Bill might have been useful to add a poll to this thread.

Anyway I think yes, why not.
Sith have Holosid and Maul and others which are not OLD SITH characters.
Sep's have Aurra Sing JH who was never a Sep but a outside Bounty Hunter freelance agent.

Imperial which a lot are arguing is Pal's Empire and there for should be the only one to have a Vader, which is wrong from the point that Emperor Fel, Marasiah Fel and a lot of others are not Pal's Empire. Also the First Thrawn has a Ysalamiri on him which he gained After Pal's died. So Pal's Empire? No.

Rebel have characters such Shaak Ti, Jax Paven and others.

Fringe have good lord were do I start, A lot that should be on a pacific factions but are not,

The Vong have Ossus Guardians which were created after the Vong war ended, Ok still Vong but can be argued that they never fort in the war so should they be on the Vong faction?? probably but arguable never the less.


I personally do not see why this should be an issue at all as Vader can be either. So it should be down to the designers, if they do not want a Sith Vader then hey that's OK, If at some point the design team changes and the later lot want a Sith one that's also fine.

The designers should have a free hand to do what they feel is best.

Talking about the designers, are they the same 3 as last time? What is there thoughts because I think there should be the most important.
Dread

Well even though I think a Sith Vader should happen at some point, should the design team agree, I also cannot argue with your point here, Sith do need other things more at the moment than another high cost melee sith, as a low cost Vader just would not be right.

Forget vader (imperial only for me)

Why is the sidious hologram sith not seperatist ???

Taking part of a post, really does not work as it is now out of context, and ignoring the other points of said post.

Plus your point that Sidious and Maul don't fit the Sith Faction, is a valid point from a limited point of view, however the point that they belong is just a valid from a different limited point of view. This to me is not a valid argument (argument used for lack of a better word) as it can used to support either point of view.

Both of these characters you mention are part of the Sith Faction because WOTC decided that's how they wanted it, rightly or wrongly depending on your/my or anyone else's point of view now really is mute as far as the game go's. WOTC did a lot of things that we (by we I mean the fans of the game) would have done differently. But WOTC set the standard and many of you (now on about the whole community) use what WOTC did to justify your point of view, why is it now that what WOTC did no longer matters because it does not support what you are now saying?

The above is not an attack on any individual, because I am sure that if everyone of my posts were reread I am sure I also am a little guilty of this.


As for this part of your post "As for the EU Rebel Jedi, well, they survived Order 66 and were resisting the Empire. Sounds like Rebel to me."

Well OK rebel as in opposing the ruling body sure, but rebel as in the faction? not really. Same word but different meaning as the Rebel Faction was a movement and both Shaak Ti and Jax were just opposing the government but not as part of a wider rebellion. Of cause had both survived then sure, would have become Rebel Faction.


On some of your points I do agree, Sith does indeed span far longer than the OT or the recent films. True the Sith lords are separated by well thousands of years, same go's for some of the OR Jedi as well. Would I want to see a OR version of say Yoda or Mace? after all the old republic ended with the rise of Pal's Empire and not as the game See's it with the clone wars or the Phantom Menace film. Well no I personally would not really want to see an OR Yoda.

This is to me one of the topics that there really is no correct answer as the correct answer is each individuals own point of view on how they see star wars and how they see the game. (WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE TOPIC AT HAND) I personally have no problem whatsoever if some members really do not want a Sith Vader, I would be happy to see one, but not going to lose any sleep over it if there is never to be one.

And oddly, OR Yoda makes a lot more sense than a Sith Vader in actuality :).

But yes, neither are likely to ever be made.

Ahh, they ol' OR and Republic should be the same faction. Man, good times. There were some people that the Old Republic was made into a faction, when it is essentially the same as the Republic.

Vader killed lots of people not just Rebels. He led the raid on the Jedi Temple and slaughtered younglings. He hunted down Jedi across the galaxy and wiped them out. That's a Sith.

I'm for a Sith Vader. He was a Dark Lord of The Sith. The Galactic Empire was no different than any other Sith Empire.

I know Vader fought with Stormtroopers and not Sith Troops, but Caedus didn't fight with Sith Troops, and neither did Maul, or Sidious. I can't think of Lumiya fighting with Sith Troops either. I think if they were "Sith" in the movies/comics/books/show, then I see no reason why they can't have a representation of themselves in the Sith Faction.

I would be happy with just "affinity" to the Sith faction.

Yeah but then you would have to waste too many points in your squad with Sidious, and Vader. Affinity would be so much better.

Just because Sidious "tricked" Anakin into joining the Sith, he still joined. He shouldn't have to be brought in with Sidious. He still committed countless acts of cruelty across the galaxy.

If the creators are dead set on keeping him exclusive to the Imperials, then I'd like to see him at least have affinity.

We discussed the topic on the SHNN tonight, so take a listen when its available for download if you didn't get a chance to listen live.