So I have not read the whole thread but this is my opinion. I am under the impression that the sith were characterized by a desire to kill and destroy the jedi order. Now with this explanation of the sith, of course vader should be in the sith faction, he hunted down jedi all over the galaxy, slaughtered younglings, and sacked the jedi temple. This seems like a very sith like thing to do.

I agree that for the most part vader should be an imperial, but he definitely belongs in the sith faction as well. I mean to say that he only existed during the time period of rebels and imperials, is ridiculous. The sith have been around and have been from every faction that has existed.

Well, I listened to the show, I agree with your points . They do make sense for the most part. However, to say that the other side at least got to be defended? Lou at 1st said yes, to a Vader being in the Sith faction. He never had a chance to defend while Dean and Yourself made your point clearly. Lou did bring up a good point ( perhaps a Vader with affinity in the Sith faction.)
I understand in gameplay why Vader was never made in the Sith Faction by WOTC though. I will disagree with the fact that he was not a Sith Lord. I would even disagree that Vader did not follow the rule of two. He wanted an apprentice so that he and his apprentice would be powerful enough to overthrow the Emperor, be it the Apprentice or Luke Skywalker. When did Vader ever want a ton of Sith Lords vying for power.

OK

I agree with so many of the things you said in your post, but I don't get why people need to take shots at the vsets. People worked their butts off on those.

Back on topic:

HE IS A SERVANT OF THE EMPIRE grrrr lol

He is loyal to the Empire and himself. I'm not even sure how much Vader even really cared about the Sith order and legacy. He didn't seem to care much from what I've seen. Vader and the Empire are inseperable. He should never be in another faction.

Seconded!! V-set ROCK!

Without crazy discussions like these, new ideas do not sprout and grow!

Good point about vader but you forget that palps orchestrated the events knowing that Anakin would become his apprentice then get injured, need the suit to survive so he'd never be able to get more powerful than palps, be stuck as his apprentice and never be able to challenge for the Master role in the Sith mandate, begun by lucas's other poweful Sith Lord Darth Bane, the Rule of Two. Hence the fact Vader keeps recuiting secret apprentices himself. Hoping one day he can use them to help topple his hated master from his lofty throne MWOOOOHAHAHA....ahem sorry.


Later he is redeemed though by the help of his whiny son

Make that a third, I agree with much of what you said about Vader.
But to take shots at the V-sets??? Whether you like the v-sets or not, there is no need to take pot shots . 1st of all, Wizos making factions of the Game like the Vong, Sith OR , MAndos cannot be seen as a bad thing. Even if they were hard to win with in the Meta they were a lot of fun to play. The V-sets purpose is to level the playing field. Have you looked at V set 1? If you haven't given it a chance, you probably should just to show you how much funner it is to play other competitive faction. If you don't like it, thats fine too, just don't rail on a superior product.

Sound reasoning.

The point was that a lot of people calling for a Sith Vader had little more legitimate reason to justify his presence other than "He was a Sith." In essence, he happens to fit under a giant umbrella term that does no justice to the various ideologies and differences, and doesn't consider at all what it means to be a faction.

True, Vader was some sort of Sith.
But the RNSF were some sort of Rebels
Revan was some sort of Imperial
Obi-Wan and Anakin served under the Old Republic

Heck, The RNSF when it rebelled against Federation authority was rebelling against a powerful entity being controlled by Sidious/Palpatine. They have a lot more in common than one might think.

There are several DIFFERENT factions that have more justification to be called a faction together than the Orange carded people have to be called a faction.

Old Republic, Republic, and New Republic have more in common ideologically and structurally than the Orange-carded characters do. But no one is screaming for OR Obi-wans or NR Carths because of the NAME of the factions. Please, get over the name!! There's more to a faction than that!

Somehow the characters with orange cards became "Pretty much anyone and everyone who ever laid claim to any title that's even sorta kinda like anything that has ever been Sith" Fine, Krayt and pals needed to go somewhere. Caedus is a weirdo, fine, put him there. Sidious and maul? I can stomach it if they are going for pre-blockade representations. But Vader? Only through a disturbing and unnneccary redefinition of the term "faction" can Vader be put there.

There is more to a faction than anything and everyhting that can fit under the name.

The best argument for making a Sith Vader is the same argument that could be made to make a OR Obi-wan and OR Anakin, and it could probably be made better for the Obi-Wan and Anakin that it could be for Vader.

Ask yourself why the orange cards became the "Almost everyone ever considering themselves Sith," while the gold cards did not become "Almost everyone ever considering themselves Jedi"

The answer is that there's more to a faction than just name. There's Era considerations, ideology considerations, and considerations of having better and more accurate places to put characters that do not equate the NAME of the faction with a united, overarching ideology that never existed.

I don't see why the inclusion of the Legacy characters necessitates a free-for-all where anything ever called Sith should be thrown into the Sith faction.

I would argue that calingl for a Sith Vader while not thinking that Anakin should have an OR version is contradictory. If people want a Sith Vader, they need to be aware of what their impact on the definition of factions will be.

If anyone would like to make an argument as to why Vader should be Sith but at the same time Anakin should not be OR I would love to hear it.

(This is a separate argument, but Palpatine is Republic and Empire and Sidious is Sep for a reason. Palpatine was the politician, while Sidious was the manipulator behind the scenes. It may get a little fuzzy with the Chancellor's arrest which persona he is (possibly even both at one time), but once Mace Windu is dead, the title of Sidious loses a lot of relevance as his Sith self is now Palapatine as well. I guess my point is is that Sidious is only a term that applies before the de facto start of the Empire, which I would say is the failed arrest.)

All your doing with this is trying to come at it from a different angle, but its a difficult one to see. The whole thing becomes a moot point when you take the Fringe and New sith into account. Its not all about the name.
If you have a Sith faction without relevent sith lords then its not really a sith faction. If we are saying vader is not revelent to the sith then is he relevent to the imps? Yes and of course yes.
Are we going to see an imperial luke in the future to represent his short spell with palps clone? Probably! If so then thats exactly the same discussion we are having about a Sith Vader right now.



On the point of OR, Republic and NR.
That is a time reference.

Republic being present, Old Republic being past and New Republic being future.
Of course Obi, Ani, Luke or leia cannot be in the OR because the didnt exist there. Unless of course they are Fringe which is that millenia jumping faction.

The Sith though stopped being Old Republic Sith Lords old boys club the moment the new sith lords on the block came to power. So naturally Sidious being a sith appears along side Bane and Kun as one of the big boys.

I do think Vader may not be an out and out Sith Faction boy but he is sith, Is that an oxymoron?

So Imp Vader with Sith or sith with imp I dont know.

Yep, good followup post and great answer from qvos. My thing is always keep it respectful and fun - heck you can even poke a little fun at your "friends" here in SWMs nerdery, just do so with respect and all is well.

Now, I also wanted to address the argument that an Imperial Luke is both A) probable and B) evidence that we should make a Sith Vader. I'd have to say the odds of each are indeed similar. I'd go with Sith Vader at about 2% chance, and Imp Luke at about .2% chance.

I'm not even convinced that a Sith Palpatine makes a whole lot of sense. Darth Sideous, I can get behind, but I'd have a hard time justifying a DS bringing in a Vader, since it was not DS, but Palpatine - but Palpatine was not his Sith identity that turned Vader - the politician Palpatine did that. So in a round about way, I'm not sure it makes much more sense. Perhaps I'd put the odds at maybe 5% for this.

The following is what admiralmotti89 said:

Interesting. So it's not OK to put characters from the Rise of the Empire Era in the OR faction, when it's essentially the same Republic, and it is the Old Republic (Pre-19 BBY), but it's totally OK to put characters from four eras and, what, a dozen idealogies, in the Sith faction?

Anakin served under the Old Republic. That is undeniable. He did exist under the Old Republic!
Vader was a Sith Lord. That is undeniable.

Yet somehow Vader should be Sith and Anakin should not be OR? This is because factions are defined by more than name.







This is why they are different the old republic was not an ideology as the sith is. The old republic was a form of government.
The sith faction is not a time period or an empire, it is an idea that continues and grows. Of course during the evolution of the sith certain leaders and powerful sith would change the ideology, but that does not make them anymore or less sith, it only changes their interpretation of what the sith should be. It is undeniable that Bane was a sith lord and that Freedon Nadd, and Naga Sadow were sith lords, but their ideologies were completely different, but does that mean that they should be in different factions? of course not.
You cannot say that well, if you can have sith from way into the future in the sith faction, then you can have people from the new republic in the old republic, because they are completely different things.
I will admit that vader did work for the empire, but that does not mean that he can not also be a sith lord. He was a leader in the empire, but was also a definite believer in the power of the dark side, as he says in the movies time and time again to Luke.
Honestly what is more sith-like then force choking one of your commanders to death because of a moment of weakness and failure? that does not sound like very empire like behavior to me.