Role of the Sith (from The Old Republic)

[Gramzamber]

Yeah. Kreia was probably one of the most interesting characters I've seen in Star Wars. Up until the end of the game, of course, but the whole thing went to shit in the last few hours anyway so that doesn't mean too much.

To me, Kreia comes across as a massive hypocrite. Perhaps due to the rushing of the game.
For example, she claims evil for evil's sake is wrong and snarls at you for being so stupidly evil as to kill the council if you do so. But if you don't, she kills them!
Say what? Oh so it's stupid to be a psychotic mass-murderer unless Kreia does it? Right.

And I didn't say Revan was a good guy (see: Telos), but he sure as hell wasn't just going "rarghhhh powerrrrr!!1"

I'm not saying every Sith is a drooling maniac like Malak. But they are evil, and they crave power and dominion.
Besides Revan has plenty of "Rawr! Power!" moments post-amnesia if you choose those dialogs.

[Formless]

Using the Force for personal gain and power is part of the dark side, and is part of the Sith way.

Yes... according to the Jedi. The Jedi, who took it upon themselves to oppress the Sith for a thousand years. Just because they are depicted as the heroes doesn't mean every word that comes from their mouths is gospel when it comes to the Force.

Yes, according to the Jedi. And the fact that every single Sith to come along has been an evil despot.
And that includes Revan. Good intentions don't diminish their crimes.

What's your point? Those characters are guilty for their own crimes. That does not automatically mean all Sith must be Puppy Eaters, or that its a violation of canon for a Sith who "stands out as a curiosity" to be a light sider. I mean, look at that code. Does it say "The Dark Side shall set me free"? No, it says "The Force shall free me," which can just as easily refer to the light side as the dark side. How are you not getting this?

[Gramzamber]

What's your point? Those characters are guilty for their own crimes. That does not automatically mean all Sith must be Puppy Eaters, or that its a violation of canon for a Sith who "stands out as a curiosity" to be a light sider. I mean, look at that code. Does it say "The Dark Side will set me free"? No, it says "The Force shall free me." How are you not getting this?

The entire Sith code is based on gaining power and victory for one's self through the Force and one's passion.
That kind of thing leads to the dark side, not because the Jedi say so, but because it has.

The kind of power the Force represents is immense. Precognition. Telekinesis. The power to bend minds to your will. To shoot lightning and kill people with a glance. Using it for purely selfish ends *is* going to lead down a dark path and this is the only way the Sith embrace.

[Losonti Tokash]

Yeah. Kreia was probably one of the most interesting characters I've seen in Star Wars. Up until the end of the game, of course, but the whole thing went to shit in the last few hours anyway so that doesn't mean too much.

To me, Kreia comes across as a massive hypocrite. Perhaps due to the rushing of the game.
For example, she claims evil for evil's sake is wrong and snarls at you for being so stupidly evil as to kill the council if you do so. But if you don't, she kills them!
Say what? Oh so it's stupid to be a psychotic mass-murderer unless Kreia does it? Right.

She gives you shit on most things no matter what you do. Give the beggar money and she scolds you for coddling the weak; tell him to fuck off and she's got another lesson about being needlessly cruel, especially if it draws attention to you.

And I didn't say Revan was a good guy (see: Telos), but he sure as hell wasn't just going "rarghhhh powerrrrr!!1"

I'm not saying every Sith is a drooling maniac like Malak. But they are evil, and they crave power and dominion.
Besides Revan has plenty of "Rawr! Power!" moments post-amnesia if you choose those dialogs.

Yeah, but that's Bioware's typical misunderstanding of nuance. The general impression of Revan from stuff other than the player's actions themselves seems to be a callous but brilliant leader. Not exactly the sort that would cackle madly as he electrocuted a nursing home.

[Formless]

The entire Sith code is based on gaining power and victory for one's self through the Force and one's passion.
That kind of thing leads to the dark side, not because the Jedi say so, but because it has.

And? You're not making sense here. It has in every example we've seen. It does NOT follow that it must-- UNLESS you are appealing to the authority of the Jedi, who cannot necessarily be trusted due to the history of them oppressing the fuck out of the Sith.

Using it for purely selfish ends *is* going to lead down a dark path and this is the only way the Sith embrace.

Strawman. The Sith code never said "be selfish", it simply says that the force can empower people. What people do with that power depends on the person.

Idiot.

[Gramzamber]

She gives you shit on most things no matter what you do. Give the beggar money and she scolds you for coddling the weak; tell him to fuck off and she's got another lesson about being needlessly cruel, especially if it draws attention to you.

And that's what I found annoying. She's supposed to be morally ambigious but comes across as an annoying hag who just likes to bitch about everything you do.
Though she does sometimes approve of you manipulating others into fucking themselves over, which does fit her character but is nonetheless evil.

Yeah, but that's Bioware's typical misunderstanding of nuance. The general impression of Revan from stuff other than the player's actions themselves seems to be a callous but brilliant leader. Not exactly the sort that would cackle madly as he electrocuted a nursing home.

Regardless, Revan still started a civil war and Revan let Malak loose on worlds like Telos.
Again, needlessly overt evil isn't the issue here, but Revan still was willing to let millions die for their own power.

[Gramzamber]

And? You're not making sense here. It has in every example we've seen. It does NOT follow that it must-- UNLESS you are appealing to the authority of the Jedi, who cannot necessarily be trusted due to the history of them oppressing the fuck out of the Sith.

So we currently have a track record of 100% and that doesn't set enough of a precident for you.

Slippery Slope Fallacy. By this logic, there is no such thing as a benevolent politician. Rare as thy may be...

Idiot.

Yeah cause politicians swear an oath to only use their authority for their own power and ambition.
Who's the idiot again?

[Losonti Tokash]

She gives you shit on most things no matter what you do. Give the beggar money and she scolds you for coddling the weak; tell him to fuck off and she's got another lesson about being needlessly cruel, especially if it draws attention to you.

And that's what I found annoying. She's supposed to be morally ambigious but comes across as an annoying hag who just likes to bitch about everything you do.
Though she does sometimes approve of you manipulating others into fucking themselves over, which does fit her character but is nonetheless evil.

I think the point she's making most of the time is that you (the character, or the player, or even writers) rarely consider the possible non-immediate effects of your actions. She's going to criticize everything you do because even if the action itself (to her) is correct, you aren't critically thinking about what you're doing yet.

Yeah, but that's Bioware's typical misunderstanding of nuance. The general impression of Revan from stuff other than the player's actions themselves seems to be a callous but brilliant leader. Not exactly the sort that would cackle madly as he electrocuted a nursing home.

Regardless, Revan still started a civil war and Revan let Malak loose on worlds like Telos.
Again, needlessly overt evil isn't the issue here, but Revan still was willing to let millions die for their own power.

Definitely. I'm not sure we're even disagreeing on anything here.

[Formless]

And? You're not making sense here. It has in every example we've seen. It does NOT follow that it must-- UNLESS you are appealing to the authority of the Jedi, who cannot necessarily be trusted due to the history of them oppressing the fuck out of the Sith.

So we currently have a track record of 100% and that doesn't set enough of a precident for you.

You moron, what part of "does not follow" do you not understand? All it takes to prove that it does not necessarily corrupt is ONE EXAMPLE. WHICH WE ARE CURRENTLY ARGUING ABOUT.

Slippery Slope Fallacy. By this logic, there is no such thing as a benevolent politician. Rare as thy may be...

Idiot.

Yeah cause politicians swear an oath to only use their authority for their own power and ambition.
Who's the idiot again?

Sorry, I misread that the first time. If you look, you will see that I changed that part of the post while you were reading it. Look again. The Sith Code never said "be selfish," it simply says the force shall set you free. That leaves plenty of room for disagreements over philosophy, and that is where you can get a sith that does not behave like a Randroid.

[Gramzamber]

You moron, what part of "does not follow" do you not understand? All it takes to prove that it does not necessarily corrupt is ONE EXAMPLE. WHICH WE ARE CURRENTLY ARGUING ABOUT.

One example, which is contradictory. Which is my point.
It's like saying all Ewoks are not necesarilly teddy bears, though all evidence suggests all Ewoks are teddy bears and all Ewoks we've seen are teddy bears.
Then a giant lizard Ewok comes along and you say that's proof even though it makes no sense.

Sorry, I misread that the first time. If you look, you will see that I changed that part of the post while you were reading it. Look again. The Sith Code never said "be selfish," it simply says the force shall set you free. That leaves plenty of room for disagreements over philosophy, and that is where you can get a sith that does not behave like a Randroid.

Yes, I've noticed it now. The entire Sith Code is clearly self-centered. I will gain power. I will gain victory. My passion. My strength. My chains unbound. This, combined with the general selfishness of every Sith we've ever seen strongly suggests that it is a sentiment of selfishness.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

The dark side would be quite boring to play if it was all "EVIL! EVIL! EVIL!". I wouldn't exactly call Darth Malgus or any strong practitioner of the dark side to be "light-side" or even good. But it demonstrates that the Sith are not as one dimensional as most people think, which is great!

And the only way they can stop being one-dimensional is to stop devoting themselves to the one aspect that defines their existance?

And what aspect is it that they've stop devoting themselves to?

Because otherwise it would be boring as hell. Didn't some Sith Lord say "Good is a point of view"?

Yes, the same guy who shortly afterwards yells "UNLIMITED POWER!", zaps a guy out of a building to his death while laughing maniacly and then gives an order to kill children.
Point of view alright.

How does this in anyway contradict the idea that Palpatine felt he was in the right?

[Civil War Man]

Everyone seems to have jumped on the "Light Side Sith" comment Schatt made and are presuming that that's what Bioware said.

Did any of you actually read the blurb on the character?

In the modern history of the Sith Empire, Darth Malgus stands out as a curiosity. As a fierce frontline warrior in his early years, Malgus took an alien lover, treating her more as a wife than a slave. She served at his side during his most successful campaigns, including the destruction of the Jedi Temple on Coruscant. He employed mercenaries from species long thought untrustworthy and learned dozens of languages.

Most unusually, Darth Malgus walked away from the power games of the Empire after the Treaty of Coruscant. As top-ranking Sith fought to control the armies and resources that traditionally lead to seats on the Dark Council, Darth Malgus led military expeditions into the Unknown Regions, claiming new territories and furthering the influence of the Empire as a whole.

Often a dissenting voice on policy issues, Malgus nevertheless can be counted on to take orders and has no power base to speak of. This combination has kept even those Sith who hate his constant calls for change from moving against him.

What I got from that is that this Malgus guy is mostly a soldier who hates political jackassery. He cares about the Sith Empire, but not most of its leaders. He has a soft spot for his wife-in-all-but-name, and seems to be open towards gathering allies among groups that everyone else hates.

Absolutely nothing in that preview says he's a nice person. The fact that he's not an omnicidal baby eater doesn't mean he can't be a Sith without breaking canon, unless people want to argue that Darths Tyrannus, Sidious, and Vader break canon.

[Formless]

One example, which is contradictory. Which is my point.

That. Does. Not. Matter. We're talking about something YOU claim contradicts canon, but that would ONLY be true if logically the Sith must be wannabe Nazis.

It's like saying all Ewoks are not necesarilly teddy bears, though all evidence suggests all Ewoks are teddy bears and all Ewoks we've seen are teddy bears.
Then a giant lizard Ewok comes along and you say that's proof even though it makes no sense.

No, idiot, its more like saying "Ewoks cannot speak basic because no Ewok we've seen speaks basic" and then getting your panties in a twist over canon when an Ewok comes around who speaks fucking basic.

Yes, I've noticed it now. The entire Sith Code is clearly self-centered. I will gain power. I will gain victory. My passion. My strength. My chains unbound. This, combined with the general selfishness of every Sith we've ever seen strongly suggests that it is a sentiment of selfishness.

But not necessarily so. Its possible to see how that sentiment can be universalized. Its entirely possible for a Sith to say "If you join me, we ALL gain power, and so we ALL win! Whose with me?" Consider that the ethical theory of utilitarianism is based on the notion that all humans want the same thing: happiness. That's a selfish motive, but it leads to altruistic conclusions.

Consider this: compassion is an emotion most people consider to be the motivating force for much good. And yet, what is it if not a passion for helping others? That's one example of a non-evil interpretation of the Sith philosophy.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Using the Force for personal gain and power is part of the dark side, and is part of the Sith way.

Yes... according to the Jedi. The Jedi, who took it upon themselves to oppress the Sith for a thousand years. Just because they are depicted as the heroes doesn't mean every word that comes from their mouths is gospel when it comes to the Force.

I would hardly agree that the Jedi 'oppressed' the Sith, every time they showed up it was to ambush and destroy the Jedi. That said, the Sith Code does not say you need the Dark Side, simply personal power and freedom for yourself; theoretically you could still be a Sith without being an evil asshole, just gaining power.

[Samuel]

The dark side does seem to have a tendancy to corrupt. You have Revan and Malak who take time out from their campaign of saving the galaxy to beat up slavers (Taris) and when they fall they procede to use slaves, you have the same thing happening to Vader and you even have the second in change of the Sith academy in Kotor okay with slavery... even though she was origionally a slave and fell to the dark side to strike back against slavers. Kreia seems to be an exception... except she seems more interested in testing her ideas out against the galaxy and doesn't mind the fact they killed trillions.

[Havok]

And? You're not making sense here. It has in every example we've seen. It does NOT follow that it must-- UNLESS you are appealing to the authority of the Jedi, who cannot necessarily be trusted due to the history of them oppressing the fuck out of the Sith.

Whoa whoa whoa whoa fucking whoa.
Please cite the examples and sources of the Jedi "oppressing the fuck out of the Sith".

[Ritterin Sophia]

And? You're not making sense here. It has in every example we've seen. It does NOT follow that it must-- UNLESS you are appealing to the authority of the Jedi, who cannot necessarily be trusted due to the history of them oppressing the fuck out of the Sith.

Whoa whoa whoa whoa fucking whoa.
Please cite the examples and sources of the Jedi "oppressing the fuck out of the Sith".

I believe he's talking about the methodical annihilation of the remnants of the Sith Empire that kept fighting after the Great Hyperspace War at the hands of the Republic and Jedi. Not that I agree, the Sith just tried to destroy the Republic and the Jedi, if they continue fighting it's their fault.

[Darth Fanboy]

Yes, I've noticed it now. The entire Sith Code is clearly self-centered. I will gain power. I will gain victory. My passion. My strength. My chains unbound. This, combined with the general selfishness of every Sith we've ever seen strongly suggests that it is a sentiment of selfishness.

But not necessarily so. Its possible to see how that sentiment can be universalized. Its entirely possible for a Sith to say "If you join me, we ALL gain power, and so we ALL win! Whose with me?"

This is exactly what the Brotherhood of Darkness was supposedly 1000 BBY and yet Kaan was still angling behind the scenes for complete control. Meanwhile, Bane going through all of the teachings of the ancient Sith (including Revan), makes some revelations about the Dark Side and thus the Rule of Two was created.

The Dark Side of the Force IS NECESSARILY SELFISH. Craving power, thirsting for more power, gaining further power, it all feeds into the Dark Side in a very tangible way. Too many Sith led to to war amongst their own order and left them weakened.

The last thing this board needs is another tard who thinks that the Sith/Empire had benevolent intentions.

[Darth Fanboy]

The dark side does seem to have a tendancy to corrupt.

Understatement of the day perhaps?

[Havok]

Just so everyone knows, this is the Sith code:

Peace is a lie; there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
—Darth Bane, Dark Lord of the Sith

Jesus fuck... If peace is a lie and 'victory' is the ends, then it's pretty clear that somewhere in there you are going to have conflict or war, the opposite of peace and something you can claim a 'victory' in.

I have decided that only complete fucking idiots think that the Sith are anything but evil.

P.S. This is just more EU crap BTW.

[Darth Fanboy]

It's even funnier when you realize that Brainless is attributing the Sith Code to Darth Bane (even though Bane didn't come up with the code or had anything to do with its creation), whose actions and beliefs run completely counter to every point he's trying to make.

[Formless]

It's even funnier when you realize that Brainless is attributing the Sith Code to Darth Bane (even though Bane didn't come up with the code or had anything to do with its creation), whose actions and beliefs run completely counter to every point he's trying to make.

Hey, I'm just going by what it says on the wookiepedia page. Which also says that its older than Bane. So go fuck yourself, asshole.

[Formless]

Jesus fuck... If peace is a lie and 'victory' is the ends, then it's pretty clear that somewhere in there you are going to have conflict or war, the opposite of peace and something you can claim a 'victory' in.

I have decided that only complete fucking idiots think that the Sith are anything but evil.

It looks pretty clear to me that FREEDOM is the ends, and that the part about victory is the means to that end. Not that I agree with it (strawmen aside) but we're talking about how someone who identifies as a Sith but isn't a massive douchnozzle could exist and how such a person might think, not whether the philosophy is correct or okay. Its no different than asking how a christian can ignore all those parts of the bible about stoning gay men and insolent children.

You... you really needed this spelled out for you. That says something about your ability to comprehend an argument, but I don't think its flattering.

P.S. This is just more EU crap BTW.

Why do you feel the need to waltz into every discussion that you KNOW is about the EU to say "this is just more EU crap"? Of course its more EU crap. That has no bearing on this discussion.

[Sarevok]

Spare me your babble and show me a Sith who never hurt or killed anyone and we will have an argument Formless. Untill then you are nitpicking Havoks arguments. Throughout the Star Wars movie saga Sith character we met had committed crimes of varying degree. In the Kotor games, whose storyline this new game should follow every Sith was evil as well. Right down to lowliest lightsaber wielding mooks. I don't know a single character in K1 or K2 who identified themselves as Sith and was not evil.

[Formless]

Spare me your babble and show me a Sith who never hurt or killed anyone and we will have an argument Formless. Untill then you are nitpicking Havoks arguments. Throughout the Star Wars movie saga Sith character we met had committed crimes of varying degree. In the Kotor games, whose storyline this new game should follow every Sith was evil as well. Right down to lowliest lightsaber wielding mooks. I don't know a single character in K1 or K2 who identified themselves as Sith and was not evil.

How about you show me the clause that says TOR's choice of depicting a not-so-evil Sith lord (especially one who is outright described as a historical oddity) is a violation of canon, then we will talk. That's what this is about: for some reason people find this concept impossible to grasp, but they refuse to justify their incredulity. Havok and Fanboy are just putting arguments into my mouth that I never made: that the Sith we see aren't so bad after all. How stupid do they take me for? Of course they were bad, but that does not actually prove what they want it to prove. Star Wars canon isn't like law, there is no such thing as precedence. Only logical or chronological contradictions.