Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Have you forgotten that Sidious himself said "Once more the Sith will rule the Galaxy" meaning there have been Sith in the past that have ruled the Galaxy and definetely longer than a mere 20 years.
Following Sith ideals is not exactly being the most powerful, but it is related. Darth Vader was the opposite of a true Sith, he had his redemption at the end, and was full of doubts of being in the dark side. A true Sith cannot have such doubts. I don´t thing Traya is too, because she was beyond the Sith, she saw that the Jedi were flawed, and that the Sith were flawed... for me she was like some kind of Exile too. Nor Sith nor Jedi.
A true Sith will be the most corrupted, the most inhuman, and the most evil in all ways. I think Marka Ragnos, Naga Sadow, etc... was more like this. But my vote goes to Nihilus, he was not very expressive, but like Kreia said, and like what the story shows.. "he is no longer a man", "he does not see the world as we do", etc.. what for me means he hardly can be considered a living being. He is very far from being human(not specie I mean), thats for certain, and for me he is the like the ideal of corruption, or if you prefer, the result of complete corruption, not a good thing, but it still is the ideal of the Sith. It is like if Nihilus became one with everything the Sith try to bring to the word ; death, destruction, etc... he was the incarnation of those things.
Other: Darth Maul. Before reading Shadow Hunter I thought Lord Maul was a low down killer and served no real purpose in the story. But that fool really is the ideal Sith Lord. His only existance, and everything he eats, sleeps, and breathes, is the destruction of the Jedi Order. He was completely devoted to Sidious and, unlike Tyrannus or Vader, he had no ambitious to betray and kill his master. As revealed in Shadow Hunter, when Lord Sidious was meditating in his prviate chambers, he is a superb duelist better on par with most of the Jedi Council members, who's only major flaw is arrogance. Which is of course how he died. Had Lord Maul survived til ROTS he woulda been a considerable adversary for the Jedi.
And Darth Vader should not even be an option in the poll. He still had good, love, and friendship in him, which are not Sith charactaristics.
Sidious is the only true sith lord because he was cold, ruthless and cunning. Vader had emotions left in him. At the end of Episode III when Padme dies she tells Obi-Wan that there's still good in him. Which is true because after Vader finds out he has a son, he starts to have attachments again. He could've killed Luke in ESB, but he offered him to join him and rule the galaxy as father and son, because he knew if Luke became Vader's apprentice, Luke would be able to kill Palpatine with ease.
Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Have you forgotten that Sidious himself said "Once more the Sith will rule the Galaxy" meaning there have been Sith in the past that have ruled the Galaxy and definetely longer than a mere 20 years.
Proof?
I don't doubt that there have been other Sith that've ruled the galaxy. But we haven't seen them. Ragnos, Sadow, and the others ruled an empire - but it was small and certainly wasn't the dominant force in the galaxy, let alone the ruler of it. And I'd also like to know where it is proven that they ruled it longer than a mere twenty years.
Originally posted by Se7in
Still, no Sith displayed these characterisitics. Sidious is great and all with the deception and power, but I don't think Sith should move in silence. Revan announced himself and still managed to nearly beat the Republic, had it not been for Bastila.
Sith have to move in silence to achieve their goals. Look at all the old Sith Lords like Naga Sadow and Exar Kun. They announced themselves and either got killed by the enemy or by their allies. The Sith have no one they can trust. The moment they turn their back on the fellow Sith to concentrate on the Jedi is the moment they are betrayed. None of the old Sith managed to beat the Republic because of this. Also, look at the question. Revan isn't even a real Sith, he's a Dark Jedi, so he doesn't even meet the requirements. And everything he did was done through more or less the same way as those before him, so he's not really that special. You say there is no Sith that displayed these characteristics. Ever hear of the Sith'ari? It is a prophecy of a perfect being, one that would destroy the Sith as they were and rebuild them stronger than ever. Well, the Sith'ari is Darth Bane. Although there are other more powerful Sith that can be named, Bane's vision led to the only incident of Sith truly beating Jedi in the entire Star Wars universe. The question asks for the ideal Sith. The ideal Sith is basically a role model for other Sith to look up to and idolize. The ideal Sith doesn't necessarily have to be looked up to for his power, but by how helpful he was in the fight against the Jedi. The two Sith who were the most helpful in the fight were Sidious and Bane, and I don't consider Sidious an ideal Sith. Sure, he's the most powerful, but he's not very ideal, mostly because when he became Emperor he turned his back on the very Rule that got him in his position by taking several apprentices rather than just one. Bane, however, lived an ideal Sith life and died an ideal Sith death.
Originally posted by Darth Callous
Other: Darth Maul. Before reading Shadow Hunter I thought Lord Maul was a low down killer and served no real purpose in the story. But that fool really is the ideal Sith Lord. His only existance, and everything he eats, sleeps, and breathes, is the destruction of the Jedi Order. He was completely devoted to Sidious and, unlike Tyrannus or Vader, he had no ambitious to betray and kill his master. As revealed in Shadow Hunter, when Lord Sidious was meditating in his prviate chambers, he is a superb duelist better on par with most of the Jedi Council members, who's only major flaw is arrogance. Which is of course how he died. Had Lord Maul survived til ROTS he woulda been a considerable adversary for the Jedi.And Darth Vader should not even be an option in the poll. He still had good, love, and friendship in him, which are not Sith charactaristics.
Vader and Revan aren't even Sith, they're Dark Jedi. They shouldn't be up there. Maul's arrogance and lack of ambition aren't ideal Sith traits. The ideal Sith should be power-hungry, but also balance that out with patience and cunning. Sidious balanced those out very well, as did other Sith in Bane's lineage. Maul isn't a good pick because he was too arrogant, line many other Sith, and this led to his death in an intense battle against a pissed off PADAWAN.
These posters have largely departed; a few actively dislike the current members. You're unlikely to get any response from the original participants of the discussion here. The posting date/time is found in the lower left quadrant of each post. The most recent one before your own was December of 2005, nearly 7 years ago.
I would say Bane. He literally wrote the book on how to be a proper Sith. For all of Sideous' dag-nasty-evilness, he didn't really have ambitions for the Sith beyond destroying the Jedi. He never had any genuine desire to train an apprentice who could replace him, for example. His ultimate plan was to live forever and replace his apprentices after their useful ran out. Not exactly good for Sith ideals, I don't think.