Jump to content

Sith Inquisitor Wishes and Regrets (Possible spoilers)


MonsterrLuv

Recommended Posts

This actually was explained, roughly, by Kallig. Zash had undergone rituals to protect her from the power of the Force, and Khem, while not as reliant on it as the Inquisitor, also makes use of its power. Hence, Zash figured she'd be safer if she convinced you to bring him, as opposed to Andy, who could just skip all the Force nonsense and stick a blaster bolt between her eyes (and thus, ruin the whole chapter 1 finale :rolleyes: ).

 

Couldn't she have just killed him easily? Being a Darth and all. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

t Thanatos seems to come out of nowhere as an enemy

 

This is due to story rewrites. Thanaton was supposed to have a bigger role throughout, seeing as how he is basically a mirror story of the Sith Inquisitor, rising from being a Slave to the Dark Council.

 

The most obvious is when he says "I love you like a son/daughter, but your rise will mean the end of the Empire." Love? When he tried to kill you right off the bat? Oh well, guess we should just enjoy what we got.

Edited by maxetius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is due to story rewrites. Thanaton was supposed to have a bigger role throughout, seeing as how he is basically a mirror story of the Sith Inquisitor, rising from being a Slave to the Dark Council.

 

The most obvious is when he says "I love you like a son/daughter, but your rise will mean the end of the Empire." Love? When he tried to kill you right off the bat? Oh well, guess we should just enjoy what we got.

 

He had a comic to introduce himself, and made a few appearances in chapter 1.

 

His problem is the motive, why would he want to kill Nox so much? The tradition does not make sense, betrayal is the core of the Sith, and Nox already defeated Zash.

Edited by Slowpokeking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

that was pretty well explained darth (then lord zash) was thanatons underling and not only was she pro-freedom anti traditional (something that ticks thanaton off by it's self.) she also disobeyed a direct order (do not kill skotia) with the way sith think disobeying an order from a superior means she and every one associated with her has to die. the problem is he couldn't prove it and according to the tradition he likes so much that means she should get away scott free (it's only murder if your caught). So thanaton had a problem on the one hand he knows zash is antitradition and has killed skotia in defiance of every thing he holds sacred on the other he can;t actually prove it so everything he holds sacred says he has to let it slide.

 

you on the other hand had many witnesses see you go into the temple to kill zash. Which makes you an easy scapegoat to replace zash as the target of his rage at being disobeyed and you broke tradition (becuase of your supposed murder of zash being so open and common knowledge if you will.)

Edited by magicallypuzzled
Link to comment
Share on other sites

that was pretty well explained darth (then lord zash) was thanatons underling and not only was she pro-freedom anti traditional (something that ticks thanaton off by it's self.) she also disobeyed a direct order (do not kill skotia) with the way sith think disobeying an order from a superior means she and every one associated with her has to die. the problem is he couldn't prove it and according to the tradition he likes so much that means she should get away scott free (it's only murder if your caught). So thanaton had a problem on the one hand he knows zash is antitradition and has killed skotia in defiance of every thing he holds sacred on the other he can;t actually prove it so everything he holds sacred says he has to let it slide.

 

you on the other hand had many witnesses see you go into the temple to kill zash. Which makes you an easy scapegoat to replace zash as the target of his rage at being disobeyed and you broke tradition (becuase of your supposed murder of zash being so open and common knowledge if you will.)

 

There is no stupid tradition, it's all nonsense.

 

Betrayal and backstabbing is the soul of Sith. Sadow murdered his master, Freedon Nadd betrayed Sadow, Exar Kun destroyed Nadd. Many many Sith in TOR's Empire kill each other's underlings or their superiors. It does not make sense at all. And he didn't destroy Zash right way(He totally could).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there definetely is a tradition in the sith of when it's acceptable to murder your superiors and when it isn't acceptable several dark lords have ignored it true but you'd be surprised how many haven't. , I/zash/apparently you say its fine to ignore that tradition thanaton believes that ignoring that tradition will ruin the sith and turn them into indescrimanate murderers something which they really aren't at the moment.

 

there are rules to follow when you want to murder your superiors zash didn;t want to follow them but did so she was safe from thanaton. you as her apprentice didn't follow them so you became the suragate target for his rage at zash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there definetely is a tradition in the sith of when it's acceptable to murder your superiors and when it isn't acceptable several dark lords have ignored it true but you'd be surprised how many haven't. , I/zash/apparently you say its fine to ignore that tradition thanaton believes that ignoring that tradition will ruin the sith and turn them into indescrimanate murderers something which they really aren't at the moment.

 

there are rules to follow when you want to murder your superiors zash didn;t want to follow them but did so she was safe from thanaton. you as her apprentice didn't follow them so you became the suragate target for his rage at zash.

 

Where did the tradition come from? Sith is all about betrayal and backstabbing, Thanaton liked Naga Sadow and Tulak Hord and they both did such thing.

 

Darth Baras let his apprentice did the same thing many times. Darth Mortis, the enforcer of law also accepted Nox and Karrid after they defeated their rival. Thanaton's "tradition" is totally nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wishes

 

That the Silencer was used in the Kaggath

 

That i could have spared Thanaton, or at least told him i Understood

 

To have more meetings with the Dark Council

 

To have kept the rakata box and talked to khem every now and then. Or got the two of them to get along inside the body. Khem was so good to me, and i had him from the start, but i felt loyal to Zash and couldnt betray her because she saved my life. And i wasnt about to miss out on the Surge Bonus from khems Story >.>

 

That i felt like i had at least ONE ally on the council.

 

That i had more of a power base.

 

That Moff Pyron could have been promoted by my Inquisitor

 

That Achelon was developed more...

 

Regrets

 

That i couldnt have killed Thanaton myself. He deserved that at least.

 

That Thanaton had to die.

 

That i had to FORCE Ashara to come with me on taris. I would have liked to persuade her.

 

That I didnt get to manipulate more.

 

That my cult on Nar Shadaa werent there to see me on Dromund Kaas (That i saw) Also that i didnt get to control them a little more.

 

That my sorcerer couldnt figure out how to learn more than one craft -____-

 

THAT I GOT XALEK SO LATE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did the tradition come from? Sith is all about betrayal and backstabbing, Thanaton liked Naga Sadow and Tulak Hord and they both did such thing.

 

Darth Baras let his apprentice did the same thing many times. Darth Mortis, the enforcer of law also accepted Nox and Karrid after they defeated their rival. Thanaton's "tradition" is totally nonsense.

 

where did it come from? it came from thousands of years of sith having to live together with out whiping them selves completely out. backstabs betrayals are all great and incouraged as long as they follow the tradition/ rules that gareenteed that you actually had to work for it. it also came from a sith's natural caution and fear of retribution. That in a sense is what thanaton fears is that if the tradition isn't followed sith will just throw caution to the wind and murder each other until nothing remains.

 

thanaton liked those betrayals and backstabs becuase they followed the tradition thanaton is talking about like i said there are clear rules to how such things should be done.

 

karrid had to make gravius fire the first shot she couldn't just blast him or rather she could but it'd break the tradition. Nox won a traditional battle who's whole reason for exisisting was for just such an occasion. thanaton's tradition is basically the reason why sith can stay in power with out killing some one every two seconds it's why sith that meet each other don't instantly fight.

 

by the way are you sure he liked naga shadow? i know he liked tulak hord and i think he liked ludo kressh (or maybe he was just noting that he participated in the ritual fight i can;t remeber) but i don;t think he likes naga shadow.

Edited by magicallypuzzled
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did the tradition come from? Sith is all about betrayal and backstabbing, Thanaton liked Naga Sadow and Tulak Hord and they both did such thing.

 

Darth Baras let his apprentice did the same thing many times. Darth Mortis, the enforcer of law also accepted Nox and Karrid after they defeated their rival. Thanaton's "tradition" is totally nonsense.

 

The "tradition" Thanaton was concerned with had nothing to do with the fact that the Inquisitor killed Zash, outside of the fact that it made Zash dead. According to Thanaton, when a Sith is killed by another Sith, that Sith's power base must be wiped away. Since the Inquisitor was still Zash's apprentice at the time, he was marked for death. If instead, the Inquisitor had joined Thanaton, for example, before it happened, there would've been no rivalry. And Zash similarly wasn't punished for the same way for killing Skotia because Skotia was not her master.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "tradition" Thanaton was concerned with had nothing to do with the fact that the Inquisitor killed Zash, outside of the fact that it made Zash dead. According to Thanaton, when a Sith is killed by another Sith, that Sith's power base must be wiped away. Since the Inquisitor was still Zash's apprentice at the time, he was marked for death. If instead, the Inquisitor had joined Thanaton, for example, before it happened, there would've been no rivalry. And Zash similarly wasn't punished for the same way for killing Skotia because Skotia was not her master.

 

this is so completely wrong in every way . i am so going to sound like a total jerk (i mean more so then i inevitably end up sounding) but if you don;t understand the tradition don't try and explain it. also what the heck does your first sentence mean? it;s entirely contradictory to it's self.

Edited by magicallypuzzled
Link to comment
Share on other sites

where did it come from? it came from thousands of years of sith having to live together with out whiping them selves completely out. backstabs betrayals are all great and incouraged as long as they follow the tradition/ rules that gareenteed that you actually had to work for it. it also came from a sith's natural caution and fear of retribution. That in a sense is what thanaton fears is that if the tradition isn't followed sith will just throw caution to the wind and murder each other until nothing remains.

 

thanaton liked those betrayals and backstabs becuase they followed the tradition thanaton is talking about like i said there are clear rules to how such things should be done.

 

karrid had to make gravius fire the first shot she couldn't just blast him or rather she could but it'd break the tradition. Nox won a traditional battle who's whole reason for exisisting was for just such an occasion. thanaton's tradition is basically the reason why sith can stay in power with out killing some one every two seconds it's why sith that meet each other don't instantly fight.

 

by the way are you sure he liked naga shadow? i know he liked tulak hord and i think he liked ludo kressh (or maybe he was just noting that he participated in the ritual fight i can;t remeber) but i don;t think he likes naga shadow.

 

Sith's society is all about cruelty and power, betrayal is a way to achieve the real power, Zash had conflict with Darth Skotia before the SI story started, his apprentice even wanted to kill Nox.

 

But it's clear that everyone in the council knew Karrid was trying to let Gravus(He was totally different than the calm commander we saw on Taris) shoot her, but they still accepted her because she proved her power.

 

The codex showed he liked Sadow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is so completely wrong in every way . i am so going to sound like a total jerk (i mean more so then i inevitably end up sounding) but if you don;t understand the tradition don't try and explain it. also what the heck does your first sentence mean? it;s entirely contradictory to it's self.

 

I understand the tradition as Thanaton himself explains it. Zash was killed, therefore everything Zash built was to be destroyed. It didn't matter that the Inquisitor killed her. What matters is that Zash was killed. That's what I meant. Thanaton specifically explains this during the first part of chapter 2. He never says anything about killing the Inquisitor for killing Zash. Heck, he doesn't even know at first. But since Zash was killed, tradition demands those who served her die as well. He makes that perfectly clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@jlazarillo your misquoting him he says zash's disobedience not her death demanded the deconstruction of her power base. he delayed it because according to the tradition he holds so dear he technically couldn't punish her until your inquisitor gave him the pretence he needed. He does indeed know it was the inquisitor that killed her the very first conversation you have with him after killing zash has a path that has him say your murder was sloppy even brazin and too many people saw you enter the temple to kill zash. if what you were saying was true he'd have to kill him self for killing his superior on the dark council but no he followed the traditions on that murder so he's clear.

 

@slowpokeking yes sith sociaty is all about cruelity power betrayal and backstabbing what you seem to have a hard time grasping is that all of those come with RULES that must be followed. you have to betray them in the correct way.

 

if it had just been about power Kharrid could of just blown gravus away immediately. instead she had to lure him into firing first (thus satisfying the tradition on the correct way to murder him) , and it's easy to be level headed when your miles away from the danger as gravus was on taris. Quite another to be so level headed facing a ship you know can destroy you. he had a very hot headed apprentice me thinks this weakness was always there below the surface i see no evidence that annihilation ruined his character at all.

 

 

heres a quote from moff pyron that might make you both understand where the inquisitor whent wrong and thanaton didn;t

 

pyron on weither your get thanatons powerbase after killing him

 

pyron: only if they can't prove it was you isnt that how you sith work?

Edited by magicallypuzzled
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked the SI over all my couple areas of bones to pick are as follows.

1. I talk all nice with some admirals and get them a nice shiny super weapon. But I never get to see my troops?

 

2. I feel like no matter what I did Ashara stayed good. She never fell. But that might have been how i went about it.

 

3. As a sith Lord why am I not able to get a flag ship, and I am left to fly around in this tiny POS? I call shenanigans?

 

4. I wanted an Office and more Apprentices.

 

 

Otherwise. I think Jadus was alot better then Zash as a manipulator but Zash most certainly wanted power. Hope in the 2nd part. i get to raise armies and destroy worlds.

Edited by AlexRage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. I feel like no matter what I did Ashara stayed good. She never fell. But that might have been how i went about it.

 

Ashara is a LS romance based around the Sith Inquisitor's redemption. She is not really corruptible, like Jaesa is. With Ashara, the best you can do is to get her to agree with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bickering in this thread alone shows that Thanatons involvement was poorly done. Even if the story is awful everyone should at least be able to agree what the story was if it was written properly. There was so much that you should have been told about him, but never were. You should have won over most of his powerbase before the final battle and they should have explained his motivations to you as you did so.

 

I disliked being the follower all the time, no planning and all reaction.

I disliked that Zash knew so much but I never felt like I learned anything which would help me (Aside from the orders).

I dlsiked that the ghosts made me ill, why would I perform an ancient sith ritual without researching it?

I disliked not getting to kill the people who slighted me.

I disliked my wasted cult. Though I love the actual cult.

I disliked that although it was mentioned a few times that I was making ally's I never actually got to see any of that. There should have been something on the ship showing the people who were on my side.

I disliked that I have no idea who is on the Dark Council, even though I am a member. I don't know if I have ally's or enemies or ANYTHING about them. I don't even know how many are left at the end of the story.

I dislike that being on the Dark Council got me no information on anything. Shouldn't I have been clued up on the Emperor, or given a list of long term plans that I shouldn't be screwing up with my new found power? Does my new position not have some kind of objective I need to try and reach?

On that topic I dislike that I didn't start planning for being on the Dark Council before I got there. I should have known that killing Thanaton would get me his seat, so I should have spent act 3 making sure it was secure rather than curing my flu.

If I remember right (It was months ago) wasn't I put in charge of the knowledge of the Sith? Why didn't I get to see any of that?

I dislike most of my companions. Khem is awesome. Ashara could have been good if we got to corrupt her (Yes keep the option for her to 'save' us too) but why would I keep her if I wasn't corrupting her? And why would she stay? Andronikos is annoying, but sadly good dps so I had to use him. Xalek is too late to count. And the healer man (His name escapes me) is just a wuss with what could have been a decent story but seemed rushed in the cut scene where he just went and did it all himself.

I dislike that the story ended without any clue of what my character even wants to do next. I have no idea why I care about being on the Dark Council considering they don't seem to do anything.

I dislike that after I did get the sickness I didn't do any research on the long term effects of these ghosts. The dark side option to keep them at the end should have been an educated decision, but I have no idea if it will be a good or bad one in the end.

I also dislike that I did no research on the device that I put Zash into, even after inheriting everything Zash owned I would have expected to find 'something' even if it took Ashara the rest of the game to read through her notes for me.

 

Overall the story was quite good (get power through ancient ghost binding rituals, great!), but it just feels that so much was missed out, and that I was being led every step of the way, which is ok as long as you are playing the game and allowing yourself to be led, which isn't the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ashara is a LS romance based around the Sith Inquisitor's redemption. She is not really corruptible, like Jaesa is. With Ashara, the best you can do is to get her to agree with you.

 

Problem is that there SHOULD of been an option to corrupt her cause honestly most DS inquisitors wonder why she is on the ship and when they found out they cannot corrupt her they put her on crafting mule duty or wish to throw her in the airlock or feed her to khem val.

 

You don't put a light side jedi user on a sith ship and don't expect the sith not to try and corrupt that said jedi its stupid.

 

BTW darkstar i pretty much agree with everything in you list. Bioware told us the SI story will have you scheming and plotting in the shadows. When I actually played the story I simply ended being manipulated by others all the time and just reacting to situations.

 

While almost all the dark side choices for SI just comes down to force lightning the SI reached the dark council seat with just force lightning people in his/her way.

 

While other classes like the IA and the SW has more options to deal with situations you can play your sith warrior as a plotter/manipulator for example.

 

On nar shadda I had to deal with lord rathari and I saw some republic troops instead of killing them I enlisted them(neutral choice) to aid me they owed me their lives. Then when I had to face rathari's forces I called in the "favor" and they helped me beat him. Now with rathari baras expected me to kill him but instead I enlisted the sith lord (neutral option neither light or dark) into my service to help me one day take down baras.

 

Then the republic troops approached me and then I killed them because their usefulness was at an end and that gave me 100 dark side points. The SI has NOTHING like this in their story what the SW did there was what I expected in the SI story.

 

The SW can plot behind bara's back instead of being led the SW is driving the story more than the SI in the SI story.

Edited by lokdron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...