I enjoy this "honorable" Sith Warrior

[JourrnoRush]

Going through the DvL event leveling up a Warrior. I considered doing the full dark side (for achievement) and to see the story. Well, I'm loving the "honorable" dark side choices. Hear me out before you start correcting me...

 

I love the "You fought well." and the "Prepare yourself, Jedi." type of responses. It is almost like BW gave us the option to either be "LOL YOU GON DIE" or "You fought well my proud enemy, time for you to fall."

 

There is like a respectable warrior behind it. I have taken a few light side choices to spare those who were loyal and/or helping me with missions for head canon sake. My warrior is loyal to the Empire, but will not kill targets that are unworthy. He will kill those who he beat in battle (if an honorable death is available) and he will ALWAYS kill traitors.

 

Tried full light side and it was...weird...

This honorable dark side is pretty cool imo.

 

Has anyone else tried/noticed this?

[CrutchCricket]

"Honor is a fool's prize. Glory is of no use to the dead" -Darth Bane

 

Of course, the way the warrior's story is written, it's impossible to live up to the full ideals of the Sith. You want that, play inquisitor. The warrior was written more as the perpetual minion, in the vein of Darth Vader (who I could see saying "you fought well" to a doomed opponent).

 

So yeah, I've found the best way to play warrior is not to try and go full Sith because he'll never get there. Playing him as super loyal to the Empire, accepting of his limitations and in fact resenting the more Sith schemers for their debilitating machinations. Works so much better. And that's not say play him light- light side Sith still makes zero sense to me. But in light of his ending in SoR, being a dark enforcer of the Empire and putting that above all else works really well. Kind of like Zod in Man of Steel.

 

Traditional Sith are supposed to follow the Sith Code to it's logical conclusion: that they invest only in power for themselves. The warrior on the other hand would hold that power is like fire- and fire must be controlled. A wildfire may be more more powerful than a torch but a wildfire can't be used as as tool, so all that power is wasted. And a wildfire no matter how powerful will eventually either be put out or run out of things to consume (the Emperor provides a good case for the latter). A torch on the other hand is modulated and restrained when necessary to achieve the overall goals. So his job will be to restrain all the fires that try to burn beyond where they're needed and put them out if need be.

 

Background wise, he's supposed to be highborn in the Empire so that gels well too.

 

Personally I prefer the traditional Sith approach, especially as applied in the Rule of Two. But this works for what the warrior can achieve.

Edited July 18, 2016 by CrutchCricket

[Teriaon]

"Honor is a fool's prize. Glory is of no use to the dead" -Darth Bane

 

Of course, the way the warrior's story is written, it's impossible to live up to the full ideals of the Sith. You want that, play inquisitor. The warrior was written more as the perpetual minion, in the vein of Darth Vader (who I could see saying "you fought well" to a doomed opponent).

 

So yeah, I've found the best way to play warrior is not to try and go full Sith because he'll never get there. Playing him as super loyal to the Empire, accepting of his limitations and in fact resenting the more Sith schemers for their debilitating machinations. Works so much better. And that's not say play him light- light side Sith still makes zero sense to me. But in light of his ending in SoR, being a dark enforcer of the Empire and putting that above all else works really well. Kind of like Zod in Man of Steel.

 

Traditional Sith are supposed to follow the Sith Code to it's logical conclusion: that they invest only in power for themselves. The warrior on the other hand would hold that power is like fire- and fire must be controlled. A wildfire may be more more powerful than a torch but a wildfire can't be used as as tool, so all that power is wasted. And a wildfire no matter how powerful will eventually either be put out or run out of things to consume (the Emperor provides a good case for the latter). A torch on the other hand is modulated and restrained when necessary to achieve the overall goals. So his job will be to restrain all the fires that try to burn beyond where they're needed and put them out if need be.

 

Background wise, he's supposed to be highborn in the Empire so that gels well too.

 

Personally I prefer the traditional Sith approach, especially as applied in the Rule of Two. But this works for what the warrior can achieve.

 

Swtor happens way before Darth Bane and the rule of two though, so it is wrong to refere to that way as traditionally sith. Since sith in this time would behave differently then post Bane sith.

[CrutchCricket]

Swtor happens way before Darth Bane and the rule of two though, so it is wrong to refere to that way as traditionally sith. Since sith in this time would behave differently then post Bane sith.

The Sith code is the same. So any Sith following it fully should act more or less the same as Bane's Sith, even if the actual Rule of Two doctrine hasn't been invented yet. Plus the Rule of Two was heavily influenced by Revan's teachings as Darth Revan. So the ideas are definitely there, in proto form at the very least.

 

I would argue that Darth Malgus acts nearly perfectly in accordance with Bane's teachings even though he preceedes him by a few millenia. Particularly after the Deceived novel.

[Zbljuv]

Thing is in the story we have seen the Wrath is better at the whole scheming thing then Darth Nox. Most of the scheming is done for Nox by other people so they could have some use out of him when he is in power. Also Light Side Wrath makes a ton of sense because a great deal of light side choices are just reasonable ones. Its not "ill spare you because i am such a nice guy" its "ill spare you but you now work for me and for the betterment of the Empire". Thats why the Empires Wrath title makes so much sense. He is the guardian of the whole Empire protecting it from outside threats and those scheming Lords and Moffs.

[OldVengeance]

Actually I think most of the Lightside options Warrior options are unreasonably merciful. Some are pragmatic, but many of the go so far to be actively detrimental to the Empire.

 

Anyway, in regards to the OP I actually completely agree. I play my Wrath as someone who is brutal and filled with hatred, but he also prefers to slay enemies in personal combat, so occasionally one will earn his respect. Most of the time he regards them as pathetic fools fit only to be crushed under his heel, but every so often he switches to a more respectful tone. It usually happens with enemies he's reluctant to fight like Tremmel or Baras' spy, or the odd enemy that impresses him, like the Jedi on Balmorra or Master Timmns.

 

He also really appreciates loyalty, so he's usually generous to anyone who he believes serves him well.

 

I found it's really a lot of fun to play a villain who has layers and nuance.

Edited July 18, 2016 by OldVengeance

[CrutchCricket]

Thing is in the story we have seen the Wrath is better at the whole scheming thing then Darth Nox. Most of the scheming is done for Nox by other people so they could have some use out of him when he is in power. Also Light Side Wrath makes a ton of sense because a great deal of light side choices are just reasonable ones. Its not "ill spare you because i am such a nice guy" its "ill spare you but you now work for me and for the betterment of the Empire". Thats why the Empires Wrath title makes so much sense. He is the guardian of the whole Empire protecting it from outside threats and those scheming Lords and Moffs.

The warrior is always somebody's chump. Literally at every turn, he simply trades one master for another. The inquisitor on the other hand is on his ascension from Chapter 2 onwards. Yes he has advisors, but he builds his power and powerbase from the get-go, while the warrior is always doing somebody else's errands.

 

Of course, the writing can leave something to be desired in both stories, especially at endgame where it doesn't matter if you're the biggest baddest Darth, there's still some uppity NPC sending you out to collect bear asses. Downside of the medium and sadly Bioware's not clever enough to disguise it.

[OldVengeance]

The Inquisitor is a chump equal to the Warrior if you count being subservient to the Emperor as ground for chump-hood.

 

The Dark Council and the Wrath both have authority on the basis of serving the Emperor.

[CrutchCricket]

The Inquisitor is a chump equal to the Warrior if you count being subservient to the Emperor as ground for chump-hood.

 

The Dark Council and the Wrath both have authority on the basis of serving the Emperor.

One less so than the other.

 

The Dark Council is an established body that's actually charged with running the Empire. And many of them think they run it (or should run it) better than the Emperor does, for one reason or another. There's a degree of independence there the Wrath never exhibits (unless you mean Scourge, who straight up betrays him).

 

The difference is one claims to speak with the Emperor's authority while the other has had their own authority given (even if it's from the same source). Subtle distinction, but an important one.

 

That's of course not even taking into consideration the power bases. Warrior has nothing, except for that one dude from Nar Shadaa. Maybe. If you allowed him to live. And ultimately that's what decides it. Not just stated authority. But practical potential for the application of one's will. The warrior can only go "but the emperor said so". The inquisitor can (and does say) "I said so." And by SoR, the warrior's more or less answerable to the Dark Council anyway since the Emperor's a confirmed loony (as omnicidal maniac eldritch abominations go) and they're the only thing left that passes for a government in the Empire.

Edited July 18, 2016 by CrutchCricket

[Nefla]

Yeah I generally find a mixed alignment character roleplayed with their own specific personality and motivations to be much more interesting than a pure LS or DS character who just seems 1 dimensional.

[Zbljuv]

One less so than the other.

 

The Dark Council is an established body that's actually charged with running the Empire. And many of them think they run it (or should run it) better than the Emperor does, for one reason or another. There's a degree of independence there the Wrath never exhibits (unless you mean Scourge, who straight up betrays him).

 

The difference is one claims to speak with the Emperor's authority while the other has had their own authority given (even if it's from the same source). Subtle distinction, but an important one.

 

That's of course not even taking into consideration the power bases. Warrior has nothing, except for that one dude from Nar Shadaa. Maybe. If you allowed him to live. And ultimately that's what decides it. Not just stated authority. But practical potential for the application of one's will. The warrior can only go "but the emperor said so". The inquisitor can (and does say) "I said so." And by SoR, the warrior's more or less answerable to the Dark Council anyway since the Emperor's a confirmed loony (as omnicidal maniac eldritch abominations go) and they're the only thing left that passes for a government in the Empire.

Except that people respect and fear the Emperor way more then the Dark Council. Which is way Baras would have controlled the whole council if he manged to complete his plan to be the Voice. A lot of people dont really even know who sits on the Dark Council but everyone knows the Emperor and his Wrath.

[OldVengeance]

One less so than the other.

 

The Dark Council is an established body that's actually charged with running the Empire. And many of them think they run it (or should run it) better than the Emperor does, for one reason or another. There's a degree of independence there the Wrath never exhibits (unless you mean Scourge, who straight up betrays him).

 

The difference is one claims to speak with the Emperor's authority while the other has had their own authority given (even if it's from the same source). Subtle distinction, but an important one.

 

That's of course not even taking into consideration the power bases. Warrior has nothing, except for that one dude from Nar Shadaa. Maybe. If you allowed him to live. And ultimately that's what decides it. Not just stated authority. But practical potential for the application of one's will. The warrior can only go "but the emperor said so". The inquisitor can (and does say) "I said so." And by SoR, the warrior's more or less answerable to the Dark Council anyway since the Emperor's a confirmed loony (as omnicidal maniac eldritch abominations go) and they're the only thing left that passes for a government in the Empire.

 

The Wrath is still a Sith Lord. That still gives them the same kind of authority the Dark Council have on teh basis of being Sith Lords. It's just that the Wrath has a different role than the Council.

 

Also the remaining power structure is unchanged after the Emperor betrays the Empire. The Wrath does not answer to the Dark Council.

Edited July 18, 2016 by OldVengeance

[GamermanZendrela]

The Sith code is the same. So any Sith following it fully should act more or less the same as Bane's Sith, even if the actual Rule of Two doctrine hasn't been invented yet. Plus the Rule of Two was heavily influenced by Revan's teachings as Darth Revan. So the ideas are definitely there, in proto form at the very least.

 

I would argue that Darth Malgus acts nearly perfectly in accordance with Bane's teachings even though he preceedes him by a few millenia. Particularly after the Deceived novel.

 

Didn't Bane's master think that the Sith should be on equal footing? The Brotherhood of Darkness and all that jazz. I would agree that the Rule of Two is the logical extreme of the Sith Code—emphasis on logical, since it's really the only way to avoid the crippling inefficiencies of constant in-fighting—but there are different ways of interpreting it..

[Asheris]

The Wrath is still a Sith Lord. That still gives them the same kind of authority the Dark Council have on teh basis of being Sith Lords. It's just that the Wrath has a different role than the Council.

 

Also the remaining power structure is unchanged after the Emperor betrays the Empire. The Wrath does not answer to the Dark Council.

 

And that is why the Dark Council bows to the Wrath? I don't think it's just respect

[OldVengeance]

And that is why the Dark Council bows to the Wrath? I don't think it's just respect

 

My point is that being the Empire's ultimate executioner doesn't come with as many responsibilities as the Dark Council, but it doesn't come with less authority.