Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Darth Bane: This was my lesson - two Sith should there be, no more. One holding power, one desiring it. You defy my teachings!

Darth Krayt: I have improved on it! Instead of two there is now only one - the Sith Order itself. I have re-created the Sith, Lord Bane, as yo once did. I have given it a purpose. For what use is power without one?

Darth Bane: Power is its own purpose. To share it is to dilute it. You delude yourself, pretender -- Your order will yet turn on itself and you.
-------------------------

A conflict of Sith philosophies from one Dark Lord to another. But which idea do you think is most fitting of the Sith? Which one is more effective?

Bane's Order survived a Millennium in hiding and achieved total domination of the Republic and nearly wiped out the Jedi.

Within 10 years, Krayt's Order has started turning on itself.


Longevity for the win.

This is a difficult topic to discuss because as newer star wars stuff comes out, the more ridiculous and unbelievable it becomes, even in the realm of Star Wars.
Let's take a look:

The Order of the Sith Lords were hidden for a thousand years and concentrated their power between two people. Because there were only numbering two, they had to share sith knowledge between the both of them, as opposed to the thousands of other sith. One may say that complete domination for 20 years after preparation for 1000 years is a pretty terrible ratio. On the other hand, they successfully wiped out the Jedi Order and watched the Jedi slowly create a new one, knowing it might take centuries to achieve full strength again. On the OTHER hand, it's unclear if the Sith would have ever conquered the Republic had Sidious not been born. We have no idea as to what extent the Sith corrupted the Republic for a millennium..

The Order of One is just a perversion of the ancient sith order, except there is no sith/dark council. They piggybacked on the reorganized Empire to take control of the galaxy after barely 100 years in existence. In terms of efficiency, I think they win. However, it doesn't appear that they possess anywhere near the level of dominance shared by Sidious and his Empire. They're constantly fighting Jedi and amongst themselves, something not seen between one master and one apprentice. Also, some of the sith, Wyyrlok and Krayt in particular, seem to have extensive knowledge of arcane force techniques. They may be the only ones that rival some of the sith lords in the Order of Two..


Anyways, that's all I can think up on the fly. They both have advantages and disadvantages but I think the Order of the Sith Lords win by a hair.

I've always thought that "Power is its own purpose" is a pretty flawed rationale. Basically it boils down to one thing.

You are ruled by fear.

If you don't want power for a specific purpose, then the only reason to acquire it is so that no-one else will have power over you. Given Bane's past (his abusive father, being in debt to the ORO company etc) it's hardly surprising he'd be afraid of anyone having power over him (even if he wasn't consciously aware of it) and would want desperately to grab it himself to prevent this. He may think he's overcome his fears, and in some ways he has, but in others fear governs his life and his every action.

Krayt's philosophy on the other hand, that having power is meaningless if it has no purpose, is about something more than just letting fear rule your life. It has a deeper sense of meaning.

This kind of thing was demonstrated in the Marvel comics "The Infinity War" series. At one point The Magus explains that he seeks the benefit of great power, not the power itself, as opposed to Thanos who only sought power so that no-one could control him.

I never liked Bane's (and Revan's, really) philosophy towards power. But I think the point of it is to make the individual crave the Dark Side, fueling their connection to it. The ultimate purpose at the end of the day is use that power to destroy the Jedi and the Republic. When seen from the long run, that makes sense.

Rule of One didn't last enough to be considered seriously.

Rule of Two, achieved complete domination of the Republic and the near absolute destruction of the Jedi Order. Although, none of this would've been done if it weren't for Sidious, of course. Out of thousands of Sith, he was the only one capable of implementing the RoT effectively enough to achieve the Sith's ultimate goals.

Replace Krayt with Sidious. Would things have gone differently? Definitely.

Just something to think about.

Originally posted by Major Valerian
Rule of One didn't last enough to be considered seriously.

Rule of Two, achieved complete domination of the Republic and the near absolute destruction of the Jedi Order. Although, none of this would've been done if it weren't for Sidious, of course. Out of thousands of Sith, he was the only one capable of implementing the RoT effectively enough to achieve the Sith's ultimate goals.

Replace Krayt with Sidious. Would things have gone differently? Definitely.

Just something to think about.

Something else to think about; by the time Palpatine became a Sith the Republic was already stagnant and corrupt since his Order had been working behind the scenes to make it so for a thousand years.

Palpatine deserves respect sure, but none of what he did would've been done if it weren't for generations of Sith laying the groundwork for him to build on and paving the way for him.

I think they're situational. Better the Rule of Two when playing a game of subtlety against a foe prepared for strength, better the Rule of One against a foe prepared for subtlety after having only known the Rule of Two.

Both beat the pants off of Kaan's "Council of Equals," in the Brotherhood of Darkness, of course.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Bane's Order survived a Millennium in hiding and achieved total domination of the Republic and nearly wiped out the Jedi.

Within 10 years, Krayt's Order has started turning on itself.


Longevity for the win.

They had been around for more than 10 years- Wyyrlok was a third generation One Sith, after all. I think they were about 90 years old.

The infighting only really started when Wyyrlok viewed Krayt as too wounded to continue unifying the Sith. Most of the time they're pretty good, though with the obvious achilles heel of requiring a strong leader such as Krayt.

One wonders what would've happened if things went differently, Wyyrlok continued to grow in power under a healthy Krayt, and was able to take Krayt's position in a more formal manner like a duel.

I don't know why you think that would be a point against the degree of Palpatine's success. I did well on my SAT based on the accumulated effort of several centuries of Enlightenment thinkers, but Yale will admit me (or not) based on my performance, not that of Immanuel Kant. Pointing out that a person had help with their task does not lessen the magnitude of their feat in the slightest.

(It is a pet peeve of mine when people implicitly denigrate accomplishments.)




In universe, we can also point out that Zannah was awed by the scope of Bane's intelligence network. Managing the resources of those thousands of years worth of effort is just as impressive as forming them.

Well because obviously it would be even more impressive to pass the SAT based purely on your own ideas rather than Kants. If you can produce original ideas equal to Kants in a SAT paper then you're more impressive than a guy who can only discuss Kants ideas.



Beating Mike Tyson in a fight by youself is more impressive than doing so with 100 others guys helping you. Krayt took power pretty much with his own hands while Palpatine had eons of help to call upon.



Not at all. Forming the comparatitive worth of thousands of years of resources by yourself in under a hundred years is MUCH more impressive than merely managing thousands of years of other peoples work.

Now I'm not saying thats what happened but your point is still incorrect.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Well because obviously it would be even more impressive to pass the SAT based purely on your own ideas rather than Kants. If you can produce original ideas equal to Kants in a SAT paper then you're more impressive than a guy who can only discuss Kants ideas.
BLUH

I was writing up a longpost but I just don't care. Bullet points:

Einstein vs. Newton. Nobody h8s on the german just cuz he used the englishman's numbers
something about the quote "if i have seen further than others it is by standing on the shoulders of giants" or some such shiite.

Srsly. like more than five minutes into that post I was only halfway done. good god.

Lol, I just noticed your location: falling.

How appropriate. excellent

*baaaaaaaait*

http://paradoxdgn.com/junk/avatars/trollface.jpg

If I had a moustache I'd be twirling it right now.

Originally posted by chilled monkey
Something else to think about; by the time Palpatine became a Sith the Republic was already stagnant and corrupt since his Order had been working behind the scenes to make it so for a thousand years.

Palpatine deserves respect sure, but none of what he did would've been done if it weren't for generations of Sith laying the groundwork for him to build on and paving the way for him.

Yeah, he deserves an awful lot of respect. All those Sith 'laying the groundwork for him' failed. Or at least they were no where near achieving what he achieved. He succeeded where everyone else did not. Not a single merit should be taken away from Sidious' mastermind execution of his plans of Republic domination. He executed perfectly and did everything exactly as he should have.

The fact that the Republic was already corrupt does not make him any less amazing.

Wherever he is, whatever he's doing, all this verbal-fellatio of Palpatine just gave Gideon a raging boner.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Wherever he is, whatever he's doing, all this verbal-fellatio of Palpatine just gave Gideon a raging boner.

Unlikely.

lol...does raging boner bother to stay current on Star Wars anymore? With the darth malgus's of the world? i haven't picked up a single book other than FOTJ since... well, I tried reading the time travel one with Jaden Korr and found it unreadable. and before that Millineum falcon, and found it unreadable and unrewarding...

Originally posted by truejedi
lol...does raging boner bother to stay current on Star Wars anymore?

Somewhat, though not as much as he used to.



I own Fatal Alliance, it's decent. Haven't read the current one. And FOTJ has fumbled the ball.



Crosscurrent was great, IMHO. MF, not so much.

So that's a yes. What are you now? A sophomore in college? What's the major?

Originally posted by truejedi
So that's a yes. What are you now? A sophomore in college? What's the major?

PoliSci, but that's about to change. Honestly, my interest in Star Wars has taken a considerable dip, though I doubt it'll ever go away. I've ran into a bit of free time here this past semester, so when I heard that Nai had apparently broken my Sidious platform, I figured I might as well see what he had to offer.

Poli Sci is a cool major if you plan on going to law school. Otherwise, start using amazon instead of having your school pick out your reading material.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Poli Sci is a cool major if you plan on going to law school. Otherwise, start using amazon instead of having your school pick out your reading material.

The problem is that most law schools, if not all of them, will take any undergraduate degree. I was an idiot and decided to go into PoliSci; granted, there are things about the subject that I really enjoy and have a naturally affinity for, but others blow more than Beefy's mom during rush hour.

its true. I could take my theatre degree and probably go to law school, if the whole acting thing doesn't pay the bills (like it EVER pays the bills...) Usually the same for Med school. just have to have a degree.

Originally posted by truejedi
its true. I could take my theatre degree and probably go to law school, if the whole acting thing doesn't pay the bills (like it EVER pays the bills...) Usually the same for Med school. just have to have a degree.

Word, word.

Originally posted by RagingBoner
The problem is that most law schools, if not all of them, will take any undergraduate degree. I was an idiot and decided to go into PoliSci; granted, there are things about the subject that I really enjoy and have a naturally affinity for, but others blow more than Beefy's mom during rush hour.






I don't know about Rush Hour and even then that's not much of an accomplishment because the car is often stopped but I digress. I pity your generation in terms of overall household debt and grad school debt. Ten years ago a law degree meant something, now even the top 10% have difficulty finding jobs, unless you're Ivy League. Your generation is just going to waste $150,000 without any realistic ROI.

I'm going to finish with something like 15k in student loans...

trying not to think about it. last month of classes.

15k in undergrad loans? Lol don't think about it. You'll be well on your way to $200k right around the time you finish med school.

oh, i'm not going to go to med school, don't get me wrong. My long-term back up plan if the theatre scene doesn't pan out is to join the army. but i have a few options in theatre. Its not just acting, I work as a scenic carpenter as well, which is much more stable in income.

Why would you want to join the army while we're in the middle of a war? That seems like a waste of spent college money.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Why would you want to join the army while we're in the middle of a war? That seems like a waste of spent college money.

Well, when you join the US army, you're bound to go through at least one war.

Lets put it this way. Have you ever seen an unemployed soldier stateside?

Originally posted by Nephthys
Beating Mike Tyson in a fight by youself is more impressive than doing so with 100 others guys helping you. Krayt took power pretty much with his own hands while Palpatine had eons of help to call upon.

Well we don't know how much Palpatine relied on the network and manipulations created by the other sith. Hell, all of the big manipulations were done by Palpatine himeslf.

As for Krayt, he also built upon the work of the sith before him. But, unlike Palpatine, these were the cornerstones of his plan. Really Krayt and his order "piggybacked" on the succes of Palpatine and the RoT as Dr MB so eloquently put it.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Lets put it this way. Have you ever seen an unemployed soldier stateside? Tons. I've also seen a lot of dead ones...

I would join tomorrow if N. Korea attacked S. Korea, or China invaded Taiwaan. Some things are just worth fighting for.

I would join if NK attacked SK as well. But not because that war would be worth fighting for. Rather, we would win so incredibly easily that my life wouldn't be in any real danger the majority of the time.

If NK attacked SK, millions of people would die. The city of Seoul would pretty much be wiped out in the first few minutes. We have 60k troops there.

Millions would die but they would mostly be Koreans so whatevs. lol.

except our 60k troops in Seoul.

60K is not a majority of a million.

That aside, I think the 60K US troops in Korea could carry against N. Korea for quite a long time.

well, the point is, they are in Seoul, and would be wiped out in the first few minutes. I don't know why we even keep them THERE. we would be much smarter to put them somewhere out of the reach of Kim Jong Il's artillery.

I really don't think 60K troops would be wiped out within minutes. Not even days.

Depends on their defensive position and what support the SK Army could provide. Those communists tend to favor human wave attacks, and eventually they would run out of ammo........ =-/

artillery bombardment is the problem. Read the logistics of a NK bombardment of Seoul, its really scary.

Artillery sucks for killing people, though. It's a morale killer/building muncher. Artillery isn't really good for precise strikes.

really good for wiping out concentrated groups of people. Like say, a city with over 13 million people in it.

60,000 thousand U.S. troops is a small price to pay for the elimination of all those StarCraft clans.

I think Vegas should start taking bets on which country would disappear first; NK or Iran?

Rule of two by far is better

I'd honestly call Naga Sadow's Sith Empire as weaker than the One Sith order, given that their Empire was smaller and they spent almost as much time fighting each other as they did anything else. Shoot, Sadow was engaged in a civil war when the Republic first arrived and was ultimately assured defeat by his rival... all in SPITE of warnings from Sith that had died to remain unified.

Exar Kun's Sith and Darth Revan and Darth Malak's Sith suffered from the problem that they were based solely around the strengths of the Sith Lord(s)... Exar Kun was powerful (and one of the few pre-Rule of Two Sith that could defeat Rule of Two Sith) but once Ulic-Qel-Droma lost his powers and betrayed Exar Kun, he was alone and couldn't have beat all of the Republic's forces... and despite being able to defeat Luke Skywalker as a ghost... he's defeated by Luke's students coming together in united opposition... which seems almost like an interesting training exercise... And when Malak betrayed Revan, while Malak remained a threat, his empire fell apart rather quickly when Revan returned to the light side of the Force.
The only one that seemed to have real strength was Vitiate's Empire given that it learned from Sadow's failings, and built a military machine that essentially defeated the Jedi following the Battle of Coruscant.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
I would join if NK attacked SK as well. But not because that war would be worth fighting for. Rather, we would win so incredibly easily that my life wouldn't be in any real danger the majority of the time.

Revan RUle of Two> Rule of one> Bane rule of Two > Revan Rules of Two...

That made absolutely no sense.

Rule of two

Your moms a droid

Each Rule is made for specific circumstances.

Like, 'what Jedi order are you facing at the time?'. If any!


The Sith Empire was made when there *were* no Jedi to face. Sith infighting wasn't a problem because Sith would always emerge on top. No big deal.

The Rule of Two was made when the Jedi had so much experience kicking Jedi butt in war that trying to take them on order-to-order was futile.

The Rule of One was made when the Jedi were used to taking on small groups of high level sith, and had Skywalkers to give them an edge, so an order was needed.

Bane's order produced the best Sith in Galactic history, of all time of you include the fact Lumiya modeled her order after Bane's as we'll

Krayt himself is among the most powerful Sith, but his lackeys pale in comparison to the likes or Plagueis, Tenebrous, and Sidious

Originally posted by Emperordmb
That made absolutely no sense.

It depend of the context..
Revan rule of two was perfect tolead an empire. And having sith accolytes.
The construction of his own empire was built on the loyauty to Revan... It was well organize and safe from any betrayal except one... : His own apprentice. That's why Revan fall....
But It could have produce the greatest leader in the history...

Rule of One is good but it lead the power to only one person... When you have many powerfull Dark Jedis (with the title of Sith lord but still they are Dark Jedi for the most part...) it became anarchy and chaos for the one throne it lead civil war.. Remember Kreia in KotOR II when she talk about sith past...

Or in the opposite case there is no successor for the throne....

Rule of Two is perfect to stay in the Dark...


There is some sith who follow Revan rules of Twobut they didn't change the face of galaxy they are near featless...

Originally posted by Revanchiste

Or in the opposite case there is no successor for the throne....


And even if you *do* have a potential successor, a failed succession attempt can lead you in that spot anyway.

I.e. Wyyrlok, the only other One Sith at RoT Sith level, not securing his grab and Krayt coming to take the ball back.

If you have multiple apprentices that are able to claim the throne they can ally to kill you.. That's the risk...

The Idea of the rule of two is to produce super bad ass mother ****er. Each apprentice need to surpass his master....

Here there is the possibility than a weaker oppenent take the throne....