How to write a Sith - Part Four (Archetypes)

[Hailyn]

Dark side fanaticism all the way.

 

[Grrwunhoooll Agaburry]

[member="Niysha"] Or they merge with the force like Darth Marr

 

[Darth Carnifex]

We can't all be as great as Darth Marr though

[member="Nulgath Zardai"]

 

[Darth Prazutis]

As mentioned previously there's a generalization people often tack onto Sith as being one dimensional, and all doom and gloom all the time. The part every one of these people miss is that Sith Lords as wicked and karked up in the head like [member="Darth Carnifex"], [member="Reverance"], [member="Matsu Xiangu"], my own Darth Prazutis and many others are all people too. They all started somewhere and their lives drove them down the paths that they've taken. Most aren't born with pure evil but rather developed it through often circumstances outside of their control. It's easy to not see over their evil nature to actually see they''re actually quite developed people.

 

[Landsknechte]

The Dark Side is a drug. A drug can take a normal person and make them do utterly reprehensible things. Usually drugs are sought out to ease a traumatic event or to fill a void. All very much in keeping with Sith that are well done in books, movies and so on. I look at Bane and see an utterly neutral, normal man twisted by his addiction.

 

[Teynara Jeralyr]

But that's the point, isn't it? The Sith are slaves to their own Ego, their own self-concept, so they can be broken down into personality types based around their favorite self-defense mechanism.

Corrupted Sith are slaves to their own egos. Just as corrupted Jedi become intransigent, complacent and ultimately tools of a broken system. Blinded by the Light, as they say.

Can't always assume that a person who calls themselves a Sith is truly representative of Sith ideology - it's like Christians who exercise racism despite 'love thy neighbour' or Muslims who kill others in the name of their faith, even though it's murder even by their own creed. These people call themselves by the name, buy into some of the doctrine, but fail to live by it. So, too, do many of those who call themselves Sith - and the ones who endure are the ones who had plenty of power but didn't have the psychological balance to put it to proper use. They became unhinged, and the screams of their spirits go to show how badly the repercussions of their perversion ultimately ended up!

EDIT: Yikes, hadn't seen page two. This is what you get for clicking notifications...

At any rate, I agree that the danger lies in the Dark Side: it invariably encourages the unhinged, and sometimes unhinges those that weren't before (Bane, as an example, though he was a little unhinged!). That's one of the reasons why many fail the Sith ideology: it demands that they strengthen themselves through sacrifice (pain etc), and that this is designed ultimately to ensure that they understand the nature of suffering, so as to be judicious (but invariably ruthless) when applying it themselves. Some, however, find themselves becoming numb to that suffering, and see themselves as having 'overcome it', so as to be utterly superior to others. Therefore, they reason, they are beyond the simple experiences of lesser mortals, and should have no time for them. They are as ants beneath their boots.

Naturally this is a problem: effective rule is determined by those who actually give a damn for the people they rule. Thus, the kind that have been so far corrupted as to only place value upon themselves is no true Sith: they have lost perspective. They have the title and the power, but not the sense, not the ethics, not the long view. They have become twisted by the very thing which granted them power, and thus are no true Sith. That's my take on it, anyway!

 

[Olom Grihk]

[member="Tirdarius"]


Funny you should bring up rulership. Many Sith are competent leaders, because while they are selfish (Sith philosophy, separated from the Dark side, still promotes a high level of self-interest), they are also pragmatic. The politician, the trickster, the scientist, and even some versions of the Monster can produce this effect, as a shrewd, capable leader need not be a moral one. These types are the Lex Luthors and Kingpins (I like comics) of the Dark Side, the people who can see the long game, and who play. Palpatine, Cadus, and many others are prone to this somewhat Machiavellan approach to ruling a nation.


Jedi have a different problem with leadership, which is detachment. As most Jedi philosophies (unlike Sith, there's not a lot of unity in overall intent) emphasize emotional and personal detachment, as well as separation from material concerns in favor of the spirituality of the force, leads to a certain weird relationship with Jedi and power. Those Jedi that do actually exert the will to rule often either forcibly develop a very calculated approach to ethics, including the willingness to sacrifice many people for the needs of many more, or to try and build some strange idealistic form of governance, which often falls apart rather heavily from the tampering of outside forces.


Now, don't take this as meaning that Jedi can't rule, or haven't ruled successfully. They have. However, ruling in a governmental capacity comes more naturally to Sith than to Jedi, purely because more Sith are trained to take and wield power, while Jedi are often trained to avoid the sort of permanent/long-term attachment normally ascribed to involvement in political rule of a planet or nation. This leads to truly fascinating issues.

 

[Teynara Jeralyr]

[member="Olom Grihk"] You're all but quoting Lumiya's monologue from Betrayal. Excellent book, and I thought it added a new line of thought on the Sith which I personally found rather compelling. As you say, the problem with Jedi is that their rules are not those of pragmatists: they try to design a system that is fair, equitable, nice. Politics is generally not nice at all: it's gritty, bloody and more than a little cutthroat. The Sith understand this, and don't try to act as though it should be otherwise. They simply learn how to stand up and do it better.

 

[Jessica Med-Beq]

[member="Darth Prazutis"] It takes a lot of posts to properly develop any given character, regardless of what relationship they have with the Force. I expect more complexity with higher post counts.

 

[Jsc]

Nevermind. This was kinda a hijack. Lulz. Carry on.

 

[Darth Grimoire]

[member="Tirdarius"]

This one's always struck me as a blend of Inquisitor and Shadow: the Darth Hauntruss of Chaos, the kind of character who is capable of doing many strange, dangerous and exotic things, and that might come from any angle.

D'aaaw oh you!~

At least some people remember Hiss Hiss in her good old days. Incidentally, Grimoire is going to be an interesting blend of many archetypes at the trajectory she is going. But, one them always remains. All my Sith are practically inspirations from Vampire Folklore. Brooding, pale and bewitching monsters with a facade of humanity on top.

 

[Lord Ghoul]

But that's the point, isn't it? The Sith are slaves to their own Ego, their own self-concept, so they can be broken down into personality types based around their favorite self-defense mechanism.

The Jedi are true to themselves and the inconsistencies therein, leaving them open to full-spectrum Force engagement. They become transcendent spirits of light while the Sith become decaying cyborgs perpetually staving off obsolescence.

On point analysis.

The Force gets complicated when you start trying to shove other philosophies into a Taoist duality framework.

 

[Klesta]

There's always a risk that one can miswrite an idealistic Sith and push their brand of idealism over their Sith-hood, in which case it becomes possible that such a character could teeter dangerously close to heresy or to the light side of the Force (and sometimes both).