MajinEddie Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 He had count duku. Duku had both ventris and grevis. When palp had vader vader had starkiller. not sure if duku and his 2 sith followers were under palp at the same time as Mual. Ifso then thats 5 sith at 1 time. The Darkside only wanted 2. Do you think this is why good old palpatine failed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldVengeance Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Grevious was not force sensitive, but yeah given all the secret apprentices they had, those two seemed to treat the rule of two as more like vague guidelines or maybe like "The Suggestion of Two." Maybe that's how Darth Bane envisioned it too, but thought "Would you ever follow a rule called "Suggestion of two?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 No, Grevious wasn't even a jedi or sith he was just a cyborg that knew lightsaber combat. Ventress was just a dark jedi, Galen(AKA: Starkiller) was a dark jedi turned light jedi. So no there was only 2 sith at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setalle Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Sith are kinda jerks, anyway, they don't need to follow rules. And palpatine was the emperor. Emperors don't follow rules, they make them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bejarid Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Many of the people you're citing as apprentices were not Sith; they were highly-trained, Force-sensitive special operatives - and Grievous wasn't even Force-sensitive. Under Palpatine's rule, there were only ever two Darths - no more, no less. And, no, Palpatine had neither Dooku nor Vader as apprentices while he had Maul apprenticed. Actually, according the new Plagueis book, Maul wasn't even a real Sith Apprentice, but he was never aware of Plagueis or the fact that he was merely a pawn of the Sith, used to do Plagueis' and Palpatine's biddings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Many of the people you're citing as apprentices were not Sith; they were highly-trained, Force-sensitive special operatives - and Grievous wasn't even Force-sensitive. Under Palpatine's rule, there were only ever two Darths - no more, no less. And, no, Palpatine had neither Dooku nor Vader as apprentices while he had Maul apprenticed. Actually, according the new Plagueis book, Maul wasn't even a real Sith Apprentice, but he was never aware of Plagueis or the fact that he was merely a pawn of the Sith, used to do Plagueis' and Palpatine's biddings. He was an attack dog, nothing more and nothing less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkCelestial Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Didn't Sidious and Plaguesis say the Rule of Two was no longer needed. Maybe thats why Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldVengeance Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) The idea that Darth Maul was alive at the same time as Darth Plagueis sounds like a rather nonsensical retcon to me, Plagueis clearly wasn't seen as important TPM and was not mentioned in any Phantom Menace related EU works, but even if he was that still means there was clearly 3 darths. None of the other dark jedi apprentices had a Sith name. But regardless, The Emperor and Vader having so many secret apprentices is really like ignoring the spirit of the law while following it to the letter. There's really little point in following the rule of 2 if you were doing so in name only. The differences between Sith Lords and Dark Jedi was mostly semantic. Heck, some of them went on to be Sith later anyway, like Lumiya. And at the end of the day, you can really end up being a Sith by claiming to be one and then stopping anyone who says otherwise. Edited February 24, 2012 by OldVengeance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) Ya but Old, Maul wasn't really a dark lord of the sith...I mean he was just there to be there. If he really was a Sith Lord, then he really should have wiped the floor with Obi-Wan(plot armor aside) and killed him. Sith Lords don't dick around with their opponents, unless needing to. Edited February 24, 2012 by Wolfninjajedi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldVengeance Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) But he did. Obi Wan survived because of plot armor. Besides, Darth Maul's book (Shadow Hunter I believe) describes him as a "Dark Lord of the Sith." I don't see anything to indicate that not toying with your enemies is some integral doctrine to being a Sith Lord. The Emperor felt the need to monologue to Skywalker for a while before killing him. Edited February 24, 2012 by OldVengeance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guildrum Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 And who was there to wag their finger in his face and tell him, "No no Mr. bad Palpatine..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkCelestial Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Darth Maul was just a puppet Palpatine used as an assassin. Darth Maul was never truly Palpatine's apprentice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonimator Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Maul believed he was Sith, and that was probably enough. I think the idea was revealing the Sith to the Jedi, and making them wonder, so Sidious had to know that the Jedi somehow were aware of the Rule of Two. So, present them with a so-called Sith Lord, a Darth. Then they'll think there's only one more out there... when really, there's still two (for a brief time, anyway, until Palpatine kills Plagueis). But whoever said it seems like a poor retcon is correct; Plagueis wasn't even hinted at in TPM. Lucas probably didn't even come up with the name until writing Revenge of the Sith (or it was on a list of rejected names for Sidious, Maul, or Tyranus; I doubt it was ever applied to Palpatine's predecessor before 2002). As for following the letter if not the spirit of the Rule, I look on it as a way for Dooku and Sidious to have a stable of potential replacements ready in case Sidious tires of Tyranus & kills him, or Tyranus makes a play for power & kills Sidious, or the Jedi manage to find, engage, and defeat one or the other of 'em. Plus it gives us a lot more Dark Jedi-types for the Jedi to fight in the Clone Wars. JUST fighting droids, or the all-too-rare organic Sep troops, gets pretty monotonous. Throwing an occasional saber duel into the mix is nice to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bejarid Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 But he did. Obi Wan survived because of plot armor. Besides, Darth Maul's book (Shadow Hunter I believe) describes him as a "Dark Lord of the Sith." Shadow Hunter was written with Maul's perspective in mind, and he of course saw himself as a Dark Lord - regardless of his actual position within the hierarchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthDeangelis Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I may be missing some info on this, but i understand that Darth Bane created this rule. Now, we are talking about the Sith. Why in the world should the current Dark Lord of the Sith follow the rule of a dead Sith Lord. Whats stopping the current Dark Lord from repealing this rule? In my opinion the rule is irrelevant. Bane is dead, Palpatine is ruler of the Sith, as far as im concerned, he can do whatever he wants with the Sith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandonSM Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I'd like to think as soon as the Grand Plan was initiated/Made the Ro2 didn't really exist anymore. The whole point of the Ro2 is to wipe out the Republic and Jedi. And the Grand Plan was the specific plan made by Plageuis and Sidious. And pretty much that was it. Maul, Dooku and everyone else were planned to die. Dooku was a place-holder Maul was a plain assassin. Etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mechavomit Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Why in the world should the current Dark Lord of the Sith follow the rule of a dead Sith Lord. Whats stopping the current Dark Lord from repealing this rule? Because the rule is efficient? Why would Palps trouble himself with another 100+ incompetent back-stabbers biting each-other's feet? Plus, as soon as the Jedi find out about them, the whole "Grand Plan" would be in danger if not ruined completely. It's a lot easier for him to keep one smart guy by his side, who is loyal enough to do everything for him. Palpatine follows the most important rule ever: if you want something done right, do it yourself. Edited February 25, 2012 by Mechavomit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hattertea Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Puppets and pawns the lot of them... Even Dooku was a pawn. Edited February 25, 2012 by hattertea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idunhavaname Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I saw Vetress more as Mara Jade with not exactly being Sith apprentice but more secret assassins. Grievous is a droid with a heart (literally) who likes to collect lightsabers so he doesn't count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecblade Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 The rule of two doesn't matter anyway. It was a failed attempt to perfect the Sith way. Sith can never truely escape from the true Sith way; have as many servants as you like and use them until they're dead or you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smartalectwo Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I don't see anything to indicate that not toying with your enemies is some integral doctrine to being a Sith Lord. In fact, the Sith went even further, and weaponised it. Like so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkitch Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Don't for get the emperor's hand Mara jade (I believe he had a few ?) who was also a force sensitive assassin for Palp but she was not a Sith. Edited February 25, 2012 by nkitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Karsk Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Rule of two have nothing to do with there only beeing 2 sith lords.There can be many Sith. Clue is one master have one apprentice.In the old days a master could have many who served the master.After the great conflicts with this they changed it so a master could only have one apprentice. Sidious had Maul then Dooku then Vader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartanik Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 they were only 2 sith lords at the time. I dont recall ventress or galen marek being sith lords to begin with. ( just for the record acolytes and dark force users as servents, arent sith lords at all.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TKMaster Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I can assure you Palpatine didnt "forget" the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts