I remember a discussion about the rule of two, and thought it might keep things busy as we patiently wait for our invite.

 

So Darth Bane gets an invite into the Brother Hood of Darkness. First an Imperial agent and eventually off to the Sith academy. He find weakness in the current sith recruits and the leader and decides to use it against them. So he convinces the Force Bomb to be used, which ultimately destroyed all Sith. Taking over, Darth Bane institutes the rule of Two. A Master and an Apprentice. The Master to bask in the glory of the power of the Dark Side, and the apprentice the want to hunger it.

 

Its a pointless rule. The Sith are always trying to convert someone to the dark side. Look at Darth Vader, he had a secret apprentice that broke the Rule of Two. There was obviously three....not to mention he tried to convert Luke to the Dark Side. The rule was made to be broken and it can be by any Sith Lord that claims to hold the power over the Sith.

 

Could a Sith council exist like the Jedi Council? No, I would agree with Darth Bane in that the Sith should only have one leader. Otherwise there would be to much cut- throating going on for the Sith and they would begin to ignore the purpose, which seems to be to destroy the Jedi. In fact, if there was less turmoil within the Sith they might have had a better chance to destroy the Jedi.

The idea about it is to keep the Sith in check, because the Sith usually end up screwing themselves over. The idea for Vader to turn Luke to the dark side, was for him to then take Vaders' place as the apprentice.

 

The point is that when the master falls, the apprentice must take over if he/she is proved worthy. Thus ensuring the Sith remain strong.

Actually, in the far future of this. There is the Rule of One made by Darth Krayt.

 

Darth bane's holocron image condemned him for it.

 

Because if he died, the sith would be like a headless rancor. (He did actually die eventually, by the way, and got resurected as well.)

 

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Rule_of_One

Edited December 13, 2011 by Kettukun

When you think about it...how many Sith masters have to die before they realize that maybe having an apprentice is a sure fire way of getting usurped/killed. I see apprentices as a liability, unless your goal is to eventually kill said apprentice and somehow absorb thier force power...let them struggle.

The brotherhood was excruciatingly weak, whether it was a good idea or bad, the sith wouldn't have lasted to darth vaders time if bane didn't do it. And on top of that the dark lord of the sith since bane have been waaaaaaaaaay powerful, the only reason why they got taken down again in the movies was because it was an lolmovie.

Yup that discussion was made by me. I for one hate the rule of two. I feel it is completely ******** and not necessary.

I agree that the Brother Hood of Darkness was weak, and I dont disagree with Banes actions. But Bane could have created a much stronger Sith empire had he not created this rule of two.

 

Here is something to think about though. although we know some Sith continues on with this Rule. Who is to say that there wasnt a self proclaimed Sith Lord somewhere else in the galaxy. There were tons of Dark Force clans/groups. They could have easily escaped notice and have been trapped on a planet somewhere like the Sith originally were.

 

I think the rule was kept beyond Bane because the proclaimed Sith lord didnt want more people coming to cut them down. Would the Sith be more powerful if they honored a hierarchy system and didnt try to kill their leaders?

Yup that discussion was made by me. I for one hate the rule of two. I feel it is completely ******** and not necessary.

 

Just remember from my orginal post, I think any Sith could proclaim the rule void. It opens them up to challenges from other Sith. Because of the chaos of the Dark Side I dont see a justified reason that this is a binding law. The force obviously isnt enforcing the rule and there are plenty of Holocrons and information for someone to stumble upon to turn themselves into a Sith.

Rule of Two sounds awesome, right up until you spend a couple seconds thinking about it.

One person who decides to ignore it, and the whole thing goes splat.

One accident that either kills the master before he/she takes apprentice, or kills master and apprentice, and it goes splat.

One harebrained scheme that ends up killing them, and the whole thing goes splat.

 

It's just too fragile to keep going for several millenia, either the teachings start to spread, or it dies out on the first bad accident, or is simply abandoned by those who are supposed to follow it.

It simply strains that suspension of disbelief way past the breaking point for me.

 

The Sith Empire, in SWTOR or during GHW simply sound cooler, and more realistic to me, they provide structure, constant competition and fresh recruits to replace the dead, and it is not one accident away form destruction.

the rule of Two. A Master and an Apprentice. The Master to bask in the glory of the power of the Dark Side, and the apprentice the want to hunger it.

 

Vader created an apprentice to pass off the emperor's bidding to someone else, and to eventually assist him in overthrowing the emperor. The emperor wanted luke to kill vader and take his place as the new apprentice.

 

I think this is the true way of the sith, in that every individual is secretly their own master, working to achieve greater power by any means necessary. They are willing to accept doing the bidding of someone else in order to gain more power, and force their underlings to make that search for power easier.

Edited December 13, 2011 by Spots

The rule of two doesn't make sense in the regard that as a Sith, I would simply never take on an apprentice. I would go about my business on my own. The less energy I have to expend looking over my shoulder, the more I could focus on the tasks at hand.

Not all Sith will follow the Rule of two. Look up the Lost Tribe and read the Fate of the Jedi series.

I think, if anything, the Rule of Two was effective in the sense that it allowed the Sith to sew decent into the ranks of the Jedi and the republic more efficiently.

 

I say this because in the timezone the TOR is set in, there are plentiful Sith. As Sith seem to spawn like maggots, the Jedi had a clear enemy and ample opportunities to strike deadly blows against the foundations of the Sith occult. However, with the introducution of the 'Rule of Two', deceit - paranoia - and general chaos could be spread within the shadows.

 

A couple of Sith are harder to spot in a Galaxy, especially when their methods are to subjugate and to sew the seeds of chaos.

 

A band of roving Sith, who slash first think later, is a problem - all be it tangibly paradox - with a clear solution.

Edited December 13, 2011 by Landuson

The whole idea of the rule was to stop the self-destructive nature of the dark side, which it did perfectly. And also Bane wanted to focus all power of the dark side on one being, ie the master, and make sure that with every generation the sith would become stronger, because the apprentice was expected to get all of the master's knowledge and expand on all subjects of it. His rule failed because Anakin never was truly loyal to the Sith.

Imo, Revan's version of the rule of two made a lot more sense. Two sith lords, one master one aprentice, and lots of cronies.

The rule of two doesn't make sense in the regard that as a Sith, I would simply never take on an apprentice. I would go about my business on my own. The less energy I have to expend looking over my shoulder, the more I could focus on the tasks at hand.

 

In the short run though, you have a reliable lieutenant to do your dirty work for you. That happens to be a Sith. You can just as easily manipulate / dispose of your apprentice, arguably moreso than they can of you. Example: Sidious and Dooku.

Never thought I would find a reason to post on the forums, but this is something I feel passionately about.

 

first off, a few above are mostly correct, most WROOOOONG

 

Bane founded the rule of two with two main goals in mind, the preservation of the sith order and the guaranteed increase of power in the master generation after generation. for example in this game, you can even see in the story, students weaker in the dark side would band together to overthrow the more powerful sith in their own self interest, subsequently weakening the order. since deception and betrayal are key elements in sith tactics this is bound to happen with many sith. Therefor there can only be two, "one to embody the power, and one to crave it" to ensure that when the master is overthrown by his or her apprentice IE darth Zannah. the new master is more powerful than the last. It then falls on the master to ensure that the apprentice understands the importance of this aspect of the rule. failure to do so would result in a flaw in the rule. Therefor as common in sith teachings failure is not an option!!! (which isnt asking a lot if you are the TRUE MFing Dark lord)

 

As for multiple apprentices, this is also explained in the Bane novels. Bane and Zannah both found new apprentices but knew that they must fight alone to decide who would be the true Dark lord of the sith to take on the new apprentice. and spoiler spoiler, even their new apprentice Darth Cognus vowed to follow whoever won the one on one battle and not assist in any way.

 

So yeah you can nit pick flaws about sith betraying the rule, but it is meant as much more of a complex system to the order than just simply one master one apprentice. It requires the master to be ultra aware of his apprentice and responsible for ensuring that they will be a suitable Dark lord someday. If they should suspect their apprentice of straying from the rule, They should probably kill that SOB. find a new apprentice that wont suck it up like a newb.

 

AAAAANyway, if you made it through that nerd wall, you can see I pretty much think the rule of two is the way to go, but that wouldnt be a fun mmo so ill be running along side all you other neckbearded nerds for the sake of epicsauce jedi slaying :]

 

#boom

Im going to say this one time and one time only you are going to read something I will never mention again.

 

The Dark Side is like venom the more you spread it the more you dilute it. I did not make up this phrase either. It came from a book of dark secrets penned by Darth Sidious.

 

There can only be ONE.

There are a ton of Sith force users, and they recruit more all the time; the Sith are living embodiments of a twisted Peter's Principle: All Sith want to be the Emporer/Dark Lord. All Sith will rise to their level of incompletence, and then get killed. Once you get to the very top, you have #1, with his chosen successor - who he expects will succeed him violently. If he does not, he is not worthy.

 

So, not being familiar with Darth Bane's story, from what I gather of the above he had the right idea for keeping the strength of the organization within the limits of the Sith code. Only, if they don't keep that recruitment going full speed, they'll kill themselves off eventually, so if it came down to only two, the master and the apprentice - that apprentice *has* to recruit his own, in order to keep the Sith going once he kills the Master. I would call it an unspoken, 'gentlemen's' agreement. Because also as mentioned, there's nothing stopping the current Master from taking on the current Apprentice's pupil for his own, and killing the Apprentice! It creates a good competition, so the best candidate wins.

There are a lot of good arguments for and against the rule of two. The problem is the arguments against the rule of two are all things Bane addresses as he creates it. He knew there would be other apprentices brought into the Sith but ultimately it would come down to two in the end always.

 

It was the only way, like above posters have said, that the Sith would grow stronger and their strength would not be diluted. I think once Darth Sidious became Emperor is when the rule of two started becoming corrupted. The Separatist movement and the Clone Wars to the Jedi Purge spanned a total of 14 years at least. During that time Darth Sidious has 3 apprentices, Darth Maul, Count Dooku, and finally Darth Vader.

 

Now one can argue Sidious was following the rule of two to the dot. He saw each of his apprentices were unworthy of the title Dark Lord of the Sith and was grooming another until his current apprentice ultimately failed. Then he just replaced them like he did with Anakin and Dooku.

 

Now it is during his reign he becomes corrupt. He no longer finds the need for a suitable apprentice to replace him. He just wants one to be his right hand, his tool. He starts cloning himself and is set on using the dark ritual of "Essence Transfer" to keep himself immortal. No he doesn't want Luke to join the Dark side to eventually kill him and take over his Empire. He wants Luke as a tool that he can discard when he gets too powerful. Vader on the other hand does not adhere to the rule of two at all. He wants to use Luke in taking power from the Emperor since he can not do it himself.

 

So what starts out as a "perfect" rule gets corrupted and twisted in the end like all things do under the influence of the Darkside.

There are a lot of good arguments for and against the rule of two. The problem is the arguments against the rule of two are all things Bane addresses as he creates it. He knew there would be other apprentices brought into the Sith but ultimately it would come down to two in the end always.

 

It was the only way, like above posters have said, that the Sith would grow stronger and their strength would not be diluted. I think once Darth Sidious became Emperor is when the rule of two started becoming corrupted. The Separatist movement and the Clone Wars to the Jedi Purge spanned a total of 14 years at least. During that time Darth Sidious has 3 apprentices, Darth Maul, Count Dooku, and finally Darth Vader.

 

Now one can argue Sidious was following the rule of two to the dot. He saw each of his apprentices were unworthy of the title Dark Lord of the Sith and was grooming another until his current apprentice ultimately failed. Then he just replaced them like he did with Anakin and Dooku.

 

Now it is during his reign he becomes corrupt. He no longer finds the need for a suitable apprentice to replace him. He just wants one to be his right hand, his tool. He starts cloning himself and is set on using the dark ritual of "Essence Transfer" to keep himself immortal. No he doesn't want Luke to join the Dark side to eventually kill him and take over his Empire. He wants Luke as a tool that he can discard when he gets too powerful. Vader on the other hand does not adhere to the rule of two at all. He wants to use Luke in taking power from the Emperor since he can not do it himself.

 

So what starts out as a "perfect" rule gets corrupted and twisted in the end like all things do under the influence of the Darkside.

 

What about Sidious' "Emperor's hand"? What were they to the rule of two? trained in the dark side but not true Sith, did he have a bigger goal then just assassination with them?

They were just darksiders used for assassinations. No more no less...

What about Sidious' "Emperor's hand"? What were they to the rule of two? trained in the dark side but not true Sith, did he have a bigger goal then just assassination with them?

 

Sidious's "Emperor's Hand" from what I understood and took from the EU were his fail-safe if anything got in his way that he needed to clean up "hush hush" style. They were trained as assassins and later Jedi killers. They did the dirty jobs behind the scenes. So no they were not true sith. The remind me more of Hitler's Youth, at least if you recall Mara Jade's near unwavering faith and admiration of Sidious.

 

Again this just furthers my argument that Sidious was the one who corrupted and broke the rule of two. Training others in the use of the dark side out side of the true "Master/Apprentice" would be forbidden in Bane's theology.

Edited December 14, 2011 by Zerrik

Rule of two Sith or Jedi is a tall tale

 

Its against human nature to not congregate.

Even though there is, obviously, valid arguments against Darth Bane's Rule of Two, they essentially fail to understand the core of being a Sith.

 

The Sith Order is based on a simple, however unending, craving for power, and The Rule of Two is simply the best way of making sure that the Sith Order will always be at its strongest while also growing in power. Slow perhaps, but growing nonetheless.

 

This is so because the whole foundation for The Rule of Two is based on the fact that the Apprentice is supposed to, violently, overthrew the Master, thus assuming the mantle of the Dark Lord for him/herself.

In order for this to happen the former master is required to teach the apprentice everything that he/she knows about The Force, and thus when the showdown is imminent the apprentice will, ideally, be stronger and thus vanquishing the former master. The new Dark Lord will then take a new apprentice and so the cycle will continue.

 

Now why would the Master take and Apprentice when it is obvious, due to the nature of the Sith and the core of The Rule, that the Apprentice will, when the time comes, kill him?

Simple: The Master knows that his sacrifice is needed in order to keep the Order strong, and if he wants to survive, he simply has to be stronger than his apprentice, though without holding any secrets of The Force back, since that would be a violation of the whole "accumulation of power" principle.

 

So the result is, if you follow The Rule of Two perfectly, that each generation of Dark Lords will be superior to all their predecessors, and thus expanding the power of The Sith.

 

Now for the point given that "More Sith are superior to Two Sith".

While that would be true incidentally, The Rule of Two will be superior in the end, simply because of the power-craving mentality inherent in nearly all Sith.

If anyone has played KOTOR1 they will remember the last part of The Sith Academy on Korriban, where the apprentice of the master of the academy wants the player to help her overthrow the master.

While she herself is too weak to overthrow her master on her own, she is able to do so with the help of the player (The Player can also choose to side with master) and thus she becomes Master of The Sith Academy too soon and thus actually weakens the Sith Order, because she was not able to overthrow her master herself.

 

Finishing point: If all Sith were able/willing to follow the principles of The Rule of Two (minus the "Two" part) spotlessly - by never hiding any newfound knowledge in order to gain more individual power, and by only overthrowing a superior without any exterior help whatsoever - the Sith would do excellently with the "more is more" principle. But sadly the Sith society, as a whole, is not able to wrap around the ideas and thus the Rule of Two is superior.

 

Rule of Two: Accumulation of power

 

More is more: Deterioration of power