Current Events > Did Palpatine abide by the rule of two?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Like, did he actually expect his apprentice to kill him one day or did he want to be endgame baddie?

Well with what happened in the last movie seemed like he has weird crazy powers to comeback from nothing. I dont follow how he came back.

Pretty sure the Inquisitors fuck up any Rule of Two.

LordMarshal posted...

Well with what happened in the last movie seemed like he has weird crazy powers to comeback from nothing. I dont follow how he came back.

They actually explain this in the movie

somehow he returned

Pretty sure once he learned the secret of Plagueis, he intended to live forever.

No, at least not until Anakin was gravely wouded by Obi wan.

Afterwhich Vader was nothing more then a tool to Palpatine. Who was set on discovering immortality rather then passing everything on to his apprentice.

Even his empire wasn't designed to last without him intentionally.

He subverted the rule of two at every opportunity he could. Palps never intended to faithfully follow it.

Ok i have a legit possibly dumb question: Was vader AND the emperor trying to get luke as their apprentice to kill each other?

LordMarshal posted...

Ok i have a legit possibly dumb question: Was vader AND the emperor trying to get luke as their apprentice to kill each other?

Yes

HornyLevel posted...

Pretty sure once he learned the secret of Plagueis, he intended to live forever.

It would have made much more sense to bring back Plagueis in Rise of Skywalker. It would have highlighted Palpatines hubris, given a more logical source for Snoke, and made the whole secret fleet thing more plausible. Plagueis never actually died (he fooled Palpatine) and was secretly orchestrating his own plans all along. Who cares if it was too obvious or whatever? The plot lines were there after Force Awakens and leftover threads from Revenge of the Sith. Even with the mess Johnson left, Abrams could have built Ep IX with Plagueis as the real villain with minimal changes and less ridiculousness.

Sariana21 posted...

It would have made much more sense to bring back Plagueis in Rise of Skywalker. It would have highlighted Palpatines hubris, given a more logical source for Snoke, and made the whole secret fleet thing more plausible. Plagueis never actually died (he fooled Palpatine) and was secretly orchestrating his own plans all along. Who cares if it was too obvious or whatever? The plot lines were there after Force Awakens and leftover threads from Revenge of the Sith. Even with the mess Johnson left, Abrams could have built Ep IX with Plagueis as the real villain with minimal changes and less ridiculousness.

I was SO sure Snoke was Plagueis, and then he's killed off like a chump.

God, the sequel trilogy is horrible. My hype was through the fucking roof after episode 7 (I saw it like five times in theaters), and episode 8 did not deliver and it just got worse from there.

Super_Slash posted...

I was SO sure Snoke was Plagueis, and then he's killed off like a chump.

God, the sequel trilogy is horrible. My hype was through the fucking roof after episode 7 (I saw it like five times in theaters), and episode 8 did not deliver and it just got worse from there.

The thing about 7 is it wasn't a great movie on its own but it did what Abrams is great at, creating a ton of threads that future movies could pull on to do something great. Of course then Rian Johnson showed up and burned all those mystery boxes to ash in order to subvert expectations. So dumb.

I forget if it's canon or not but I heard something that said Palpatine wanted to implement the Rule of One, as in his rule and his rule alone.

His apprentices were merely pawns to make his bidding happen.

wackyteen posted...

I forget if it's canon or not but I heard something that said Palpatine wanted to implement the Rule of One, as in his rule and his rule alone.

His apprentices were merely pawns to make his bidding happen.

That's pretty much what it eventually came down to, cause the man hated all of his apprentices.

Maul was never a true apprentice. He was just a weapon to be wielded and discarded.
Tyrannus was old as shit, so he was never going to be able to effectively carry on the teachings of the Sith
Vader was crippled and lost half his force potential the same day he turned to the dark side.

After going 0-3 it's no surprise that the man just said "screw it, I'll rule it all myself".

I mean, did any of them? That was kind of the entire thing, that all of them had secret apprentices that they were grooming to overthrow each other etc.

The point is the master tries as hard as possible not to be killed. If he didn't pass any knowledge on then he wouldn't be abiding by the Rule of Two. Otherwise, if the apprentice isn't strong/cunning/whatever enough to kill his master he never deserved to be the master in the first place.

If the master passes on all his knowledge and still can't be killed, then he's still the strongest Sith which is ultimately the point of the rule of two. Keeping the existence of the Sith secret while always ensuring the strongest survive.

Super_Slash posted...

I was SO sure Snoke was Plagueis, and then he's killed off like a chump.

God, the sequel trilogy is horrible. My hype was through the fucking roof after episode 7 (I saw it like five times in theaters), and episode 8 did not deliver and it just got worse from there.

All of this. I was SO hyped for Ep8. Between Driver and Gleeson I was positive we were in for something truly special.

I was wrong.

Super_Slash posted...

I was SO sure Snoke was Plagueis, and then he's killed off like a chump.

God, the sequel trilogy is horrible. My hype was through the fucking roof after episode 7 (I saw it like five times in theaters), and episode 8 did not deliver and it just got worse from there.

They COULD have made it work but instead they backed down if trying to actually do anything with the franchise after 8 and had to pull more shit out of asses then... uh... an ass doctor.... to try and get shit back, and it all sucked and none of it made sense.

Prismsblade posted...

No, at least not until Anakin was gravely wouded by Obi wan.

Afterwhich Vader was nothing more then a tool to Palpatine. Who was set on discovering immortality rather then passing everything on to his apprentice.

Even his empire wasn't designed to last without him intentionally.

this. under the bane rule of two you would have one sith lord to hold the power while the other coveted it. vader never seemed motivated to take over the sith empire apparatus, he was just rage and hate personified, being used as a weapon by sidious. you could probably argue that no sith lord planned on being deposed, but most of them did teach their proteges everything.

andel posted...

this. under the bane rule of two you would have one sith lord to hold the power while the other coveted it. vader never seemed motivated to take over the sith empire apparatus, he was just rage and hate personified, being used as a weapon by sidious. you could probably argue that no sith lord planned on being deposed, but most of them did teach their proteges everything.

I mean, he was wanting Luke to join him to rule as father and son...

Let alone the stupid games where he had an apprentice.

Enclave posted...

The thing about 7 is it wasn't a great movie on its own but it did what Abrams is great at, creating a ton of threads that future movies could pull on to do something great. Of course then Rian Johnson showed up and burned all those mystery boxes to ash in order to subvert expectations. So dumb.

7 was ANH 2.0 with almost the exact same story beats. But that's okay because it was the first new movie in years, so they played it safe and it worked out. Had a great ending too.

Then Rian took a giant shit on the franchise. So much for that.

Sith in general tend to break the rule so much that it's really more the Guideline of Two.

As long as they don't develop a full Sith army it's probably fine. That was the reason for the rule to begin with - get enough Sith together and their very nature leads to infighting and losing to the Jedi.

Sariana21 posted...

It would have made much more sense to bring back Plagueis in Rise of Skywalker. It would have highlighted Palpatines hubris, given a more logical source for Snoke, and made the whole secret fleet thing more plausible. Plagueis never actually died (he fooled Palpatine) and was secretly orchestrating his own plans all along. Who cares if it was too obvious or whatever? The plot lines were there after Force Awakens and leftover threads from Revenge of the Sith. Even with the mess Johnson left, Abrams could have built Ep IX with Plagueis as the real villain with minimal changes and less ridiculousness.

That's the way would have taken it, but Rian, and nostalgia for Palp overruled functional ideas.

Hey remember when some random kid could forcepull a broom and was never heard from again?

lol

Sariana21 posted...

It would have made much more sense to bring back Plagueis in Rise of Skywalker. It would have highlighted Palpatines hubris, given a more logical source for Snoke, and made the whole secret fleet thing more plausible. Plagueis never actually died (he fooled Palpatine) and was secretly orchestrating his own plans all along. Who cares if it was too obvious or whatever? The plot lines were there after Force Awakens and leftover threads from Revenge of the Sith. Even with the mess Johnson left, Abrams could have built Ep IX with Plagueis as the real villain with minimal changes and less ridiculousness.

I'm now feeling the same thing I felt when I heard about that "theory" of Jar Jar Binks being the Phantom Menace :(

Philip027 posted...

Jar Jar Binks being the Phantom Menace :(

https://imgur.com/GmcoAi9