is to deny what you are, which can only lead to violent ends in anyone with a strong sense of self. Vrook followed the Jedi way to a tee, and that is his failing. The absolute Jedi way is ultimately flawed, as it has led to the rise of the sith, and ultimately, the failure of the Jedi, time and time again.

 

Everyone starts with the best of intentions, even villians, but typically, what comes from their intentions identifies them as morally "right", or "wrong", though such perspectives do not truly exist in my eyes. To me, all morality is essentially grey with a self-perpetuated idea that it is somehow more valid, when in reality, it is not. Kreia was, at her core, a grey Jedi who sought knowledge regardless of the limitations imposed by morality, and she brought several startling truths, and new layers of depth, to the entire Star Wars universe. She was the one who established the Jedi as flawed, denial-ridden to the point of egotistical in their ideas of the perfect Jedi, which was akin to a robot with compassion, and the one who showed the sith as husks of men deteriorated by the power of the Force.

 

To me, that's all that would make sense. Otherwise, the concept of Jedi and Sith would be far too unrealistic for me to swallow.

[Darth_Yuthura]

Adavardes brings up a good point about original intents leading to bad ones. The ideals of the Jedi as being fundamentally flawed was also a nice addition.

 

I would agree that the Force really is just the same one way or another, but it only comes through to people differently. The Sith just choose emotion while the Jedi choose peace as the means by which to use it. They are polar opposites in terms of beliefs, but that doesn't exactly mean the Force is also divided one way or another.

 

The only reason why the Darkside is considered to be corruptive is because it is so tempting to use power for yourself instead of living a 'life of sacrifice.' Would anyone on this post TRULY want to be a Jedi? I know I wouldn't.

[TKA-001]

Arrogance is one of the key things Vrook said lead people on the path to the darkside. He is THE most arrogant Jedi apart from Atris. Although he DOES have experience to back his side, he was so arrogant the he never considered that he or the Council could have been wrong.

First of all, you don't know that he never considered that he may have been wrong. What did you expect, a thought balloon appearing over his head every time he says something? Second, why does it matter? A person doesn't continue with a prolonged course of action if they think it is wrong. That aside, Vrook is completely different from Atris, who could be compared to C'baoth from Timothy Zahn's novels.

 

Besides, I think whether a person is right or not is more important than whether they're "arrogant".

 

While he was lecturing about the Exile's failures and the consequences of the Mandalorian Wars, he seemed to overlook HIS failures as he watched the entire Order crumble under the Council's leadership. If they had been so strong, the Jedi would have always backed them, but instead they chose Revan.

Once again you blame the Jedi Civil War and the First Jedi Purge on the Council, despite the fact that Revan is the one who convinced so many Jedi to turn against the Council, Revan is the one who led them to the war, Revan is the one who led the rebellion against their leaders (not the other way around), and Revan is the one who turned the rogue Jedi to the dark side. Revan's actions and his demented ideas of what Jedi were supposed to be was none of the Council's responsibility. Your statement that the Jedi rebels would have stayed with the Council if they were "stronger" doesn't say much, either. Strength is valued by the Sith, not the Jedi.

 

and hypocritical for faulting others for his mistakes.

What mistakes did Vrook make that caused others to have problems?

 

One of the lessons Kreia(Traya) had taught the Exile was that the Jedi Civil War was caused by the improper training of the Jedi by their masters.

Yeah, you're right. It's not like Kreia is a biased, vengeful liar, a backstabbing, self-righteous blackmailer, or an immoral manipulator whose entire life revolved around justifying the atrocities committed and blood spilled by Revan when he deliberately declared war on the Republic. There's no reason we shouldn't believe the morally superior Sith Lord's ideals and opinions - it's not like Kreia is evil or anything. It's not like Kreia was an insane, depraved murderer who cared about absolutely nobody except the Exile (whom she cared about in the same way an assassin cares about his knife). Kreia would have no reason to be biased against the Jedi Council after they exiled her. It's not like she murdered Vrook, Kavar, and Zez-Kai Ell in the Jedi Enclave for revenge; she was only protecting the Exile. This is evidenced by her in-game 50/50 alignment.

 

Sure.

[Darth_Yuthura]

What of ALL those who followed Revan? If the Council taught the ideals of the Jedi well enough, their followers wouldn't have turned on their own masters.

 

Maybe Revan was that good, but he couldn't possibly have attracted so many followers unless they didn't believe in the High Council. Maybe it was all of them who were at fault, but if the Council earned the trust of their followers, they wouldn't have doubted their leadership and turn to Revan.

 

It's not JUST Revan in all this, but it ultimately started from the Order's lack of confidence for the High Council's leadership. If they were trusted so dearly, Revan could not have become powerful enough to challenge them.

[Litofsky]

What of ALL those who followed Revan? If the Council taught the ideals of the Jedi well enough, their followers wouldn't have turned on their own masters.

I disagree, DY: perhaps the Council's teachings were good enough, but I say that what Revan proposed was for more enticing for the young ones of the Jedi Order.

 

Maybe Revan was that good, but he couldn't possibly have attracted so many followers unless they didn't believe in the High Council. Maybe it was all of them who were at fault, but if the Council earned the trust of their followers, they wouldn't have doubted their leadership and turn to Revan.

Or perhaps he could have? We have nothing to corroborate or disprove this argument.

 

It's not JUST Revan in all this, but it ultimately started from the Order's lack of confidence for the High Council's leadership. If they were trusted so dearly, Revan could not have become powerful enough to challenge them.

Or it could have been that Revan was highly influential and a magnificent speaker. Or perhaps even that the Jedi he influenced were weak? We may never know. Trust is important to this discussion, it it is overcome by (Human) desires, sometimes which even the Jedi could not overcome.

[TKA-001]

I don't think it's possible to make a blanket statement about why a bunch of Jedi joined Revan. The Order had what, 20,000 members? If that's so, Revan's movement would have to comprise at least several thousand Jedi (possibly a considerable number of them being Padawans). That's way too many people to say that's there's a single reason for their movement. Some of them probably went with the "we must help the innocent/help the Republic/stop the Mandalorians" approach. It's also not too much of a stretch of the imagination to suspect that a fair deal of the Padawans probably went for the action factor alone (I'd actually be surprised if any of the Jedi Crusaders were Masters or experienced Knights). Then there's the percentage of people whose homeworlds are likely to be razed in the war.

 

One could go on and on. If I were to make a blanket statement on the topic, it could only be "all of the above".

[Darth_Yuthura]

Well I'm sure that people have already made up their minds one way or another. This is just to speak, not to counter anyone else.

 

I think that the Council should have realized that staying neutral would have driven a wedge between them and their followers. Despite their reasons, they should have joined the war in the first place. They should have known that it was only going to be a matter of time before their followers would follow Revan. Thinking the Order would follow them off a cliff was foolhardy of them. It really didn't matter whether they were right or not, they should have either provided good reason to the Order... reason enough to make their case... or their followers would have assumed they were making a mistake.

 

Instead, the Council took a totalitarian stand over the Order and disregarded their own followers' reasoning for joining the Mandalorian War. They could have the wind out of Revan's sails by joining the war in the first place. This shows how authoritative the Council was when they disregarded the opinions of their followers.

 

If there is a 'blanket statement' of my own, it would be that the Council WAS wrong when they refused to join the Madalorian wars. Everything that Revan accomplished was spawned from that one decision of theirs.

[Allronix]

The only reason why the Darkside is considered to be corruptive is because it is so tempting to use power for yourself instead of living a 'life of sacrifice.' Would anyone on this post TRULY want to be a Jedi? I know I wouldn't.

 

Individual Jedi are pretty great folks, for the most part. The Order, for the most part, stinks.

 

In the KOTOR era and post-Ruusan, they're pompous windbags that pull their recruits from the cradle. That is the BIGGEST issue I have with them. It's one thing to take on such a life when one is old enough, and aware enough to understand the consequences, quite another to have child soldiers stolen from their families and brainwashed from infancy! I read that bit in Shatterpoint where Yoda is "teaching" a baby Mace Windu not to get attached by withholding a toy, and started to agree with Brin's epithet of "vicious green oven mitt." I read about how they were throwing lightsabers into the hands of ten year old kids at Ruusan, and putting 13 year olds in charge of clone brigades. Child soldiers leading child soldier slaves, and NO ONE saw a problem with this?! Frankly, the Carth and Canderous running around in my head had plenty to say and none of it printable. About the only good thing you can say for the Sith is that they tend to recruit at an age where those getting into it know damn well what they're in for.

 

Thing is, it wasn't always that way. Prior to Exar Kun, folks had marriages and families. The Force came first, of course, much like modern-day soldiers. The Jedi also didn't have a lot of power centralized into high councils and their recruits seemed to be of a consenting age. It seemed that post-Exar Kun, the Council got reactionary, and not in a good way. Bastila was the finest example of what they could produce, and she was quite a brittle individual, unable to handle even the smallest bit of teasing. Luke's New Order tried to go back to this idea, part by necessity, part because...well, you be the one telling Han "no." Too bad his rotten nephew wrecked it.

[Chevron 7 locke]

Allronix raises another excellent point.

I can understand the jedi taking children in a time of war so they can have more solder to fight; i don't agree with that policy but they did it anyway. The jedi of that era seemed to be no better then the sith in those regards

[CommanderQ]

Allronix raises another excellent point.

I can understand the jedi taking children in a time of war so they can have more solder to fight; i don't agree with that policy but they did it anyway. The jedi of that era seemed to be no better then the sith in those regards

 

Well, let's not forget a certain important point here. The Jedi did take children away, the Sith did, too. But that Jedi at least gave the kids a good education, trained them in the "good" ways of the force, and kept them fed and treated them well. Now, the Sith on the other hand are quite legendary for torturing their apprentices to near death and then teaching them something and torturing them some more. It was to deal out the "hate and anger motif." So, in my opinion, the Sith were more brutal about the kid taking thingy. Of course, the amount of evil might still slightly edge towards the Sith, despite the Jedi actions.

[Chevron 7 locke]

I see them as equel. if any of those kids fell to the darkside during the war it was because they did not have the proper training from the jedi council.

 

The council had no chance of keeping many of the jedi, the councul in essence was simply training the jedi for revan

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

no sir, my analysis of fictional character x is correct, you see,