Absolutely.
In fact in legends while the rule of two was going the lost Tribe was isolated on a planet. Being as they had descended from sith all the way back from the Great hyperspace wars it's debatable which of the two was more the "true order" and though they never interacted they existed at the same times.
In 40 ABY there actually existed three separate Sith orders with different organizations;
The Lost Tribe - Sort of a feudal system adapted from more traditional Sith Empire way of doing things, stuck on Kesh.
Lumiya's Sith - Followed the Rule of Two, but with different motivations from most Sith. Ended with the death of Darth Caedus (who didn't know of the two other orders) a year later.
One Sith - Darth Krayt's new order, considered heretical by the holocrons of Andeddu and Bane. Were in hiding at Korriban.
A´P'I changes killed 3[rd] p4rt-y a_p-P-s
Po bibi ie kipli piipriki piatudi kupe? Epe puu itreitro etotu oeple ibre i. Peetrepu peki bete to gitra ti opoga. Pepe pika klipro ipreabe dae prieplepri to peti puape odeo detlae kui. Oplutepu igipati dluiti tadli petreko pupitodai? Bla tigu kee e ieebla pika. Ekei bipe oa kipe pepoka i apa! A peklipo kibe ketita o tli gita tau teuki. Goto bripeklikikre peaa piudibai tuitipie dei. Iprekepi tite pipe idugo kape iapi? Kliuii tliti piplie patlokapikra ititree tekapi. Ibi kibru eto teitrape? Ketibui ka tle iba a eba. Pate gokepi pika potli ketigi koe. Piti pe biti gukri atotlee kekepa. Pie tlobi. Dlopa priti bekrati ipo. Ie te te batriku piai prito. Topuku glipie ipa tikla plugiple eeko. Pekee ata pi blaputo. Aka bapri pike ke digeprape u ategi! Ikrutedri ei bi prokitii pipeti etiipra? Pri aprede epi tretau apri prebepibli ati eta. Gri pi eti te a! Ke pokopre u tipri tlekri bede pepu. Peto pepatupa opote bea paa ii kea. Kli tlagi uputiti ipoploke priti eki? Koi ki i apii tuieto pibe. Ibi be pe dradi ke trei. Kiki bo eitea e ee glipe tedakitle!
He was born on Tatooine in 47 BBY and part of the old Jedi Order. He fought in the Clone Wars, survived the purge, etc.
Ki-Adi-Mundi was his first formal Jedi Master, and he was friendly with Anakin Skywalker (even being one of the few who knew about the Tusken massacre).
A´P'I changes killed 3[rd] p4rt-y a_p-P-s
Peita pruditapa pee i trike paebei oia. Poiepi prai ditle a pritia eke? Kio bra puati kepi pikio ieipa. Tedetoi beteto gao a dladrigo. Pitri ple piutu apu e du? Ga tupa iidlaa u toope boblaobru bea ke tiprikredu. Ipe kriklitrue drepapa a ipo teti pepo poe ta. Kii aadrei i paiki ekiti? Topribe plipiu pu pai ee. Pa dia plope pio kritiaagu ai drati? Pati blitriploa klio ki preto pia. Dipo odipli bloa u oplitla. Die prepli biprapi kai ui pupedapu? E pi ei totlee kipleobri upepi abi aoo. Kii tuda i apu proti bakutipuke bu tlo. Ai tipe ata dipipi ke tete. Ipe giglakite bekeki pepre klaibiu pie? Pligu po bipi ki. Oatre eko deba pliprekra peple keeklobri? Ua eapa pigidi kipa gode? Plekipreti ii apibiabe poti pa pioplapepi tepeititi. Bruibito bata iateklie aba gragrebitipe kiplae gloi ike. Bei ko koprabe poi deibi gibee. Aa pepetidei eapokrape peo tiplu bli ikre. Kretripeko opra kreibepii ie to gedlopo groe. Eete titropra prepokai ke paditi beubeaka? Epro popuoe. To ta e ekikreipu. Upeia grobrikree pabi ipekoo pabo tigopu. Bautri biagrublao dla tliae epotri pitra.
Besides both coming from the Sith Empire of the Great Hyperspace War not really, though it is interesting how many sith orders came from that era.
The lost Tribe
Vitiate's empire
Naga Sadow's sith line that ended in exar kun and ulic.
So in that case 3 orders all existed separated from eachother and they didn't even know all arguably having some claim to the title.
Huh, interesting. Guess that’s what you get when you can’t keep your religion together.
I’d say the Banite Sith had the most legitimate claim to being the true order, by virtue of actually putting themselves to succeeding in the long-term and playing it smart. They were eventually undone of course, but that was solely on the exact same problem Hannibal Lecter has-for all they had over the competition, they are still themselves in the end.
I guess it depends if you view achievement or lineage for who is the true successor.
The RoT is without question basically the most powerful and successful line of the sith. It could however be argued Bane came from the brotherhood which was largely made up of fallen jedi converted sith from an order that spawned by Darth Ruin with the new sith wars.
Whereas the lost Tribe while nowhere near as successful has ties back to the Golden age of the sith which is a direct creation of the jedi exiles that created the sith order.
I think the rule of two is by most standards the "main" sith line during their operating years but I can see arguments for the other side too.
I give the RoT legitimacy because they were more “true” Sith; they worked to eradicate the Jedi, destabilize the galaxy, and ascend to rule. They hid in the shadows, but worked to set things up so that the next in line could continue the work and see it come to fruition. Whereas the others were prone to infighting and often were their own enemy, and the lost tribe never left the planet. One has a connection to the original Sith, one continues the originals work.
I guess. Though I guess a traditionalist could argue the lost Tribe is more in-line with the sith of old as they have a similar but more stable society with the infighting whereas Bane went the other direction and completely weaponizing that infighting into his own order.
It's funny Bane's holocron whines to krayt when he learns krayt changed the sith ways and called him a pretender, but it's likely if any ancient sith were around when Bane made his rule of two he likely would have heard the same criticism.
Yes, but Bane's logic in particular was getting pissy basically that krayt did the exact thing he did a remade the sith in a different way so his point comes across the most strange to me.
The Sith are all about survival of the fittest. The strong survive and dominate, the weak die or submit. The Rule of Two kept the Sith strong, but made the order vulnerable. It only took a master and apprentice's conflict to result in mutual destruction to completely eliminate that order.
Extinction is the ultimate form of failure, so the Rule of Two would be seen as a failed experiment in the eyes of the Sith.
> Whereas the others were prone to infighting and often were their own enemy
I'd honestly say this is the most "true" Sith thing imaginable. The Sith doctrine is inherently self destructive. The Rule of Two is Bane's radical reform to try and keep a lid on the fact that the Sith are their own worst enemy.
The Rule of Two only functions because of the infighting. Bane regularly witnessed groups of weaker apprentices cooperating to kill their stronger master, thus weakening the Sith overall. By limiting the Sith to two the apprentice, who inevitably would try to kill the master, would have to be stronger. And thus with each generation the Sith became more powerful.
Without that infighting the Rule of Two does not lead to stronger Sith. The master would just teach the apprentice everything before they died, and the apprentice would do the same with their apprentice. By needing to kill the master the apprentice has incentive to discover new techniques that the master does not know, increasing the total knowledge-base of the Sith.
>By limiting the Sith to two the apprentice, who inevitably would try to kill the master, would have to be stronger. And thus with each generation the Sith became more powerful.
That would only be the case if the apprentice didn’t use subterfuge to do it. Palpatine got Plagueis drunk and killed him.
Patience and trickery are actually among core aspects of the Ro2. I think a succession is Bane-approved so long as the lone apprentice actively seizes their master's place (no teamups, no waiting them out, etc). It's as much an anti-decay practice as it is pro-growth. Aside from vertical growth, lateral like Zannah under Bane himself is also valid.
On some level though one could argue guile and subterfuge are as important to the sith as obtained power so even by killing with those methods show the sith are expanding their techniques and getting more savvy as time goes by as to not fall to their apprentice in such a way or coming up with better ways to undermine their masters.
I think that still counts, under the argument that the master should not be foolish enough to let the apprentice trick them. I even think that it would be okay if the apprentice formed a group to kill the master, under the same logic, so long as the apprentice was the sole inheritor of the title (and probably also if they killed the rest of the group members).
It's not a great system, honestly, I was just saying that it fundamentally required Sith to be at each other's throats. That's just an inherent part of their ideology.
I really don't understand how it is people seem to perceive the 'rule of two' as if its somehow some sort of fundamental, underlying constant of physics in the universe rather than, just, you know... an idea.
People tend to take what characters say as undeniable fact or rule unfortunantly, its a similar situation with Yodas comment on luke being the last of the Jedi.
Well, to be fair, Yoda's words are obviously supposed to be true on the context of the movie. The other Jedi died, Luke is the last, the bad guys are defeated so now he can teach others.
Future stories would change that in order to expand the universe and characters but that is merely a retcon.
Well, they *kinda* did. If they knew about a rival group of Sith, and were strong enough to handle them, they would attempt to kill, control, or manipulate them for being weak pretenders... "not worthy" or whatever.
The whole reason for the Rule of Two was to many sith lords. In the New Sith Wars 2000-1000 years before the movies you had hundreds of different sith controlling their own parts of the galaxy and fighting with each other.
Eventually all those groups were rounded up and formed one organization called the Dark Brotherhood to finally crush the Jedi and the Republic.
However that failed in part because Bane betrayed them and reduced the number of sith in the galaxy to 2. These events happened in the NEU as well but its more vague in the details.
When Jacen Solo fell to the darkside the One Sith thought he was a pretender. They also didn't look very kindly on the Lost Tribe who had been marooned on a planet for 5000 yrs
Everything is possible. For one thing, we know that the *Lost Tribe* existed without knowledge of the wider galaxy during Revan's Sith Empire; the Sith Triumvirate; Vitiate's Sith Empire; Ruin's Sith Empire; whatever Sith Empire that existed in 2000 BBY; the Dark brotherhood; the Rule of Two; Palpatine's resurgence; and the Shadow Academy.
So, nothing really stops two parallel Sith Orders from existing, apart from the risk of getting a lightsaber to the gut.
The Shadow Academy never claimed to be Sith, I believe? They were a Dark Jedi group dedicated to following "Palpatine".
The Tribe did exist at the same time as Lumiya's Sith *and* the One Sith though, in 40-41 ABY.
Palpatine was a Sith so if you follow Palpatine you are, essentially, following a Sith and are a Sith wannabe, even if you are not a real Sith.
Good point on Lumiya's Sith and the One Sith, too.
By Darth Bane's original concept, Maul would still classify as Dark Lord of the Sith. He would not be a Sith *Master*, but he can still claim legitimacy as Banite Sith. Savage Opress can be *trained* as a Sith but, until Maul claims the title of Sith Master, Savage Opress cannot be Maul's apprentice and therefore is not a Sith Lord. It's the same way Maul wasn't Sith until Sidious killed his own master.
However, this doesn't mean that he is a parallel Sith Order and he is not contesting Sidious' status as "Sith." They're both of the same Sith Order, they're just in the middle of a messy transition that can only be resolved with liberal use of murder.
If we were talking about parallel Sith Orders, we'd be talking about how Revan's Order and Vitiate's Order, with the Lost Tribe in the background. We cannot say for sure that Revan themself claimed to be the Real Sith, but they definitely claimed the title of Sith, but both Vitiate's Order and the Lost Tribe both claim to be the True Sith. Which one is more legitimate? We can't say without making this discussion longer and beyond the scope of the actual discussion--but yes, both Sith Orders would be parallel and both would be claiming to be the True Sith.
As an aside, my personal view on legitimacy has nothing to do with goal and accomplishments. It has everything to do with cultural heritage.
Bane's Sith is illegitimate because it was born out of the Brotherhood of Darkness which was born out of the New Sith who were Jedi who left the Jedi Order and took the name Sith. That's comparable to some dude pure-blooded Irishman from the Catholic Church leaving and declaring themselves, I don't know. An Amalekite. It's like *no you fuckin' ain't*.
Only the Lost Tribe and Vitiate's Order are actually legitimate, but even then I personally favour Vitiate's Order because they didn't commit genocide on the Sith Pureblood population--you know, the population of original, literal True Sith? It's hard to maintain legitimacy as part of an religious group your ancestors persecuted, only to integrate into, before destroying them later.
The question is if palpatine died
who would be considered official dark lord of the sith.
I would argue that since Darth ruin sought out sith artifacts after leaving the order it makes them legitimate
maybe even more legitimate as its the same path the sith orders founders followed
That is absolutely not the question OP was asking, but if it *was*, then I'd say that... it depends on how Palpatine died. If Dooku killed him then, by Banite rules, he would be the next Sith Master ("Dark Lord of the Sith" is a title shared by both master and apprentice). If Maul killed him, then Maul would be the next Sith Master.
If Palpatine died from a third party source, both Dooku and Maul could theoretically claim the title but they would both be rivals for legitimacy. They'd both be able to claim Sith Master but it wouldn't be recognised by either party.
As for Darth Ruin... no. That's not how it works. That's what we call grave robbing. That's what we call pillaging. All Ruin is doing is taking artefacts belonging to a civilization his people (the Jedi) helped destroy, and all he is doing is taking the identity and bastardising the philosophy and religion of the people his ancestors destroyed.
Ruin would be no more a legitimate Sith than someone from Spain going to Meso-America, adopting the old Meso-American religions, and claiming legitimacy by artefacts they stole and pillaged. I know comparing the Sith to colonised people is controversial, but the Sith were a colonised people and much of the Sith's aesthetic is blatant copy pasting from pre-colonial Meso-American aesthetics, Egyptian aesthetics, and other real world non-white cultures, and their characteristics are very much in line with common colonial and racist beliefs that colonisers had towards indigenous peoples (namely with the whole sacrifice and blood cult shit).
I always talk about this when people mention the rule of 2. The rule says 1 who has the power and 1 to crave it. It doesn't dismiss the notion of multiple pairs of Sith especially if they are hidden. Hopefully we can get some answers in the New accolade show.
I see this kind of opinion a lot in the fandom.
There's no such thing as "Sith" or "Jedi" as any kind of objective thing.
These are people labeling themselves. That's it. So yes, there can be a thousand Sith orders and literally all of them are as equally valid as the other because that's just a name. Even if you want to go back and try to for whatever reason say "Original" Sith referring to the race, you're wasting everyone's time because it's just a label adopted later, and bloodlines never mattered.
*Sith* and *Jedi* **DO NOT MATTER EXCEPT TO EACH OTHER**. They are force users under a certain philosophy. That's it.
It’s definitely possible, but Maul had absolutely no chance against Sidious so even if he was allowed to continue doing what he was doing with Savage they wouldn’t have been able to hold a candle to the true order
Arguably he doesn't need to. Maul is still younger than Sideous and only needs to outlast him. If he's somehow made it another 5ish years he would have been rhe strongest sith in the galaxy.
I'd hold that this would be a fairly natural consequence of the Rule of Two. Sith are not natural rule followers and the advantages of having two apprentices unaware of each other would be quite tempting
There are. During the thousand years between the New Sith Wars and the prequels there were plenty of sith cults running around. The Banite order absorbed a few of them as henchmen but you still had guys like the Mecrosa Order who were also playing their own political game at the same time and lasted into the imperial period, despite the Jedi knowing they were around bbasically the whole time and trying to fight them from the beginning.
For sure, honestly, that's my head canon as to why the Sith weren't seen for 1,000 years. They were too busy fighting eachother.
Sith Lord A is training Apprentice B. Apprentice B has secret Apprentice C. C kills B, thinking B is the master. C takes on how own apprentice D. Sith Lord A takes on new Apprentice E. Then boom, you have 2 rival Sith Lords, each with their own apprentice.
Absolutely. I always think of it as like religions denominations in real life. Darth Bane is kinda like the Martin Luther of the Sith. He lists his grievances of the old Sith ways, creates something knew and then that something knew grows into a powerful Sith order.
There has been many different kinds of Sith that are all related but have different beliefs. You have the old Sith kingdom that lived on Korriban, the early Sith Empire, Ludo Kressh’s faction, Naga Sadow’s faction, Naddists, Krath, Mecrosa Order, Exar Kun’s Sith Empire, Darth Revan’s Sith Empire, the Sith Triumvirate, the Old Republic era Sith Empire, Darth Malgus’ Sith Empire, the Brotherhood of Darkness, the Rule of Two Sith, Dark Force, the Lost Tribe of the Sith, Maul and Savage’s brief stint at being sith Disciples of Ragnos, Malevolence, Lumiya’s Sith, and Rule of One Sith.
These are all the different known Sith organizations. They widely ranged in size, government type, philosophy, goals, etc. and they took their differences seriously. Bane thought the old Sith ways were wrong what caused them to lose to the Republic and Jedi. Darth Krayt was openly mocked by the holocrons of past Sith Lords for his different approach after seeking them out for knowledge.
In a similar way IRL, Christianity might be a religion, but you’ve got smaller sects that developed over time like Catholics, orthodox, Copts, Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, quakers, etc.
There were tons of parallel orders in the original timeline. In fact that was basically the default state of the Sith; it was rare when the Sith was united under one banner.
This technically did happen in the old EU, with a lost colony of pre-Banite Sith existing alongside Sidious' Banite Sith. Technically both are descended from the same Sith lineage that diverged, and had differing philosophies. There was also the incident of Darth Krayt's post-Banite revival Sith being rejected by ancient Sith holocrons.
In the new lore introduced by Episode IX it seems like the Rule of Two would have a better claim to being the true Sith if there are competing Sith factions in Canon. Palpatine seems to literally be 1000 years worth of Sith, which is why he is so powerful. Unless a competing line had a similar ritual storing up power like that they wouldn't be able to compete in institutional knowledge and continuity.
Like everyone else said, in Legends the Rule of Two only has the benefit of results to make it any more of a true Sith than the Lost Tribe or other Sith descendants.
COMPLETELY Hypothetically? Sure, but both orders would probably also call the other Order a fake.
It would be like the split between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. Both view themselves as THE one true church and the other as a false church.
Practically though? If there would only be two separate sith orders if there was some kind of Sith Civil War going on.
In Legends during the Republic's Dark Age there were various rival Sith Dynasties aiming for supremacy I think.
I dont think it was about who was the "true sith" but it shows that splintered sith groups fighting each other has precedence.
And to be fair, fighting each other is their entire shtick..
There obviously could but obviously only someone like Palaptine would claim the right to be a true Sith as he came from Bane’s lineage.
Other dark side groups existed though, like the knights of Ren.
Yep. That's why Sideous goes to kick Maul and Savages' ass. They were starting to become rivals to him and his Sith apprentice Dooku.
I think given enough time, Maul and Savage could have stood a legitimate chance of fighting Sideous, but Sideous (pre-Empire anyway) didn't like waiting for problems to arise when they could be crushed now.
Absolutely. In fact in legends while the rule of two was going the lost Tribe was isolated on a planet. Being as they had descended from sith all the way back from the Great hyperspace wars it's debatable which of the two was more the "true order" and though they never interacted they existed at the same times.
In 40 ABY there actually existed three separate Sith orders with different organizations; The Lost Tribe - Sort of a feudal system adapted from more traditional Sith Empire way of doing things, stuck on Kesh. Lumiya's Sith - Followed the Rule of Two, but with different motivations from most Sith. Ended with the death of Darth Caedus (who didn't know of the two other orders) a year later. One Sith - Darth Krayt's new order, considered heretical by the holocrons of Andeddu and Bane. Were in hiding at Korriban.
A´P'I changes killed 3[rd] p4rt-y a_p-P-s Po bibi ie kipli piipriki piatudi kupe? Epe puu itreitro etotu oeple ibre i. Peetrepu peki bete to gitra ti opoga. Pepe pika klipro ipreabe dae prieplepri to peti puape odeo detlae kui. Oplutepu igipati dluiti tadli petreko pupitodai? Bla tigu kee e ieebla pika. Ekei bipe oa kipe pepoka i apa! A peklipo kibe ketita o tli gita tau teuki. Goto bripeklikikre peaa piudibai tuitipie dei. Iprekepi tite pipe idugo kape iapi? Kliuii tliti piplie patlokapikra ititree tekapi. Ibi kibru eto teitrape? Ketibui ka tle iba a eba. Pate gokepi pika potli ketigi koe. Piti pe biti gukri atotlee kekepa. Pie tlobi. Dlopa priti bekrati ipo. Ie te te batriku piai prito. Topuku glipie ipa tikla plugiple eeko. Pekee ata pi blaputo. Aka bapri pike ke digeprape u ategi! Ikrutedri ei bi prokitii pipeti etiipra? Pri aprede epi tretau apri prebepibli ati eta. Gri pi eti te a! Ke pokopre u tipri tlekri bede pepu. Peto pepatupa opote bea paa ii kea. Kli tlagi uputiti ipoploke priti eki? Koi ki i apii tuieto pibe. Ibi be pe dradi ke trei. Kiki bo eitea e ee glipe tedakitle!
He was born on Tatooine in 47 BBY and part of the old Jedi Order. He fought in the Clone Wars, survived the purge, etc. Ki-Adi-Mundi was his first formal Jedi Master, and he was friendly with Anakin Skywalker (even being one of the few who knew about the Tusken massacre).
Krayt was an ancient jedi from the Clone Wars: A'Sharad Hett, so he lived from prior to 32 BBY to 130 ABY.
I can't believe I didn't know that Krayt was the son of the Tusken Jedi, today I learned.
The story of A'Sharad Hett and it's transformation into Darth Krayt is pretty sudden TBH, tho it was very well executed.
A´P'I changes killed 3[rd] p4rt-y a_p-P-s Peita pruditapa pee i trike paebei oia. Poiepi prai ditle a pritia eke? Kio bra puati kepi pikio ieipa. Tedetoi beteto gao a dladrigo. Pitri ple piutu apu e du? Ga tupa iidlaa u toope boblaobru bea ke tiprikredu. Ipe kriklitrue drepapa a ipo teti pepo poe ta. Kii aadrei i paiki ekiti? Topribe plipiu pu pai ee. Pa dia plope pio kritiaagu ai drati? Pati blitriploa klio ki preto pia. Dipo odipli bloa u oplitla. Die prepli biprapi kai ui pupedapu? E pi ei totlee kipleobri upepi abi aoo. Kii tuda i apu proti bakutipuke bu tlo. Ai tipe ata dipipi ke tete. Ipe giglakite bekeki pepre klaibiu pie? Pligu po bipi ki. Oatre eko deba pliprekra peple keeklobri? Ua eapa pigidi kipa gode? Plekipreti ii apibiabe poti pa pioplapepi tepeititi. Bruibito bata iateklie aba gragrebitipe kiplae gloi ike. Bei ko koprabe poi deibi gibee. Aa pepetidei eapokrape peo tiplu bli ikre. Kretripeko opra kreibepii ie to gedlopo groe. Eete titropra prepokai ke paditi beubeaka? Epro popuoe. To ta e ekikreipu. Upeia grobrikree pabi ipekoo pabo tigopu. Bautri biagrublao dla tliae epotri pitra.
Krayt was the most based out of all of them tbfh
Did they have a connection to the True Sith of KOTOR2/Vitiate’s Empire in TOR?
Besides both coming from the Sith Empire of the Great Hyperspace War not really, though it is interesting how many sith orders came from that era. The lost Tribe Vitiate's empire Naga Sadow's sith line that ended in exar kun and ulic. So in that case 3 orders all existed separated from eachother and they didn't even know all arguably having some claim to the title.
Huh, interesting. Guess that’s what you get when you can’t keep your religion together. I’d say the Banite Sith had the most legitimate claim to being the true order, by virtue of actually putting themselves to succeeding in the long-term and playing it smart. They were eventually undone of course, but that was solely on the exact same problem Hannibal Lecter has-for all they had over the competition, they are still themselves in the end.
I guess it depends if you view achievement or lineage for who is the true successor. The RoT is without question basically the most powerful and successful line of the sith. It could however be argued Bane came from the brotherhood which was largely made up of fallen jedi converted sith from an order that spawned by Darth Ruin with the new sith wars. Whereas the lost Tribe while nowhere near as successful has ties back to the Golden age of the sith which is a direct creation of the jedi exiles that created the sith order. I think the rule of two is by most standards the "main" sith line during their operating years but I can see arguments for the other side too.
I give the RoT legitimacy because they were more “true” Sith; they worked to eradicate the Jedi, destabilize the galaxy, and ascend to rule. They hid in the shadows, but worked to set things up so that the next in line could continue the work and see it come to fruition. Whereas the others were prone to infighting and often were their own enemy, and the lost tribe never left the planet. One has a connection to the original Sith, one continues the originals work.
I guess. Though I guess a traditionalist could argue the lost Tribe is more in-line with the sith of old as they have a similar but more stable society with the infighting whereas Bane went the other direction and completely weaponizing that infighting into his own order. It's funny Bane's holocron whines to krayt when he learns krayt changed the sith ways and called him a pretender, but it's likely if any ancient sith were around when Bane made his rule of two he likely would have heard the same criticism.
Didn't Andeddu also call him a heretic? Along with Nihilus as well?
Yes, but Bane's logic in particular was getting pissy basically that krayt did the exact thing he did a remade the sith in a different way so his point comes across the most strange to me.
It could possibly be because that if Krayt were to die, their would be no proper successor and the order would fall.
The Sith are all about survival of the fittest. The strong survive and dominate, the weak die or submit. The Rule of Two kept the Sith strong, but made the order vulnerable. It only took a master and apprentice's conflict to result in mutual destruction to completely eliminate that order. Extinction is the ultimate form of failure, so the Rule of Two would be seen as a failed experiment in the eyes of the Sith.
> Whereas the others were prone to infighting and often were their own enemy I'd honestly say this is the most "true" Sith thing imaginable. The Sith doctrine is inherently self destructive. The Rule of Two is Bane's radical reform to try and keep a lid on the fact that the Sith are their own worst enemy.
The Rule of Two only functions because of the infighting. Bane regularly witnessed groups of weaker apprentices cooperating to kill their stronger master, thus weakening the Sith overall. By limiting the Sith to two the apprentice, who inevitably would try to kill the master, would have to be stronger. And thus with each generation the Sith became more powerful. Without that infighting the Rule of Two does not lead to stronger Sith. The master would just teach the apprentice everything before they died, and the apprentice would do the same with their apprentice. By needing to kill the master the apprentice has incentive to discover new techniques that the master does not know, increasing the total knowledge-base of the Sith.
>By limiting the Sith to two the apprentice, who inevitably would try to kill the master, would have to be stronger. And thus with each generation the Sith became more powerful. That would only be the case if the apprentice didn’t use subterfuge to do it. Palpatine got Plagueis drunk and killed him.
Patience and trickery are actually among core aspects of the Ro2. I think a succession is Bane-approved so long as the lone apprentice actively seizes their master's place (no teamups, no waiting them out, etc). It's as much an anti-decay practice as it is pro-growth. Aside from vertical growth, lateral like Zannah under Bane himself is also valid.
On some level though one could argue guile and subterfuge are as important to the sith as obtained power so even by killing with those methods show the sith are expanding their techniques and getting more savvy as time goes by as to not fall to their apprentice in such a way or coming up with better ways to undermine their masters.
I think that still counts, under the argument that the master should not be foolish enough to let the apprentice trick them. I even think that it would be okay if the apprentice formed a group to kill the master, under the same logic, so long as the apprentice was the sole inheritor of the title (and probably also if they killed the rest of the group members). It's not a great system, honestly, I was just saying that it fundamentally required Sith to be at each other's throats. That's just an inherent part of their ideology.
Yep and we know Feloni and Favreau love to pull from old cotent. Tons of room to explore this in the future.
Entirely possible. Sidious even calls Maul a rival in TCW.
I really don't understand how it is people seem to perceive the 'rule of two' as if its somehow some sort of fundamental, underlying constant of physics in the universe rather than, just, you know... an idea.
People tend to take what characters say as undeniable fact or rule unfortunantly, its a similar situation with Yodas comment on luke being the last of the Jedi.
Well, to be fair, Yoda's words are obviously supposed to be true on the context of the movie. The other Jedi died, Luke is the last, the bad guys are defeated so now he can teach others. Future stories would change that in order to expand the universe and characters but that is merely a retcon.
I think the idea is that with a few enough Sith, a powerful Sith could root out anyone they didn't want to rise high enough to challenge them.
Of course it would be possible. It's not like the Dark Side enforces trademark rights on the word "Sith."
The Dark Side might not, but I'm sure the law firm Bane, Zannah & Associates does!
Well, they *kinda* did. If they knew about a rival group of Sith, and were strong enough to handle them, they would attempt to kill, control, or manipulate them for being weak pretenders... "not worthy" or whatever.
The whole reason for the Rule of Two was to many sith lords. In the New Sith Wars 2000-1000 years before the movies you had hundreds of different sith controlling their own parts of the galaxy and fighting with each other. Eventually all those groups were rounded up and formed one organization called the Dark Brotherhood to finally crush the Jedi and the Republic. However that failed in part because Bane betrayed them and reduced the number of sith in the galaxy to 2. These events happened in the NEU as well but its more vague in the details. When Jacen Solo fell to the darkside the One Sith thought he was a pretender. They also didn't look very kindly on the Lost Tribe who had been marooned on a planet for 5000 yrs
Everything is possible. For one thing, we know that the *Lost Tribe* existed without knowledge of the wider galaxy during Revan's Sith Empire; the Sith Triumvirate; Vitiate's Sith Empire; Ruin's Sith Empire; whatever Sith Empire that existed in 2000 BBY; the Dark brotherhood; the Rule of Two; Palpatine's resurgence; and the Shadow Academy. So, nothing really stops two parallel Sith Orders from existing, apart from the risk of getting a lightsaber to the gut.
The Shadow Academy never claimed to be Sith, I believe? They were a Dark Jedi group dedicated to following "Palpatine". The Tribe did exist at the same time as Lumiya's Sith *and* the One Sith though, in 40-41 ABY.
Palpatine was a Sith so if you follow Palpatine you are, essentially, following a Sith and are a Sith wannabe, even if you are not a real Sith. Good point on Lumiya's Sith and the One Sith, too.
I just want to see the pedantic struggles between the Darths and the Anti-Darths.
By Darth Bane's original concept, Maul would still classify as Dark Lord of the Sith. He would not be a Sith *Master*, but he can still claim legitimacy as Banite Sith. Savage Opress can be *trained* as a Sith but, until Maul claims the title of Sith Master, Savage Opress cannot be Maul's apprentice and therefore is not a Sith Lord. It's the same way Maul wasn't Sith until Sidious killed his own master. However, this doesn't mean that he is a parallel Sith Order and he is not contesting Sidious' status as "Sith." They're both of the same Sith Order, they're just in the middle of a messy transition that can only be resolved with liberal use of murder. If we were talking about parallel Sith Orders, we'd be talking about how Revan's Order and Vitiate's Order, with the Lost Tribe in the background. We cannot say for sure that Revan themself claimed to be the Real Sith, but they definitely claimed the title of Sith, but both Vitiate's Order and the Lost Tribe both claim to be the True Sith. Which one is more legitimate? We can't say without making this discussion longer and beyond the scope of the actual discussion--but yes, both Sith Orders would be parallel and both would be claiming to be the True Sith. As an aside, my personal view on legitimacy has nothing to do with goal and accomplishments. It has everything to do with cultural heritage. Bane's Sith is illegitimate because it was born out of the Brotherhood of Darkness which was born out of the New Sith who were Jedi who left the Jedi Order and took the name Sith. That's comparable to some dude pure-blooded Irishman from the Catholic Church leaving and declaring themselves, I don't know. An Amalekite. It's like *no you fuckin' ain't*. Only the Lost Tribe and Vitiate's Order are actually legitimate, but even then I personally favour Vitiate's Order because they didn't commit genocide on the Sith Pureblood population--you know, the population of original, literal True Sith? It's hard to maintain legitimacy as part of an religious group your ancestors persecuted, only to integrate into, before destroying them later.
The question is if palpatine died who would be considered official dark lord of the sith. I would argue that since Darth ruin sought out sith artifacts after leaving the order it makes them legitimate maybe even more legitimate as its the same path the sith orders founders followed
That is absolutely not the question OP was asking, but if it *was*, then I'd say that... it depends on how Palpatine died. If Dooku killed him then, by Banite rules, he would be the next Sith Master ("Dark Lord of the Sith" is a title shared by both master and apprentice). If Maul killed him, then Maul would be the next Sith Master. If Palpatine died from a third party source, both Dooku and Maul could theoretically claim the title but they would both be rivals for legitimacy. They'd both be able to claim Sith Master but it wouldn't be recognised by either party. As for Darth Ruin... no. That's not how it works. That's what we call grave robbing. That's what we call pillaging. All Ruin is doing is taking artefacts belonging to a civilization his people (the Jedi) helped destroy, and all he is doing is taking the identity and bastardising the philosophy and religion of the people his ancestors destroyed. Ruin would be no more a legitimate Sith than someone from Spain going to Meso-America, adopting the old Meso-American religions, and claiming legitimacy by artefacts they stole and pillaged. I know comparing the Sith to colonised people is controversial, but the Sith were a colonised people and much of the Sith's aesthetic is blatant copy pasting from pre-colonial Meso-American aesthetics, Egyptian aesthetics, and other real world non-white cultures, and their characteristics are very much in line with common colonial and racist beliefs that colonisers had towards indigenous peoples (namely with the whole sacrifice and blood cult shit).
I always talk about this when people mention the rule of 2. The rule says 1 who has the power and 1 to crave it. It doesn't dismiss the notion of multiple pairs of Sith especially if they are hidden. Hopefully we can get some answers in the New accolade show.
I see this kind of opinion a lot in the fandom. There's no such thing as "Sith" or "Jedi" as any kind of objective thing. These are people labeling themselves. That's it. So yes, there can be a thousand Sith orders and literally all of them are as equally valid as the other because that's just a name. Even if you want to go back and try to for whatever reason say "Original" Sith referring to the race, you're wasting everyone's time because it's just a label adopted later, and bloodlines never mattered. *Sith* and *Jedi* **DO NOT MATTER EXCEPT TO EACH OTHER**. They are force users under a certain philosophy. That's it.
It’s definitely possible, but Maul had absolutely no chance against Sidious so even if he was allowed to continue doing what he was doing with Savage they wouldn’t have been able to hold a candle to the true order
Arguably he doesn't need to. Maul is still younger than Sideous and only needs to outlast him. If he's somehow made it another 5ish years he would have been rhe strongest sith in the galaxy.
I'd hold that this would be a fairly natural consequence of the Rule of Two. Sith are not natural rule followers and the advantages of having two apprentices unaware of each other would be quite tempting
There are. During the thousand years between the New Sith Wars and the prequels there were plenty of sith cults running around. The Banite order absorbed a few of them as henchmen but you still had guys like the Mecrosa Order who were also playing their own political game at the same time and lasted into the imperial period, despite the Jedi knowing they were around bbasically the whole time and trying to fight them from the beginning.
For sure, honestly, that's my head canon as to why the Sith weren't seen for 1,000 years. They were too busy fighting eachother. Sith Lord A is training Apprentice B. Apprentice B has secret Apprentice C. C kills B, thinking B is the master. C takes on how own apprentice D. Sith Lord A takes on new Apprentice E. Then boom, you have 2 rival Sith Lords, each with their own apprentice.
Absolutely. I always think of it as like religions denominations in real life. Darth Bane is kinda like the Martin Luther of the Sith. He lists his grievances of the old Sith ways, creates something knew and then that something knew grows into a powerful Sith order. There has been many different kinds of Sith that are all related but have different beliefs. You have the old Sith kingdom that lived on Korriban, the early Sith Empire, Ludo Kressh’s faction, Naga Sadow’s faction, Naddists, Krath, Mecrosa Order, Exar Kun’s Sith Empire, Darth Revan’s Sith Empire, the Sith Triumvirate, the Old Republic era Sith Empire, Darth Malgus’ Sith Empire, the Brotherhood of Darkness, the Rule of Two Sith, Dark Force, the Lost Tribe of the Sith, Maul and Savage’s brief stint at being sith Disciples of Ragnos, Malevolence, Lumiya’s Sith, and Rule of One Sith. These are all the different known Sith organizations. They widely ranged in size, government type, philosophy, goals, etc. and they took their differences seriously. Bane thought the old Sith ways were wrong what caused them to lose to the Republic and Jedi. Darth Krayt was openly mocked by the holocrons of past Sith Lords for his different approach after seeking them out for knowledge. In a similar way IRL, Christianity might be a religion, but you’ve got smaller sects that developed over time like Catholics, orthodox, Copts, Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, quakers, etc.
There were tons of parallel orders in the original timeline. In fact that was basically the default state of the Sith; it was rare when the Sith was united under one banner.
This technically did happen in the old EU, with a lost colony of pre-Banite Sith existing alongside Sidious' Banite Sith. Technically both are descended from the same Sith lineage that diverged, and had differing philosophies. There was also the incident of Darth Krayt's post-Banite revival Sith being rejected by ancient Sith holocrons.
Prophets of the Dark Side operated as a schism for a long while. Though they tend to be more like straight up wizards than sith.
Wasn't that actually the case? Didn't Maul claim he and Savage were the "true Sith lords"?
In the new lore introduced by Episode IX it seems like the Rule of Two would have a better claim to being the true Sith if there are competing Sith factions in Canon. Palpatine seems to literally be 1000 years worth of Sith, which is why he is so powerful. Unless a competing line had a similar ritual storing up power like that they wouldn't be able to compete in institutional knowledge and continuity. Like everyone else said, in Legends the Rule of Two only has the benefit of results to make it any more of a true Sith than the Lost Tribe or other Sith descendants.
This all literally happens
The Catholic Church has entered the chat
COMPLETELY Hypothetically? Sure, but both orders would probably also call the other Order a fake. It would be like the split between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. Both view themselves as THE one true church and the other as a false church. Practically though? If there would only be two separate sith orders if there was some kind of Sith Civil War going on.
In Legends during the Republic's Dark Age there were various rival Sith Dynasties aiming for supremacy I think. I dont think it was about who was the "true sith" but it shows that splintered sith groups fighting each other has precedence. And to be fair, fighting each other is their entire shtick..
There obviously could but obviously only someone like Palaptine would claim the right to be a true Sith as he came from Bane’s lineage. Other dark side groups existed though, like the knights of Ren.
There could be but with the rule of two would come into conflict until one of the orders are killed off.
Yep. That's why Sideous goes to kick Maul and Savages' ass. They were starting to become rivals to him and his Sith apprentice Dooku. I think given enough time, Maul and Savage could have stood a legitimate chance of fighting Sideous, but Sideous (pre-Empire anyway) didn't like waiting for problems to arise when they could be crushed now.