Jump to content

The Jedi Civil War


Ulicus

Recommended Posts

Just curious as to why Obsidian felt the need to change the name of the Sith War in KotOR to the "Jedi Civil War" - KotOR frequently had it billed as a war between the Republic and the growing (neo) Sith Empire.

 

One: whilst it might be true that a lot of people don't know the difference between Jedi and Sith, the Republic military and the Jedi themselves *certainly* didn't see it as a "Jedi Civil War" during KotOR 1- it was always "the war against the Sith". So why military figures and Jedi would refer to it as the "Jedi Civil War" in KotOR 2 is beyond me. The entire conflict was the Sith fleet fighting the Republic fleet.

 

Two: Yes, though the Republic might not have been the true target as Kreia says, whilst it might have always been the Jedi that the Sith were aiming for: the Republic and the rest of the galaxy wouldn't look at it that way, and wouldn't refer to it as "the Jedi Civil War".

 

Three: Revan was *no longer a Jedi* (in their eyes or the eyes of the Republic at least), so how could it be a "Jedi Civil War"?

 

I mean, the Great Schism really *was* a Jedi Civil War. The Jedi philosophies had not been truly set in stone, some Jedi expermented with the dark-side, Xendor and all his Jedi followers went into battle against the Jedi etc - they got beaten, fled to the Sith worlds, took them over and established a dark side Empire. After which they were no longer Jedi, they were Sith Lords.

 

The war in KotoR was nothign like a war between Jedi with the Republic caught in the middle- it was pretty clearly a war of the Sith against the Republic, with the Jedi acting as elite troops/whatever in the Republic's service.

 

I know that "the Sith War" was already taken, but KotOR did acknowledge this by referring to the war against Kun as the "last Sith War" or "the Great Sith War"- so what possible reason did Obsidian have for messing with the continuity? I mean, it's only minor but it really annoyed me at the start of the game. Especially since it's such a *small* thing to have changed, yet so damn irritating.

 

It doesn't matter that much... I just... don't... understand... :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I have at least part of an answer in the story.

 

After the war was over, most citizens of the galaxy saw it not as a war against the Sith, but a Jedi civil war, since most of the Dark Jedi/Sith under Revan's command were former Jedi turned bad. Also, many races in the galaxy see little difference between the Jedi and Sith. They see them almost as one and the same.

 

Thats the best answer I can give.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Atton explains this when he's locked in a cell and again when you first leave Peragus.

 

Essentially, citizens of the galaxy distrust jedi and sith alike, not understanding them and not seeing much of a difference. From their perspective, all the great sith of the time were jedi first, and so sith is more of an epithet than a reality to them. Also, many jedi inactions cost as many lives as sith actions, so the renaming is kind of like pointing out the uselessness of the war with Malak, and the lack of gain that winning presented the average republican. Not saying this is fair, but this is how atton presents the perspective of non-jedi on the Ravan/Malak thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

History changes the name. Its civil war because it was started with Jedi leaders. Revan was seen as a jedi for the common people.

The sith army was made of old Republic troops who switch sides.

 

Like the south was called confederate army and might have been a country. Why did the south call themselves confederate army. Before the U.S. constitution was made the U.S. Confederate constitution that has very different powers. It didn't work so we use U.S. constitution shortly after.

 

Point. The people causing the war were force user and the just believed in different ways of using the force. The main group believed in the jedi order while the other group believe in the sith teacing. The American civil war fought between Yankees and Confederates is not called the confederate war.

 

Also I think Republic after the war wanted to fixs things quickly as possible and just blamed everything on the Jedi. No jedi no war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sith War is the war with Exar Kun, the one that Jolee fought in before he left the order.

 

The Mandalorian wars are, obviously, the war where the Mandalorians atttacked the Republic. Revan defeated them and enter...

 

The Jedi Civil War, a war fought between the 'defecters' of the Jedi Order (Revan, Malak) and the Jedi Order (Bastila, Vander, etc. ).

 

 

The Great Hyperspace war was the war with Naga Sadow if I remember right. Which happened a thousand years before The Sith War. I'll check.

 

Jaguars4ever I must have missed your post since you said the same thing I did. ;)

"They might not call you a Jedi anymore, but believe me, you are. It's not the sort of thing that you just stop being. You're stuck with it, just like you're stuck being the General." ~Bao-Dur, Knights of the Old Republic: The Sith Lords
Link to comment
Share on other sites

History changes the name. Its civil war because it was started with Jedi leaders. Revan was seen as a jedi for the common people.

The sith army was made of old Republic troops who switch sides. 

 

Like the south was called confederate army and might have been a country. Why did the south call themselves confederate army. Before the U.S. constitution was made the U.S. Confederate constitution that has very different powers. It didn't work so we use U.S. constitution  shortly after.

 

Point. The people causing the war were force user and the just believed in different ways of using the force. The main group believed in the jedi order while the other group believe in the sith teacing. The American civil war fought between Yankees and Confederates is not called the confederate war.

 

Also I think Republic after the war wanted to fixs things quickly as possible and just blamed everything on the Jedi. No jedi no war.

 

Indeed a bit like how the First World War was called 'The Great War' (until World War II came along) o:). History is always being made and as long as it's always being made, then history will always change ;).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to conversations in the game, it would seem that after KotOR the war evolved from a massive 'Republic vs. Mandalorian Wars veterans' war into a struggle between the Sith and Jedi.

 

Before the U.S. constitution was made the U.S. Confederate constitution that has very different powers. It didn't work so we use U.S. constitution  shortly after.

I think its name is the Articles of Confederation.

"Who could blame Skynet? He's such a cute, innocent, steel-bolted robot."

-Gauntlet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't changed at all. KotOR 1 was seen through the eyes of the Jedi, mostly, like every Star Wars movie to date for the most part (even A New Hope, etc. was built around Luke becoming a Jedi, and the Rebellion was founded around Jedi principles. This is explored more deeplyin KotOR 2). As was said above, the general populace didn't see a real difference between the Sith and the Jedi -- they were two branches of the same religion warring over doctrine while everyone else burned. The events were the same, but they are presented from a different perspective, which is one of the best appeals of KotOR 2 -- the destinction between Jedi and Sith is not so great; the Jedi are not so good, and the Sith not so evil. At least until the end, when the game in general falls apart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't changed at all. KotOR 1 was seen through the eyes of the Jedi, mostly, like every Star Wars movie to date for the most part (even A New Hope, etc. was built around Luke becoming a Jedi, and the Rebellion was founded around Jedi principles. This is explored more deeplyin KotOR 2). As was said above, the general populace didn't see a real difference between the Sith and the Jedi -- they were two branches of the same religion warring over doctrine while everyone else burned. The events were the same, but they are presented from a different perspective, which is one of the best appeals of KotOR 2 -- the destinction between Jedi and Sith is not so great; the Jedi are not so good, and the Sith not so evil. At least until the end, when the game in general falls apart.

 

The whole 'Jedi are good' stuff only really showed up in Star Wars III - Revenge of the Jedi (Or what some call Star Wars 6: Return of the Jedi) when Lucas decided that all good stems from not facing your fears, not feeling emotion, but being at peace with oneself.

 

Personally, the Semi-Sith in KOTOR2 (the Betrayer :ermm: ) is more of a Jedi than Luke will ever be, simply because she's not going to be blinded by the whole Jedi Code stuffs. Once you detatch yourself from emotion, are you really human?

 

Jedi don't always do good things. Sith can do bad things for a good cause. All in all, we're just people when it comes down to it. And everything we do will have both good and bad repercussions.

Fnord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I can remember in K2 they call it the Jedi Civil War because they said that the Republic and the citizens couldn't tell the difference between the Jedi and Sith anymore since the Sith were once Jedi themselves.

 

In K1 it was simply another Sith War. In fact if you kinda look at it Exar Kun and his apprentice Ulic Qel-Droma were Jedi also so wouldn't that war be a Jedi Civil War also?

 

Even though K2 called it a Jedi Civil War, as I see it, it was an extension of the Sith War so it's another Sith War. I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I can remember in K2 they call it the Jedi Civil War because they said that the Republic and the citizens couldn't tell the difference between the Jedi and Sith anymore since the Sith were once Jedi themselves.

 

In K1 it was simply another Sith War. In fact if you kinda look at it Exar Kun and his apprentice Ulic Qel-Droma were Jedi also so wouldn't that war be a Jedi Civil War also?

 

Even though K2 called it a Jedi Civil War, as I see it, it was an extension of the Sith War so it's another Sith War. I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

 

Yeah thats exactly what I thought.

It's because no-one trusts the Jedi Knights anymore, because they think the Jedi and the Sith are the same, they think if you wield a Lightsaber, your a Jedi. And of course there was the huge war, between the "Jedi".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't changed at all. KotOR 1 was seen through the eyes of the Jedi, mostly, like every Star Wars movie to date for the most part (even A New Hope, etc. was built around Luke becoming a Jedi, and the Rebellion was founded around Jedi principles. This is explored more deeplyin KotOR 2). As was said above, the general populace didn't see a real difference between the Sith and the Jedi -- they were two branches of the same religion warring over doctrine while everyone else burned. The events were the same, but they are presented from a different perspective, which is one of the best appeals of KotOR 2 -- the destinction between Jedi and Sith is not so great; the Jedi are not so good, and the Sith not so evil. At least until the end, when the game in general falls apart.

 

The whole 'Jedi are good' stuff only really showed up in Star Wars III - Revenge of the Jedi (Or what some call Star Wars 6: Return of the Jedi) when Lucas decided that all good stems from not facing your fears, not feeling emotion, but being at peace with oneself.

 

Personally, the Semi-Sith in KOTOR2 (the Betrayer :o ) is more of a Jedi than Luke will ever be, simply because she's not going to be blinded by the whole Jedi Code stuffs. Once you detatch yourself from emotion, are you really human?

 

Jedi don't always do good things. Sith can do bad things for a good cause. All in all, we're just people when it comes down to it. And everything we do will have both good and bad repercussions.

 

It was also in the first movie, when the empire is evil, the "Sith" (who aren't Sith yet, just fallen Jedi) are evil, and the Jedi are described in no uncertain terms by Obiwan Kenobi as good. After all, it's hard to be evil when you're portrayed as the defenders of peace and justice in the galaxy. The origional Star Wars is a VERY dualistic ethical system, with clear cut good and evil; like most dualistic systems with clear cut good and evil, then don't take into account anything resembling moral choice or question. It appears greatly in the table top RPG system -- using the Dark Side for any reason is evil, and grants you a Dark Side point, even if used for good. Jolee Bindo in the first KotOR was a sorry excuse at a "neutral" Jedi. "I'm not a Jedi, even though I'm just like Yoda! I just left because I fell in love, and it ended badly!"

 

As for the argument with the Betrayer, I agree fully. It's an ammusing hypocracy that Jedi aren't supposed to feel, unless it's a noble emotion, like compasion, and especially love, while the Sith are potrayed and stated as giving into the passions and animal emotions, again, until you get to noble emotions, like love, which no Sith ever appears capable of. Atton covered it nicely. It is another symptom of a dualistic system. When one side is absolute good and the other is absolute evil, and you throw in philosophies that restrict an entire spectrum of experiance, both good and evil, you run into continuity errors that make for great philosophical debate, but those same continutiy errors leave obvious flaws that turn people away and limit how much you can do without creating yet more plot holes. LotR used such a dualistic system, with the West/Valar being good, and the East/Melkor/Sauron being evil, but if you read the Silmarillion, which outlines the general history of Middle Earth up until the end of the Third Age and the fall of Sauron, it is quite apparant the Sauron is a mini-me version of Melkor, he's former superior; the story repeates itself. Now, the individual tales are ones of more variety, but even these tend to be similar in premise -- the noble heroes either defeats or are defeated by evil, as things gradual get worse and worse until a stunning reversal turns the tide and utterly destroys the evil. And after a while, it gets repetative and old; I loved LotRs, but there's only so many times good and evil can clash without some sort of moral and ethical analysis and questioning in the story, instead of the assumed "we're good, they're evil", and it shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the argument with the Betrayer, I agree fully. It's an ammusing hypocracy that Jedi aren't supposed to feel, unless it's a noble emotion, like compasion, and especially love, while the Sith are potrayed and stated as giving into the passions and animal emotions, again, until you get to noble emotions, like love, which no Sith ever appears capable of. .

 

That's why I believe the Exile, Revan, Bastila, and perhaps Jolee and Juhani have to return in KotOR III. They are the only ones who can remake a stronger order that knows the old code is so restricting and is the reason so many leave the order or turn to the Sith teachings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ulicus, the way it's explained in the game, Reven and Malak had alot to do with why the Jedi Civil War is known as such. Reven and Malak were both seen as champions of the Republic, at least until they came back to conqure it. There former heroes were also targeting Jedi specifically, and thus it seemed to outsiders that it was a squable between Jedi. And why shouldn't it? To an outsider, the dispute between Catholics and Protestants over history would seem like two different philosophies or branches of the same religion fighting over minor differences, while the two belief systems themselves hold that there are great differences that merit such conflicts. Here's where the Jedi's own secretive nature damns them -- unlike the divergences between Catholics and Protestants, which can be easily researched in the modern era, the Jedi keep much of their knowledge secret, so those who might be tempted by the dark side can not begin that path. In doing so, the rest of galaxy is stripped of the knowledge they could have used to try and understand the differences between the Sith and the Jedi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ulicus, the way it's explained in the game, Reven and Malak had alot to do with why the Jedi Civil War is known as such. Reven and Malak were both seen as champions of the Republic, at least until they came back to conqure it. There former heroes were also targeting Jedi specifically, and thus it seemed to outsiders that it was a squable between Jedi. And why shouldn't it? To an outsider, the dispute between Catholics and Protestants over history would seem like two different philosophies or branches of the same religion fighting over minor differences, while the two belief systems themselves hold that there are great differences that merit such conflicts. Here's where the Jedi's own secretive nature damns them -- unlike the divergences between Catholics and Protestants, which can be easily researched in the modern era, the Jedi keep much of their knowledge secret, so those who might be tempted by the dark side can not begin that path. In doing so, the rest of galaxy is stripped of the knowledge they could have used to try and understand the differences between the Sith and the Jedi.

 

Yeah, I know all of that.... butttttt you've missed my point.

 

It was a war of the Republic vs the Sith/Mandalorian War vets.

 

so my point is that the way "it's explained in the game" is wrong. It wasn't a war of Jedi, it was a war where veterans of the MWs turned on the REPUBLIC. They came back and started conquering the Republic, the Republic retaliated and the Jedi helped out.

 

Though I completely understand how "Outsiders" would see Jedi and dark-Jedi as the same thing, I don't think it *would* seem to outsiders that it was a squabble between Jedi.

 

The "good" Jedi were helping the Republic, the "bad Jedi" were leading the Sith (and since the outsiders are "ignorant" as we've established, they WOULD view the fleets and soldiers as the Sith) in attacks against the Republic.

 

Both sets of Jedi were on opposing sides and had opposing goals, true- but to an "outsider" the main war would appear to be between the Sith (as in, the dark jedi, the soldiers, the ships and everything) and the Republic.

 

The "Civil War"- fine, could understand that. Oh wait, that got taken by Episodes IV-VI. Doh.

 

Anyway, I've more or less coped with that- I can extend my disbelief far enough to see how it could be called "the Jedi Civil War" by the masses. But it sure as hell doesn't fit in with what I saw in KotOR 1 in regards to the Republic's attitude towards it.

 

But that is *not* my main gripe.

 

Jedi Masters are *not* outsiders, yet even they call it the Jedi Civil War. Which is pretty stupid. But I guess they just figured they had to call it that since it was the name that the rest of the galaxy had stamped on it.

 

Urg. Anyway, it is the Jedi Civil War, I can't not accept that- since it's its name. I just think it was a lame choice.

 

I mean, take away the context we have of KotOR 1. Pretend we just had KotOR 2 and we heard "Jedi Civil War". What does that make you think of? Certainly not the type of war we saw in KotOR 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ulicus, the way it's explained in the game, Reven and Malak had alot to do with why the Jedi Civil War is known as such. Reven and Malak were both seen as champions of the Republic, at least until they came back to conqure it. There former heroes were also targeting Jedi specifically, and thus it seemed to outsiders that it was a squable between Jedi. And why shouldn't it? To an outsider, the dispute between Catholics and Protestants over history would seem like two different philosophies or branches of the same religion fighting over minor differences, while the two belief systems themselves hold that there are great differences that merit such conflicts. Here's where the Jedi's own secretive nature damns them -- unlike the divergences between Catholics and Protestants, which can be easily researched in the modern era, the Jedi keep much of their knowledge secret, so those who might be tempted by the dark side can not begin that path. In doing so, the rest of galaxy is stripped of the knowledge they could have used to try and understand the differences between the Sith and the Jedi.

 

Yeah, I know all of that.... butttttt you've missed my point.

 

It was a war of the Republic vs the Sith/Mandalorian War vets.

 

so my point is that the way "it's explained in the game" is wrong. It wasn't a war of Jedi, it was a war where veterans of the MWs turned on the REPUBLIC. They came back and started conquering the Republic, the Republic retaliated and the Jedi helped out.

 

Though I completely understand how "Outsiders" would see Jedi and dark-Jedi as the same thing, I don't think it *would* seem to outsiders that it was a squabble between Jedi.

 

The "good" Jedi were helping the Republic, the "bad Jedi" were leading the Sith (and since the outsiders are "ignorant" as we've established, they WOULD view the fleets and soldiers as the Sith) in attacks against the Republic.

 

Both sets of Jedi were on opposing sides and had opposing goals, true- but to an "outsider" the main war would appear to be between the Sith (as in, the dark jedi, the soldiers, the ships and everything) and the Republic.

 

The "Civil War"- fine, could understand that. Oh wait, that got taken by Episodes IV-VI. Doh.

 

Anyway, I've more or less coped with that- I can extend my disbelief far enough to see how it could be called "the Jedi Civil War" by the masses. But it sure as hell doesn't fit in with what I saw in KotOR 1 in regards to the Republic's attitude towards it.

 

But that is *not* my main gripe.

 

Jedi Masters are *not* outsiders, yet even they call it the Jedi Civil War. Which is pretty stupid. But I guess they just figured they had to call it that since it was the name that the rest of the galaxy had stamped on it.

 

Urg. Anyway, it is the Jedi Civil War, I can't not accept that- since it's its name. I just think it was a lame choice.

 

I mean, take away the context we have of KotOR 1. Pretend we just had KotOR 2 and we heard "Jedi Civil War". What does that make you think of? Certainly not the type of war we saw in KotOR 1.

 

It makes sense to me. Jedi always stand out, and enough people knew about Reven's targets and could connect the dots well enough to start rumors. That's how many wars get their unofficial names in more chaotic eras, which the Republic is at this time. The Jedi Masters calling the conflict the Jedi Civil War is an oversight, I agree, but that hardly derails the entire game.

 

As for the presentation in KotOR II, that was the point. Instead of having the overt, epic space-opera of wide proportions, TSL was meant to turn everything on its head, to be subtle instead of overt, to have many shades of grey instead of being black and white. Personally, I prefer it -- there are only so many times you can have a massive, epic war without it getting repetative, and there is already alot of copy-and-paste materials in Star Wars. Honestly, no one has really updated ship designs in over a few millenia?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only was the Sith War was already taken by the Expanded Universe (Exar Kun, Ulic Qel-Droma), the Jedi Civil War made sense to us and in our opinion, the Republic as a whole. Many Jedi defected to Malak and Revan's side during the war (text crawl), and it doesn't feel like much of a stretch to see why the galaxy would call it that - Atton pretty much sums up the everyman view, despite his bias, but people in K2 aren't really happy about Jedi as a whole. Plus, when you hear "Jedi Civil War," it makes you stop and think about WHY people would call it that, and I think that's equally important in the context of the game.

 

It's worth noting that both LucasArts and Lucas Film didn't have a problem with the name, they approved it on the first pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only was the Sith War was already taken by the Expanded Universe (Exar Kun, Ulic Qel-Droma), the Jedi Civil War made sense to us and in our opinion, the Republic as a whole. Many Jedi defected to Malak and Revan's side during the war (text crawl), and it doesn't feel like much of a stretch to see why the galaxy would call it that - Atton pretty much sums up the everyman view, despite his bias, but people in K2 aren't really happy about Jedi as a whole. Plus, when you hear "Jedi Civil War," it makes you stop and think about WHY people would call it that, and I think that's equally important in the context of the game.

 

It's worth noting that both LucasArts and Lucas Film didn't have a problem with the name, they approved it on the first pass.

 

Meh, well now I'm never going to win this debate. >_<

 

I suppose all I can say in retaliation is... urm... Lucas Film approved the Christmas Special... and the Ewoks mini-series. *Clutching at straws*

 

I can see why the name was changed, I mean, you did have the EU purists baying for blood when the first game had "the Sith War"... but I just thought of it as "Sith War II" (III - if you want to count the Great Hyperspace War) and didn't care so much.

 

I also definately got the "average joe doesn't see a difference between Jedi and Sith" feel throughout the game, no worries there- it was just that the K1 war always seemed like it was primarily the Republic's fight. Yeah- Kreia did do her spiel about how the Republic wasn't the target and was the shell around the Jedi and I thought that was a good interpretation: but didn't think that's how the galaxy-at-large would have seen it.

 

I mean, at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what I think. It *is* the Jedi Civil War, that's what it's called in the game and I've accepted that. KotOR never had any *voiced* dialog that referred to the war as "the Sith War" anyway... I was just used to thinking of it as that.

 

The only thing I was curious about were the reasons for it's name change, and I got the definitive answer to my question, so I'm happy. :) Cheers.

 

I still think I was right though. :shifty:

 

Now about that ending... (jk)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought that "Jedi Civil War" is the generic term for the conflicts between Jedi and fallen Jedi. I have heard this term many times before KotOR.

"Jedi poodoo!" - some displeased Dug

 

S.L.J. said he has already filmed his death scene and was visibly happy that he

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
I always thought that "Jedi Civil War" is the generic term for the conflicts between Jedi and fallen Jedi. I have heard this term many times before KotOR.

 

Obsidian didn't change the name of the war that took place in KOTOR I. The Sith War occurred long before Revan & Malak's time. The Jedi Civil War was named such because most of the galaxy couldn't distinguish the difference between the Jedi & the Sith. To them, the Jedi & the Sith were the same thing. Unfortunately, people who knew the difference between Jedi & Sith were quite rare. Obsidian, like Bio-Ware, simply set the story many years after the time of Exar Kun & Ulic Qel-Droma.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...