Strive-US Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 The Rule of Two was developed to address the constant infighting among the Sith. It limits the number of Sith to a master and an apprentice, which was thought to create stability and encourage Darwinist rite whereby the apprentice would become powerful enough to overthrow his master, adopt his own apprentice, and repeat the cycle into perpetuity. However, some have criticized the Rule of Two as being self-detrimental because it intentionally restricts the number of Dark Side practitioners. There is also a significant amount of risk involved, such as if both Sith were in the same location during a catastrophic disaster or if they to became overwhelmed by Jedi in superior numbers. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 It worked, it achieved the goal and there were other Dark side practitioners around. IE: Ventress and the GE's Dark Jedi/Inquisitors, they just couldn't become Sith, yet they were able to fight Jedi, so it was pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
that_Spartan_IV Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 If it didn't work, there wouldn't be a Galactic Empire. I'd say it was pretty successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_wolf Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 In my opinion, the Rule of Two was a plan with the goal of achieving power over the Republic and defeating the Jedi. In that regard it worked well. Where it failed was in maintaining that power. The Rule of Two was partially created out of a need for secrecy, but once the Jedi were defeated that need vanished. I think the Galactic Empire might have done better if the Emperor had adopted a more open policy towards training new Sith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lokdron Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 In my opinion, the Rule of Two was a plan with the goal of achieving power over the Republic and defeating the Jedi. In that regard it worked well. Where it failed was in maintaining that power. The Rule of Two was partially created out of a need for secrecy, but once the Jedi were defeated that need vanished. I think the Galactic Empire might have done better if the Emperor had adopted a more open policy towards training new Sith. Agreed, now I believe it stopped working soon as sidious killed his master in his sleep, yes I went there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PadsterPwns Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Agreed, now I believe it stopped working soon as sidious killed his master in his sleep, yes I went there. Not really, Sidious still became the strongest and most powerful Sith (and darksider) ever, being able to use Force Storms to destroy entire fleets and being a master of all 7 traditional forms of lightsaber combat, being able to transition between forms perfectly. In fact the main reason the RoT ended was because it culminated, Sidious WAS the most powerful Sith, the Jedi were basically wiped out and the Sith ruled the galaxy again. He basically was the perfect Sith but unfortunately like almost every other Sith he was overconfident after it looked like he had won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Chickenwalker- Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 I agree that the Rule of Two is impractical. It seems unlikely that a organization of just two individuals could survive for thousands of years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eriksarcasm Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 The Sith Empire had a vast and powerful hold on a small part of the galaxy for thousands of years... thriving, in it's own way. The Rule of Two stayed hidden for... hundreds? I'm not sure, it's been a while since I read those books. But, that method eventually allowed them to take control of Coruscant and the entire galaxy.... for 25 years. Anyway, apparently the Rule of Two is canon, Sith Empire as we know it is "legend". So.. yeah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) In my opinion, the Rule of Two was a plan with the goal of achieving power over the Republic and defeating the Jedi. In that regard it worked well. Where it failed was in maintaining that power. The Rule of Two was partially created out of a need for secrecy, but once the Jedi were defeated that need vanished. I think the Galactic Empire might have done better if the Emperor had adopted a more open policy towards training new Sith. Except the Emperor had Dark Side Adepts/Force Users, he didn't need to train any new Sith when he had powerful Dark Side Force Users. The GE was fine, it was really only because of the Rebellion who won by some really lucky method that it was destroyed. If you actually look into the GE, they really shouldn't have lost **** to be honest. The GE had a powerful military + Force Users + great technology. The GE could have really lasted a long time if there was no Rebellion, if not just as long as the Republic given the setup being the former Republic, having a host of worlds and the like with the afore mentioned things. Edited November 10, 2015 by Wolfninjajedi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarSquirrel Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 The Sith Empire had a vast and powerful hold on a small part of the galaxy for thousands of years... thriving, in it's own way. The Rule of Two stayed hidden for... hundreds? I'm not sure, it's been a while since I read those books. But, that method eventually allowed them to take control of Coruscant and the entire galaxy.... for 25 years. Anyway, apparently the Rule of Two is canon, Sith Empire as we know it is "legend". So.. yeah Funny... The Rule of Two lasted nearly 1,000 years. The Sith Empire under Naga Sadow fell only a few years after first contact with the Republic. Then, the Sith Empire under Vitiate nearly fell a few decades after first meeting the Republic again. Both despite early success. While we don't know the ultimate fate of the SWTOR Sith Empire, we know it can't last too much longer as it is at least gone by the time of the New Sith Wars and presumably before the Seventeenth Alsakan Conflict only ~600 years after the treaty of Coruscant. Basically, all incarnations of the Sith Empire have fallen to the Republic (most relatively quickly) and never destroyed the Jedi Order until Sidious managed it. So RoT was very successful as it achieved all its stated goals and produced the most powerful Sith to have ever existed as well as an Empire more successful in controlling the galaxy as a whole than any prior incarnation. It got the point that when Sidious fell, he wasn't practicing the Rule of Two any longer, according to the Book of Sith he'd turned it to the Rule of One, indicating he expected his reign to be eternal and that he'd never have an apprentice stronger than he was. (note: rule of one doesn't say he can't have apprentices, just that they'll never be stronger than Sidious.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quickpaw Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 It's also interesting to note that it depends on your definition of "Strength." According to the EU (Legends) "Rule of Two," it was created to foster the gradual increase of stregnth (both physically, mentally, and in the Force) to reach the point where Sidious found himself ("strongest Sith possible). How is this done? Logically, for the apprentice to prove himself stronger than his master he would have to deliberately challenge his master for the title when said master was at his strongest point, not weakest. Otherwise, there is no guarantee that anything has been gained. Sidious never proved himself stronger than Plaguess, he murdered him in his sleep (BEFORE he could teach Sidious how to manipulate life, I'll remind you) which shows a rudimentary level of cunning, but not actual superiority in the terms described by Revan/Bane's "Rule of Two." Palpatine is SHOWN in both the Movie (canon) universe and the Expanded Universe that he is the strongest Sith to exist so far. But not how he got there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euphrosyne Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 It's also interesting to note that it depends on your definition of "Strength." According to the EU (Legends) "Rule of Two," it was created to foster the gradual increase of stregnth (both physically, mentally, and in the Force) to reach the point where Sidious found himself ("strongest Sith possible). How is this done? Logically, for the apprentice to prove himself stronger than his master he would have to deliberately challenge his master for the title when said master was at his strongest point, not weakest. Otherwise, there is no guarantee that anything has been gained. Sidious never proved himself stronger than Plaguess, he murdered him in his sleep (BEFORE he could teach Sidious how to manipulate life, I'll remind you) which shows a rudimentary level of cunning, but not actual superiority in the terms described by Revan/Bane's "Rule of Two." Palpatine is SHOWN in both the Movie (canon) universe and the Expanded Universe that he is the strongest Sith to exist so far. But not how he got there. Yeah. Did Sidious succeed because of the Rule of Two, or did he succeed because he was Sidious? Did the Rule of Two add anything to his power that would not have been there anyway? Does that compensate for the immense risk of destruction that the Sith ran by following the Rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 (edited) Um...Sidious killed Plagueis after he learned everything from him. In truth, Palpatine was well versed in the ways of the Force, having been apprentice to Darth Plagueis the Wise, a Sith Lord who was a master of arcane and unnatural knowledge. In true Sith tradition, Palpatine murdered his Master upon receiving the skill and ability to do so. Source: The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia Sidious served for many decades as the apprentice of Darth Plagueis, learning diligently at the feet of his Master. Once he possessed all of Plagueis' secrets, he retired him. Source: Insider #88: Heritage of the Sith Which he also already knew how to manipulate life alongside Plagueis, so...yeah, he knows that. Edited November 12, 2015 by Wolfninjajedi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegoggles Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 I always thought the Rule of Two was the dumbest thing ever. The galaxy is big, and having such few Sith limits their ability to keep a good hold on their interests. There could be those with brilliant minds and/or have great resources, only to be killed off by their over zealous apprentice. Too much paranoia and scheming than keep focus on more important things, in my opinion. Now if someone was challenging a top position (ex. Dark Council member), that required forceful removal, that's one thing. Hierarchy system is perfect for the Sith: Cadet-->Apprentice-->Lord-->Darth-->whatever else in between Emperor. If you can't hack it becoming a Darth, then you're stuck as a Lord being told to do whatever task you're good at. If you can't be good enough to be a Lord, then you're stuck as fodder or killed off by your master for being bad. You need fodder and the strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 (edited) I always thought the Rule of Two was the dumbest thing ever. The galaxy is big, and having such few Sith limits their ability to keep a good hold on their interests. There could be those with brilliant minds and/or have great resources, only to be killed off by their over zealous apprentice. Too much paranoia and scheming than keep focus on more important things, in my opinion. Now if someone was challenging a top position (ex. Dark Council member), that required forceful removal, that's one thing. Hierarchy system is perfect for the Sith: Cadet-->Apprentice-->Lord-->Darth-->whatever else in between Emperor. If you can't hack it becoming a Darth, then you're stuck as a Lord being told to do whatever task you're good at. If you can't be good enough to be a Lord, then you're stuck as fodder or killed off by your master for being bad. You need fodder and the strong. It doesn't matter really if there's few or more Sith, if you have someone that can get the job done. What does it matter if there's only 2 or 100 Sith? The RoT accomplished what it set out to do. Make the most powerful Sith Lord and destroy the Jedi. Palpatine didn't need anymore Sith, he had powerful Dark Force Users under him, along with a vast amount of resources and the like with the GE to keep hold of his interests. More Sith =/= anything that another could do. Edited November 12, 2015 by Wolfninjajedi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts