Is Vitiate a Sith Lord?

Originally posted by DarthSkywalker0
Well, that is where you are wrong. I can demonstrate with 99% certainty that SWTOR Vitiate was Valkorion. In fact, so was Novel Vitaite.

Well, he was both. Not sure why they have to be mutually exclusive.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Well, he was both. Not sure why they have to be mutually exclusive.

Again, Samantha Wallschlaeger has confirmed that he left the Sith Faction. He was not both; he was an American Spy on Russian turf.

Ironic

Originally posted by FreshestSlice
Vitiate was never a Darth, if that's what you mean by "Dark Lord of the Sith."

Originally posted by DarthSkywalker0
So you agree he stopped being a Sith when he becomes Valk. He becomes Valk before Exar Kun's death.

No, I don't agree he stopped being a Sith after he became Failk.

I dunno why you name him Failkorion? Palpatine was an even bigger loser than Vitiate. He got owned twice. Once by a sand hating teenager and then by a smuggler.

Originally posted by Azronger

Good work Az. 👆

Clearly, being a heir to marka ragnos. Means shit to Post Novel Vitiate though.

so when does he stop being a sith lord hasch?

Originally posted by JMANGO
Good work Az. 👆

At your service.

Around the time, when he went to Zakuul/possessed Valkorian, is when we can confirm his Ideology didn't conform to the sith.

👆

I don’t really see why his ideology of raising Zakuul stops him being a Sith Lord. It’s a title, one the rest of his empire and the galaxy see him wearing. Even if he was undermining the empire, he was a Sith Lord who was actively undermining the Empire.

Mhmm, and the rest of his empire/Galaxy have no Idea of what he conforms to, or how he thinks, asides from maybe Revan, during this time. But the fact is, their opinion/thoughts don't matter, when It comes down to what Vitiate was. You can label an ex racist, a racist, but they may not be. Does that still make them a racist, being reliant on misinformed/outdated knowledge. no it doesn't.

So he sheds his limitations sometime after the Revan Novel?

Originally posted by Azronger

Due to OU time reasons, there seems to be no IU records of the Revanite crisis, Eternal Empire, etc.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
That's IU. The "Darth" title was likely given to him by later historians, similar to Darth Naga Sadow.

Due to OU time reasons, there seems to be no IU records of the Revanite crisis, Eternal Empire, etc.

The fact he gave Darth Titles to Malak/Revan, sort of indicate he did hold Sith philosophies back then.

don't forget Darth Nyriss

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
That's IU. The "Darth" title was likely given to him by later historians, similar to Darth Naga Sadow.

Due to OU time reasons, there seems to be no IU records of the Revanite crisis, Eternal Empire, etc.

Doesn't matter. The point I'm illustrating is that regardless of the guy's personal beliefs in the matter, he clearly was acknowledged as a Sith Lord by historical sources (which are based off of actual historical records), and his title is Sith, just like with Darth Nihilus.

I don't see why you people have to make this needlessly complex. Palpatine was never a democrat as far as personal ideologies went, but he was still the leader of a democratic system. Or should I open the floodgate and let loose the endless stream of LeGenDary conspiracy theories about how Palpatine was never the Supreme Chancellor of the Galactic Republic?

Have fun.

Philosophically no, but much like Darth Nihilus the history books identified him as one regardless.

Originally posted by Azronger
Doesn't matter. The point I'm illustrating is that regardless of the guy's personal beliefs in the matter, he clearly was acknowledged as a Sith Lord by historical sources (which are based off of actual historical records), and his title is Sith, just like with Darth Nihilus.