Speculation on the Jedi Masters

[Jediphile]

The sith are far more evil then the Jedi. Since when have the Jedi Massacred people in a quest for power? The Jedi earn their power in the Republic through trust and their usefull ness. Tell me when the Sith haven't just clawed their way up the tier into power without decimating millions of lives or creating an oppressive government of their own? The Jedi can have faults but the Sith and the Jedi are not in the same moral league.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The comment wasn't made in reference to the jedi in general, but rather to their (ab)use of Revan. There might have been extenuating circumstances for the manipulation of Revan, but that still doesn't absolve them from the moral responsibility, and they don't exactly demonstrate much regret or sorrow on the matter - did any of them ever apologize to Revan for doing what they did? I certainly didn't hear it... And if they don't accept the ethical responsibility, then how can they claim to hold the moral high ground?

[master_pendrak]

The sith are far more evil then the Jedi. Since when have the Jedi Massacred people in a quest for power? The Jedi earn their power in the Republic through trust and their usefull ness. Tell me when the Sith haven't just clawed their way up the tier into power without decimating millions of lives or creating an oppressive government of their own? The Jedi can have faults but the Sith and the Jedi are not in the same moral league.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The Sith kill the weak and the Jedi protect them, in protecting the weak you only weaken yourself. The weak will always need protecting which costs resources, time and lives which in the end weaken their protectors. Atleast the Sith are simple they route out weakness and in doing so weaken themselves because unless the Sith have a common enemy or goal. They will undoubtedly turn on one another.

 

Jedi and Sith are the same no matter their differences they always link back to each other. And when you think of it the first "sith" were a species a people, now they are an ideal using the same name. Dark Jedi that call themselves Sith are Jedi, the sith are dead whats left is an ideal using that name. So Jedi and Sith are the same, the flaws in the Jedi teachings are what caused the small faction of dark jedi like Ajunta Pall etc to form their own order. The Sith Order.

[Dark Moth]

The Sith kill the weak and the Jedi protect them, in protecting the weak you only weaken yourself. The weak will always need protecting which costs resources, time and lives which in the end weaken their protectors. Atleast the Sith are simple they route out weakness and in doing so weaken themselves because unless the Sith have a common enemy or goal. They will undoubtedly turn on one another.

 

Jedi and Sith are the same no matter their differences they always link back to each other. And when you think of it the first "sith" were a species a people, now they are an ideal using the same name. Dark Jedi that call themselves Sith are Jedi, the sith are dead whats left is an ideal using that name. So Jedi and Sith are the same, the flaws in the Jedi teachings are what caused the small faction of dark jedi like Ajunta Pall etc to form their own order. The Sith Order.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So you're just going to let the weak die off by themselves and leave them nothing, right? Oh, that's not evil, is it? I think someone's been listening to Kreia too much. Kreia was a fool in the sense that she didn't realize that sometimes people can't help themselves. And Kreia, of course, was a bitter, hate-filled old woman who disliked anything she deemed as "too good". She disdained killing people just for its own sake, but that was only because it didn't 'benefit' a person. If you killed a person for your own benefit, then yes, she was okay with it.

 

On Nar Shadaa, those refugees were already getting by themselves, but they had nowhere to go. Many of these poor people that Kreia refuses to help have nothing to hope for; nowhere they can turn. Helping out the weak does not make you weak, it only makes you a good person and in the end a strong person. But I think that's where our philosphies differ.

 

No. The Jedi and Sith are definitely not the same. They have radically different philosphies and beliefs. Sure, the Sith and Dark Jedi ended up being an offshoot of the Jedi, but they were a people who rejected the teachings of the Jedi and embraced the teachings of the Sith. They are not the same thing. The Jedi as a whole are good, the Sith as a whole are evil. And when I say as a whole, I am referring to their entire race and beliefs. I am well aware that not all Jedi are good and not all Sith are evil, but as a whole, they are both opposites. End of story.

 

@Jediphile: I am referring to the Mandalorian wars, not the Jedi civil war. Revan discovered the True Sith after the Mandalorian wars, but before the Jedi civil war. You seem to think I was referring to the Jedi civil war. And if the Jedi were given a chance to act in the Mandalorian wars, there would be no Jedi civil war and the Republic would have been more intact and less people would have lost their lives.

 

You can't even really say that Revan always intended to save the Republic during the Jedi Civil War. Revan was going to wipe out the power structure behind the Republic and replace it with his own Sith empire. That is destroying the Republic, no matter how you look at it. And of course, Revan would leave certain things intact because an empire with nothing to rule over or produce soldiers would be worthless to him/her. Darth Sidious did the same thing: he destroyed the Republic, but didn't destroy any of its worlds. He replaced it with the Galactic Empire. That is the same as destroying it.

[Master_Vrook]

Protecting the weak makes the weak weaker and strengthens yourself, Kreia teaches you this on Nar Shadaa.

[Dark Moth]

Protecting the weak makes the weak weaker and strengthens yourself, Kreia teaches you this on Nar Shadaa.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The Sith would say the same thing. Kreia was a liar who used just one circumstance to prove her point, as if that was the same way in every occasion. In some cases, sure it does, but definitely not in most. If anything, helping out the weak helps them to become strong again. If you never help the weak, then you are only condeming them to suffer. You're only proving that you have no desire to help them.

[Jediphile]

@Jediphile:  I am referring to the Mandalorian wars, not the Jedi civil war.  Revan discovered the True Sith after the Mandalorian wars, but before the Jedi civil war.  You seem to think I was referring to the Jedi civil war.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Fair enough, but I don't get that impression from the source material that I have quoted. But while I have tried to use canon material as evidence to support my position, you have merely stated that Revan did not know at that time and then expected me to accept that. I might, but you'll have to do better than just claim it without documenting your position. Otherwise it's just opinion against opinion. Or opinion against conclusion based on the sources, since I have actually founded my position on what the game tells us. I still have no idea what you have founded your position on.

 

And if the Jedi were given a chance to act in the Mandalorian wars, there would be no Jedi civil war and the Republic would have been more intact and less people would have lost their lives. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Uhm... If the jedi had acted, Revan would not have had to defy them...

 

He did because they refused to act - they had ample opportunity to act. They just chose to wait and let millions die in the outer rim instead.

 

You can't even really say that Revan always intended to save the Republic during the Jedi Civil War.  Revan was going to wipe out the power structure behind the Republic and replace it with his own Sith empire. That is destroying the Republic, no matter how you look at it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

True, but he would still have saved the people, and I do not find it impossible that he chose that knowing that he, in time, would also be overthrow, so that the Republic could live again. If the true Sith had won, however, the Republic would have stayed dead. That's what Kreia talks about when she says that the difference between a fall and a sacrifice can be difficult to see.

 

And of course, Revan would leave certain things intact because an empire with nothing to rule over or produce soldiers would be worthless to him/her.  Darth Sidious did the same thing: he destroyed the Republic, but didn't destroy any of its worlds.  He replaced it with the Galactic Empire.  That is the same as destroying it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Once again...

 

GOTO: "Revan did not intend to destroy the Republic. He deliberately left the infrastructure of many planets intact - and many military production facilities. I believe that by whatever means he used to build his armada, he recognized that it was somehow a limited source - or that he was only willing to use it to a point.My prediction is that whatever production facility was being employed, it carried a price that Revan perceived as detrimental to the goals of the Sith. And that is why Revan left many military production facilities in the Republic intact.Unlike Revan, Malak demonstrated no concern for the future of the Republic in his attacks. His stratagems were painfully obvious, intending to crush all resistance, everywhere. There was little thought beyond the complete destruction of anything that opposed him.{Irritated}He left quite a mess. I'm still trying to assess all the damage.Between the two, I would have preferred Revan rule the galaxy. He had foresight in his conquest, a subtlety that Malak did not possess.That is what occupies my calculations as well. I believe that Revan saw a war on another front that we did not, or saw the value in keeping a strong military force."

 

I don't know why you continue to ignore this quote by GOTO, particularly the part I've put in bold, since it more than clearly suggests that Revan did not merely seek conquest, but no matter - I shall continue to repeat it for as long as you continue to ignore it.

[darknesslord]

Protecting the weak makes the weak weaker and strengthens yourself, Kreia teaches you this on Nar Shadaa.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The Sith would say the same thing. Kreia was a liar who used just one circumstance to prove her point, as if that was the same way in every occasion. In some cases, sure it does, but definitely not in most. If anything, helping out the weak helps them to become strong again. If you never help the weak, then you are only condeming them to suffer. You're only proving that you have no desire to help them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

no he's right, if you protect someone, he will never be able to protect himself alone and will become dependant of your protection. You can teach them how to go alone, but protecting them will always make them weaker

 

quick example: if you have a desease(sp?), and you take drugs, you will heal yes, but you can be sure to have this desease in the future because your body wont learn to defeat it.

same goes for a child who want to build something, build it for him, and he wont be able to build it himself in the futur.

[Krookie]

Protecting the weak makes the weak weaker and strengthens yourself, Kreia teaches you this on Nar Shadaa.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

..."This will be a lesson I will never learn" said the Exile.

[Dark Moth]

Once again...

 

GOTO: "Revan did not intend to destroy the Republic. He deliberately left the infrastructure of many planets intact - and many military production facilities. I believe that by whatever means he used to build his armada, he recognized that it was somehow a limited source - or that he was only willing to use it to a point.My prediction is that whatever production facility was being employed, it carried a price that Revan perceived as detrimental to the goals of the Sith. And that is why Revan left many military production facilities in the Republic intact.Unlike Revan, Malak demonstrated no concern for the future of the Republic in his attacks. His stratagems were painfully obvious, intending to crush all resistance, everywhere. There was little thought beyond the complete destruction of anything that opposed him.{Irritated}He left quite a mess. I'm still trying to assess all the damage.Between the two, I would have preferred Revan rule the galaxy. He had foresight in his conquest, a subtlety that Malak did not possess.That is what occupies my calculations as well. I believe that Revan saw a war on another front that we did not, or saw the value in keeping a strong military force."

 

I don't know why you continue to ignore this quote by GOTO, particularly the part I've put in bold, since it more than clearly suggests that Revan did not merely seek conquest, but no matter - I shall continue to repeat it for as long as you continue to ignore it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I too, am basing my opinions on the canon. You're GOTO quote only proves one thing: that Revan left some military installations intact. I don't see how you can say that Revan knew about the True Sith during the Mandalorian wars. It defies logic. As for what GOTO said, it's true that Revan didn't destroy the Republic in the sense that he left some worlds intact, but as I said, that's only so he could use those in the fight against the True Sith or to protect his own empire. However, Revan was going to replace the democratic power structure within the Republic with his own Sith Empire, essentially destroying it.

 

As I said, Darth Sidious didn't destroy any worlds to take over the Republic, but he in a sense destroyed it. The same goes for Revan. Besides, GOTO is not Revan. GOTO would not know Revan's motives. The only evidence you've given is that Revan left some military installations and infastructures intact, and that's about it. But as I've said, he only wanted to use those military installaions for himself so he could fight the True Sith. But he would have destroyed the Republic authority behind those worlds and replace it with his own.

 

And Revan did not "have" to defy them. He was impatient and went to war and ended up sparking a chain of events that lead only to millions of more deaths. The Jedi were right, because they believed that the real threat (the True Sith) hadn't revealed themselves. Revan went to war, and the exile followed. If Revan hadn't went to war, the exile wouldn't have fought, you'd have no "Malachor V", no wound in the force, no Nihilus, no "Sith Lords" like Kreia and Sion. And look at my Revan link also. The stuff in there is a bunch of official stuff.

 

@darknesslord: Oh, I get it. So if you saw a woman getting robbed or kidnapped by thugs, you wouldn't lift a finger to protect her? If you saw a child lost in the woods and starving to death, you wouldn't help him? That's what I'm talking about here.

 

And you're example is flawed for one reason: not all diseases can be cured by the human body. If that were so, then we'd have no need for medicine. Ever hear of malaria? Yellow fever? Smallpox? If you don't help your body, you're only dooming yourself. As for the child, sure you wouldn't build it for him, but couldn't you help him so he can learn? After that, will he not be able to build it himself? Not everyone can figure things out for themselves the first time.

Edited August 8, 2005 by Mothman

[darknesslord]

yeah and that's exactly what I'm saying, help them, but dont do it for them, for they will learn nothing. for the girl and the child, if they dont learn anything about their experience, the child will once again lost himself in the woods, and the girl will be robbed again. what I'm saying is, help them, teach them, but dont always protect them, cause things will happen over and over again when your not there

 

edit: and for the diseases, I was talking about those who can be cured by the human body of course

[Dark Moth]

yeah and that's exactly what I'm saying, help them, but dont do it for them, for they will learn nothing. for the girl and the child, if they dont learn anything about their experience, the child will once again lost himself in the woods, and the girl will be robbed again. what I'm saying is, help them, teach them, but dont always protect them, cause things will happen over and over again when your not there

 

edit: and for the diseases, I was talking about those who can be cured by the human body of course

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But that's what I mean. You're mistaking helping someone with 'doing everything for them'. Kreia would have you ignore the woman and the child, leaving them both to die. You help them so they don't die, and so they can learn from that experiecnce. And you also seem to forget that many times, it isn't even someone's fault for being in a bad spot, just like the refugees on Nar Shadaa. That's the same thing as how sometimes there are diseases the body can't cure. Sometimes a person can't do something alone, so you would naturally help them so they aren't left to suffer or die.

 

Look at the example of the Lootra sidequest: Lootra's wife couldn't get out of the refugee sector. She wasn't a fighter. She couldn't get through to the exchange. She needed you to help her. Lootra couldn't get back to his wife for the very same reasons. You had to help them. By helping them, you only accomplished good. It's not like they would have just kept getting separated after that, either. If you complete the quest, Kreia yells at you for helping them. Kreia would have just left them to fend for themselves and never see each other again, and wouldn't have even cared. That is the danger of her teachings. Her teachings are, IMO, just as flawed, if not more flawed, then either the Jedi or the Sith's.

 

EDIT: But of course, you don't do everything for a person over and over again, and therefore make them weak. That is where you have to use judgement. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't help out someone in the first place.

[Jediphile]

I too, am basing my opinions on the canon.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Where?

 

You say you do, but you don't point to anything in the game, and all you've given is a link to a summary of Revan's life, which can be called into question simply on the basis of being written by a third party that does not support their interpretatations with references to the original source. If you want to blindly accept that, then that's fine for you, but I'll stick to what I actually see in the game, thank you.

 

 

You're GOTO quote only proves one thing: that Revan left some military installations intact.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

And again, no:

 

GOTO: "Revan did not intend to destroy the Republic. He deliberately left the infrastructure of many planets intact - and many military production facilities. I believe that by whatever means he used to build his armada, he recognized that it was somehow a limited source - or that he was only willing to use it to a point.My prediction is that whatever production facility was being employed, it carried a price that Revan perceived as detrimental to the goals of the Sith. And that is why Revan left many military production facilities in the Republic intact.Unlike Revan, Malak demonstrated no concern for the future of the Republic in his attacks. His stratagems were painfully obvious, intending to crush all resistance, everywhere. There was little thought beyond the complete destruction of anything that opposed him.{Irritated}He left quite a mess. I'm still trying to assess all the damage.Between the two, I would have preferred Revan rule the galaxy. He had foresight in his conquest, a subtlety that Malak did not possess.That is what occupies my calculations as well. I believe that Revan saw a war on another front that we did not, or saw the value in keeping a strong military force."

 

It helps to read what others write in the discussion, particularly when I've already gone through the trouble of putting the important bit in bold.

 

I don't see how you can say that Revan knew about the True Sith during the Mandalorian wars.  It defies logic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't think it defies logic, but you're right that we don't actually know that he did. We don't know the opposite either, though, and if canon says so, I'd like to see where.

 

One reason why I call the link you mention into question is that the timeline it mentions for Revan's fall (or sacrifice) does not make sense to me, since it claims that Revan fall when he found the Trayus Academy on Malachor V. Since we know that Revan arrived late to that battle and it was the final battle of the Mandalorian Wars, this would have happened just after the Mandalorian Wars ended at the earliest.

 

And that doesn't make sense to me, since it would mean that Revan had not yet fallen when he sent the jedi and Republic soldiers that were not completely loyal to him to die on Malachor V.

 

HK-47: "Observation: Master, I do not believe that the Mandalorians were the true target at Malachor - I believe that the intention was to destroy the Jedi, break their will, and make them loyal to Revan.I do not know if you examined the records of the deaths on Malachor, but you cannot escape that many of the Jedi and Republic soldiers who died were not Revan's strongest supporters. Observation: I believe that Revan was "cleaning house" at Malachor V. What ones did not die became Revan's allies against the Republic."

 

Now, given that Revan used Malachor V to either convert the jedi to become fanatically devoted to him or else to kill them, it naturally follows that he would already have fallen to that dark side at that point - what he did here is really evil! But according to the link you gave, he didn't fall until later when he had time to explore Malachor V, and that doesn't seem to add up to me.

 

Now look at what Kreia tells us.

 

Kreia: "You were there at Malachor. Revan's choices were always his own. It was not teaching, or circumstance, or example. It was him. Is that what he was? Or was he always true to himself, no matter what personality he wore?And there is something that the Council may never understand. That perhaps Revan never fell. The difference between a fall and a sacrifice is sometimes difficult, but I feel that Revan understood that difference, more than anyone knew.The galaxy would have fallen if Revan had not gone to war. Perhaps he became the dark lord out of necessity, to prevent a greater evil. I do not believe the Jedi Council changed Revan, as they claimed. They merely stripped away the surface, and allowed the true self to emerge again - someone who was willing to wage war to save others."

 

The part in bold clearly suggests that Revan's choice was a conscious one. We could argue that it's just Kreia's interpretation and that it is colored by her own bias, but I don't think she would have held onto this belief if the facts had contradicted her opinion, and that suggests that Revan's fall - or sacrifice - came early enough to support her view. Now look at something else she says.

 

Kreia: "You must go where Revan did, into the Unknown Regions, where the Sith, the true Sith, wait in the dark for the great war that comes. And he came because Malachor, like Korriban, lies on the fringes of the ancient Sith Empire, where the true Sith wait for us, in the dark.Have we? You thought that the corrupted remnants of the Republic, the machines spawned by technology that Revan led into battle were the Sith? You are wrong. The Sith is a belief. And its empire, the true Sith Empire, rules elsewhere.And Revan knew the true war is not against the Republic. It waits for us, beyond the Outer Rim. And he has gone to fight it, in his own way.He left the Ebon Hawk and its machines behind, for he knew he would not need them.And, like you, he knew he must leave all loves behind as well, no matter how deeply one cares for them. Because such attachments are not the way of the Jedi, and they would only bring doom to them both in the dark places where he now walks. It would have helped had he made her understand. But she was always strong-willed, that one, and did not understand war as Revan did."

 

Now the first part in bold in this quote only makes sense if it speaks to Revan's motives *before* he fell to the dark side. It also explains why he left military installations and so intact throughout his reign as the dark lord - he knew the true Sith were out there. And for Kreia's comments about Revan never falling to make sense, he would have had to have this knowledge of the threat of the true Sith before he fell or sacrificed himself to the dark side, or else the whole idea of a sacrifice falls apart. It only makes sense if Revan can possibly be interpreted to have willing embraced the dark side and converted the jedi with him all for the greater good of being able to stand against the true Sith later. And the last bold-faced part I quote above tells us, that Revan knew war, which supports the idea that his choices were strategic and farsighted all along.

 

As for what GOTO said, it's true that Revan didn't destroy the Republic in the sense that he left some worlds intact, but as I said, that's only so he could use those in the fight against the True Sith or to protect his own empire.  However, Revan was going to replace the democratic power structure within the Republic with his own Sith Empire, essentially destroying it. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

He would have brought down the democratic Republic, yes, but not destroy it - democracy is an ideal, and that you cannot ever destroy. It may even be that Revan sacrificed himself, became the dark lord, dooming the Republic, just so that it's planets could survive the next war with the true Sith and then overthrow Revan himself and finally restore the Republic's democracy. Yes, those are a lot of factors that need to fall into place, but if the threat Revan saw was the true fall of the Republic, then he might have embraced that fickle hope simply on the basis that it was it was the only way he saw for the Republic to survive the true Sith in the long run.

 

As I said, Darth Sidious didn't destroy any worlds to take over the Republic, but he in a sense destroyed it.  The same goes for Revan.  Besides, GOTO is not Revan.  GOTO would not know Revan's motives.  The only evidence you've given is that Revan left some military installations and infastructures intact, and that's about it.  But as I've said, he only wanted to use those military installaions for himself so he could fight the True Sith.  But he would have destroyed the Republic authority behind those worlds and replace it with his own. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

GOTO, HK-47 and Kreia all mirror similar theories about Revan's motives. You can call them incorrect, sure, but so far they're all we have to base our speculation on, and therefore it's still better than nothing. Besides, GOTO's analysis is compelling because it does explain several things and fits with what we know of Revan's actions.

 

And Revan did not "have" to defy them.  He was impatient and went to war and ended up sparking a chain of events that lead only to millions of more deaths.  The Jedi were right, because they believed that the real threat (the True Sith) hadn't revealed themselves.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Millions would have died if Revan had not gone to war, and he and Malak would never have been defiant if the masters hadn't decided to basically just let the Mandalorians do whatever they wanted on the outer rim. It is said many times throughout both games that the Republic likely would have fallen had it not been for Revan and Malak, and the postulate is hardly ever refuted even by the masters. The masters just thought they could wait forever until the true threat revealed itself, but while they were right about the true threat, they were wrong about the significance of the more immediate danger - even jedi cannot fight wars without support of the military, and even if the Republic had survived the Mandalorian Wars without jedi interference - and that's a pretty big if - it would still have shattered its military infrastructure.

 

That was the genius of the manipulation of the true Sith - the jedi could either act too soon and risk falling to the dark side by helping the Republic fight the Mandalorians, or they could sit back and let the Mandalorians and the Republic shatter each other until the Republic was so weak that it couldn't defend itself when the true Sith came. For the true Sith this is a win/win situation. And note that the jedi order was already failing at the time, since many jedi had already died in Exar Kun's Sith War only a few decades before.

 

The only one that seems to have understood all this is Revan (and perhaps Kreia). But the masters did not, or else they did not have the stomach to risk anything in war. Revan knew that risks were unavoidable in war, however, and so he risked what was needed. He had to risk more because the masters were indecisive.

 

Revan went to war, and the exile followed.  If Revan hadn't went to war, the exile wouldn't have fought, you'd have no "Malachor V", no wound in the force, no Nihilus, no "Sith Lords" like Kreia and Sion.  And look at my Revan link also.  The stuff in there is a bunch of official stuff. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, but you cannot blame Revan for the situation with the Exile - what happened there was completely unprecedented - it was a totally new risk wholly unrelated to the threat of Revan or the true Sith. Indeed, it was a threat to them too, though I doubt Revan was aware of it. The blame can just as well said to be the council's since they forced the issue by refusing to go to war. Of course there are those jedi who will not let millions die on the outer rim - protecting the weak and fighting evil is what the jedi do. To suddenly tell them they can't is to deny who they are.

[darthbass123]

No offense Jediphile but you must have alot of time on your hands if you type that much. How long did it take you.

[Gabrielle]

Someone has been taking long winded reply ideas from Meta.

[Jediphile]

No offense Jediphile but you must have alot of time on your hands if you type that much. How long did it take you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not so long, actually - 10 minutes or so? You'll note that much of it is actually dialogue from the game, which I could cut and paste. That doesn't take long to do.

 

And besides, once I get going, I can write very long and extensive sentences. Not always a good thing, but I've learned to cut them into smaller sentences, though that just makes my posts even longer...

 

There are doubtlessly those who type faster than I do, but my rate is pretty decent too, so that gets a lot out there pretty quick...

 

Yes, my bad - I know... :">

[DAWUSS]

It's a quality post, that's all that matters

[Jediphile]

It's a quality post, that's all that matters

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thanks.

 

See, I can write one-word posts... Oh damn!!

[Kashrlyyk]

The more I read in this topic, the more I get the feeling that Obsidian tried to turn the things the jedi did in Kotor 1 into something bad. That is such a bad and stereotypical thing to do to continue a story.

 

Especially this quote from GOTO:

"So while Revan would have conquered the Republic, he would also have prepared it for the next war against the true Sith. How much or how little he was corrupted by the dark side is immaterial, since he would have armed the Republic in time either way - either to save the Republic or else to protect his own empire."

 

The Exile could wound the force.

 

As I already have said, that is a thing Obsidian defined. But if you can not believe that it is possible the whole story falls apart.

[Master_Vrook]

The Exile didn't inflict the wound, he is the wound. He gave up the force entirely.

[germi91]

I believe Jediphile is right. Revan's objective was to prepare the republic against the true Sith threat. His primary goal was always to save the republic, despite falling to the dark side.

It was a risk he knew he would have to take, as well as the fact that he had to leave his loved ones behind.

[master_pendrak]

The Jedi are GOOD just as the Sith are EVIL, both factions have similiarities but yet are completly opposite. Jedi protect the weak and in doing so weaken themseves. Sith kill the bottom of their hiarchy (the weak) the ones at the top are vulnerable as all eyes turn to them. And thus the Sith Empire begins to crumble thanks to internal conflicts and civil wars.

 

A Jedi's belief in pacifism and tolerance weakens them, or atleast leaves them open to attack from a enemy. I think HK-47 explains it best something like "if a Jedi's friends are in danger they will do everything to help them". Whatever decision the Jedi or Sith make they tend to leave one door open while another closes. K1&2 the Jedi decisions showed this as did the Sith's.

 

Kreia was right to be neutral was right by telling you not to give credits to a refugee who gets mugged. By helping him you've caused him two pains, physical and emotional, being beaten up and the fact what little happiness he had was ripped from his fingers. Had the Exile done nothing the refugee would be unhappy with his life but he wouldn't have gone through the extra pain he goes through when credits are given.

 

I admit the Jedi are my preferance to the Sith but when you look at it from a non-bias view they both are pretty similar. Even if intentions are honourable or otherwise the consequences can be disasterous. Just look at the Exile he initiated the Mass Shadow Generator with the intention of defeating the Mandalorians at Malachor V and ending the war. But from a honourable decision he nearlly caused Genocide, aswell as destroying and killing Republic forces and Jedi. Aswell as destroying the planet itself it was also a spark for other Jedi to join Revan perhaps, aswell as damaging and destroying ships and soldiers. Who could have been eventually brought into the Jedi Civil War to help the Republic.

[Jediphile]

The Jedi are GOOD just as the Sith are EVIL, both factions have similiarities but yet are completly opposite.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Before this turns into a topic completely devoted to ethics and moral principles, let me just say one thing about how I see the difference between jedi and sith.

 

Yes, the sith are, for lack of a better word, evil. They are selfish and ambitious and care only for themselves and their own power. They continually fight among themselves, because just as they hate the jedi, they also wish to gain more power by killing their masters. Trust, cooperation, friendship - these are lies and weaknesses to a sith.

 

But it's too black and white in my opinion to say that jedi are good and sith are evil.

 

I find it more appropriate to say that jedi *try* to be good, while sith strive for power without moral considerations. That may seem to be the same, especially for the sith, but there is a subtle and important difference for the jedi.

 

The jedi aren't "good" simply by virtue of being jedi - it doesn't nessarily mean that they are or that they cannot do evil things.

 

In KotOR, I think that female jedi you meet in the enclave in K1 said it best:

 

"You should be proud of your accomplishment... but never forget that you still have much to learn.As your power grows you will constantly face temptations to slip to the dark side. This is the eternal struggle of the Jedi."

 

And it *is* an eternal struggle for any jedi, including the masters. The fact that they are the masters does not put them above doing evil things or falling to the dark side. Kreia was a master, and she "fell" to the dark side. The masters may be more powerful and wiser, but that does not make them infallible, and since they are more powerful, they actually have to fight harder than all other jedi in that eternal struggle against the temptation of the dark side.

 

That is why we can see the masters do things that are morally questionable and strategically unsound things in both KotOR games.

[darthbass123]

Although you took the words right out of my mouth; you have to admit that the Jedi do a really good job of walking the path of the light. ( of course i'm not including the many jedi that fell such as : Ulic, Exar Kun, Malak, Revan, Anakin, and many others.

[Gabrielle]

Just like the Sith do a fine job walking the path of the Darkside.

[Calax]

Ulic is an enigma so we really can't count him...

 

I'm going to have to point out that "good" and "evil" are just points of view. While it has become generally accepted that the Sith are evil somtimes the Evil people can actually be better and more honorable than those that are good. Food for thought