So what about this Seraph stuff?


03-05-2005 04:37:56

The above is a collection of thoughts from IRC.


03-05-2005 08:37:32

Eh...what is a Seraph rank?


03-05-2005 08:40:10

For full details, read the latest Sith High Warrior report.

As for the title "Seraph", it is usually used to denote a "Holy Warrior or Knight" of the highest order...I may be a little off on it, but I believe that's the general idea of that name

Nekura Manji

03-05-2005 11:13:53

Technically, Seraph is the shorter form of the word 'Seraphim', which denoted one of the 'ranks' of angels. Seraphim and cherubim, you probably know. As such, why would a Sith devoted to evil have a rank associated with holy angels? The only way that could possibly work is if it was 'Fallen Seraph' or something, to show that it was a Seraphim who had fallen from the light with Lucifer. But that would suck for a rank name. So overall... meh. :D


03-05-2005 12:09:54

Actually...Seraphim was used long before Judeo-Christian-Islamic theology arose.

Pre-Judaism, back when Aramaic was a "new" language...Seraphim was simply a supernatural warrior. Divine or Infernal, it didn't matter. They just happened to be vested with powers. The Babylonians made many sacrifices to Seraphim they believed were the guiding hand behind their Kings and Generals, informants who would turn the tide of battle by whispering tactical advice in the ears of those who were willing to listen. At the end of the battle...the ritual slaughter and sacrifice that ensued was to honor those Seraphim.

As an aside...for the comments regarding the rank on the news site...Neither "Jedi" or "Darth" are indigenous to Star Wars. Both were taken from ancient Persia. Jedi "j'dai" being an elite cabbal of warriors, and "da'arth" being the leaders of those elite.

Sith Bloodfyre

04-05-2005 00:17:30

I'd also like to make mention, none of the Sith fictionally would see it as being a connotation to "holy angels," seeing as how the religions we have don't translate, or exist in Star Wars. I can understand people thinking that outside of the fiction, but if we're delving into things, etc., that train of thought wouldn't exist.

Also, as Oberst noted, I use it in the tense of the Holy Warrior. Or, in our case, an Unholy Warrior. "Star Wars-ish," "non-Star Wars-ish," these are terms that only have meaning in the real world. We've taken the Orders to be something that they simply weren't in Star Wars. Anyone who portrays a scribe, or scholar Krath, you're taking the context wrong. The Krath were aristocrats who gathered, met in secret, etc., to use and refine Dark Side (Sith) magic. They weren't scholars, or scribes, they were rich people with too much time on their hands, and found an outlet for their enjoyment.

The Obelisk don't exist in Star Wars. However, we've taken the term to mean an Order of excellent warriors within the Brotherhood, who follow after Ferran, Alaiedon, or more appropriately (if you think in real life senses), Blazer, who was the first OHC, credited with the creation of the Order, etc. IN addition, a lot of the terms and ideas of the Brotherhood are borrowed. Whether it be the butchered leadership system taken from Roman culture, certain words taken from VTM, or whatever, we are not a completely "Star Wars-pure" Club, nor will we ever be.

Open your minds, take liberal translations, see stuff from a different viewpoint, and maybe you'll see things how many of us view them. This Club, this world, it's a world (universe) of our imagination. While I enjoy the movies, and I appreciate the creations and fantasy of George Lucas, I won't be limited by it.

By the way, I'd just like to make one comment about this poll. I just LOVE how there's about five or six "no answers," one "don't know/care" answer, and one "yes" answer. Shows something, definitely not an impartial viewpoint, however.


04-05-2005 02:14:57

Hey folks,

First, I like the direction in which Bloodfyre is taking these ideas. If the Sith of the Brotherhood are largely opposed to the usage of Overlord, then I agree that we need a change. I personally do not mind the rank either way. I do admit that I like the "choruses" idea. I'm not a big fan of Seraph, though that is primarily because it is such a huge change from the "War"-progression. However, unless anyone has any new "War" or similiar ideas that they're wishing to present, the "war"-progress is at a dead end... Which lends itself to utilizing what ideas we have... at the moment, that is Seraph.

Anyway, this poll is a bit bias in tone, as Bloodfyre points out. If there is a push for an accurate count of opinion on this matter, we can create a poll on the DB site and make it so only Sith can vote. *shrugs*

I'd prefer people just voice their opinions to the Sith High Warrior in one manner or another so that he can make an accurate judgement on the proposal before submitting it for approval to Jac and myself.

Sith Bloodfyre

04-05-2005 04:04:39

Oh, btw, just another quick item of mention. At least one person, probably more, has commented on it "Not having the Order name first." I never said it was simply "Seraph." It was intended as "Sith Seraph." However, I saw a problem with that, as did Kaiann; if you abbreviate "Sith Seraph" as "SS," well, you cause a lot of issues with people who have problems with acronyms or anything associated with the Nazis. An option was mentioned as "SSR," or "SSH." I didn't like either, so I decided the abbreviation would be "SER." More of my trying to think outside of the box, not being bound by the norm, steretypes, etc., as I prefer to.


04-05-2005 04:08:46

Well, change for a change we can even go with medieval japanese ranks and titles or perhaps old egyptian's, if will work just as fine as this angelic thing. Biased ? People are just expressing their opinion on this matter and as far as I'm concerned I agree with them.
What's that wrong with the sith ranks anyway ? The Siths has been at war toward eachother or agaist the Jedi since before they were even called Siths so why don't keep this "attitude" noted in their actual ranks ? The current ranks, for as bad as it look, shows clearly and easily the progression or powers, influences and responsability (often =P) a member of the Sith Order holds moving up on the power ladder. IF we really need to change it, it should be something even someone un-geeky can understand and recognize.


04-05-2005 04:22:59

I personally don't see much need to change the ranks at all.

Warrior, Warlord, and Overlord are all straightforward and connote the level of authority by rank nicely. Warmaster I'm not too fond of though, and maybe a small break in the "war" chain is warranted there. How about "Elite"?

Notwithstanding the original meanings of words, we shouldn't forget the modern connotations. Will people thinking about joining the DB look at Seraph and go "Neat. A military advisor" or "...right....a Dark Jedi strumming a harp on a cloud"? Personally, I think Overlord sounds much better.

I say keep the words loaded with religious and mystical undertones to a minimum (Acolyte is plenty - and probably fairly well denotes the point at which a Jedi's education in the Force really picks up), and stick to the current more military (for lack of a better word) feel overall.

Make with the Sith-wide poll then.

Sith Bloodfyre

04-05-2005 04:43:17

Short and simple? I don't like Overlord as a rank, never have. I don't see Overlord as following with the current ranks, nor do I see it as "keeping with the feel of warring with Jedi." Am I trying to corrupt something that is seen, today, as something established, "holy," etc.? Sure.

If we're going to get mad about using "holy" names, I suppose we ought to get rid of Priest, Archpriest, Epis and Pontifex for the Krath, and all but Primarch for the Obelisk. If you have to ask why, try on each of those words. Quite honestly, objection to something seen as "holy" is absurd. Objection to something new is not, however, though change in and of itself is not bad. I'm not just trying to change the rank name, or the "chorus names." I've been very honest about this since I became SHW; I'm looking to remold the image of the Order, to do away with the misconception that the Sith should still be pilots, or a military Order.

If you want a military Order, we have some wonderful allied Clubs who focus on the military. If you want something that has its own flavor, and encourages creativity, that's what this Club is going for. I can appreciate those of you who were brought up in the Sith Order as a veritable TC clone; I'm not going to be bound by that, though. Nor am I going to encourage it. For as many transfer requests as I've seen from Initiates of the Sith, who want to go Krath or Obelisk, because they're "not pilots, don't own (or want to own) the flying games, would rather be a warrior," or any other number of reasons, I've decided that changes need to come.

Any suggestions to the contrary? Feel free to mention them. I've got no problems with people presenting alternatives. I've got no problems with people discussing alternatives. I've got no problems whatsoever with people choosing another option for the Order. I do have a problem with people saying, "omg, that sucks, change it," "that's not Star Wars, change it," etc. This is what we make it, and quite honestly, this Order is what you make it. If you make it my decision, I'll change it to what I like. If you make it your decision, you'll get what you like. It's pretty simple, but I either want an involved Order, or peace over what I choose to do.

Personally, I'd rather have the involved Order.


04-05-2005 06:10:58

As taken from the comments page

Though I don't dislike the general idea I'm not a fan of the Seraph rank. I never particuarly felt it appropriate for the GMRG and I also find it inappropriate in use as an actual rank. To make this a bit easier on the eyes I'm going to put sub-headings in:


It means an angel. It just doesn't fit. Yes, yes, the word really comes from Aramaic, but here's the important fact: who actually knows that? Nobody.

Everybody knows the Seraphim as the archangels of Heaven that "guard" (remember that word, we're coming back to it later) God. That's all people think about. The average Dark Brotherhood member isn't a professional historian of the ancient world. Despite that words like Jedi and Darth might have had their source in Persia, again: nobody knows that. People think of them as new and unique words. 99.99% of fans think Darth is an abbreviation of DARk Lord of the SiTH, and for all we know, unless somebody here has Lord Lucas sitting next to them, it might be.

Its what the common public think that matters, not what some professional historian sitting in a dark room thinks about. If people think angels then the word means angels, no if-ing and but-ing about the true origins of ancient language will change that. A lot of English words have their direct origins in Latin, but nobody cares about that, the general public only consider the words Old English origin, or perhaps French origin.

Rule #1: KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid. The general public aren't that bright.


This is a fairly short issue.

Everybody think back for a second to the Obelisk Ranks. Here's a brief summary of events:

1. The DC came up with what they thought was a great set of changes.
2. The DC made those changes.
3. The Obelisk Order revolted.
4. The DC gave in and accepted the ranks needed to be changed.
5. The DC accepted suggestions for new ranks.
6. The DC ran tons of polls to narrow down the final choices.

Moral of the story, don't do something without the full support of the whole majority. I was on the DC when we changed the Obelisk Ranks, and yes, like the rest of the DC, I thought our original suggestion was a great idea. That didn't mean it was. People dislike change.

People especially dislike unnecessary change. The Obelisk Ranks were somewhat justified as we wanted all three Orders to be unique. Right now though, while I'm seeing lots of "Pro-Seraph" arguments, could somebody please enlighten me as to whats wrong with the term Overlord? Sure, we could think up a new word, but I wasn't aware there was any need to do so? A lot of people dislike Pontifex but we haven't seen an surge of demands to change the rank, people just accept it. For a start, changing a rank is just going to piss off a few people, thats it, its not going to actually generate any constructive benefit to the people who like it, surely we've got better things to worry about (running a competition will make people active, changing their rank to Seraph won't)? Its the same with Pontifex, a lot of people would like to see it changed, but a lot of people would get pissed off if it were changed too. The people it pisses off cause problems. The people who like it... don't actually benefit, a new name isn't going to increase their activity, but it will run the risk of alienating those who dislike it. So, basically, other than "we don't like it", what is the reason for changing Overlord?

I can see a basis if we were, say, changing all four ranks to "more Sith style ranks to increase recruitment prospects following Revenge of the Sith". That would make sense, and don't get me wrong, I don't care if we change the current Sith ranks. But I'm not seeing a logical reason for why we are doing it. If anything ranks like Seraph risk alienating the ordinary Star Wars fan, a.k.a. our recruitment and member base for the future. With the new film just a fortnight away alienating potential Star Wars fans is really, well, unwise.

The point is, normally theres a reason for doing something, I'd quite like to see a reason for why we should change what we already have, not just a reason for why we should have something new. Seraph might be a good rank, but so is Overlord, so where exactly is the necessity? I'm sure I could think up a whole new set of four good sounding ranks if I could really be bothered, but again, what would be the necessity?

If it's not broke, don't fix it. It may not be perfect, but it's not broken either.


I've seen a lot of arguments saying "the Krath and the Obelisk don't follow canon, so why should the Sith". Did anybody else see the direct irony of that statement?

Because they don't. Somebody has to. At times I wonder if we're trying to run just another plain Sci-Fi club and not a Star Wars club. We've got Episode III coming out just around the corner, and here we are trying to play Roman Catholic rather than Dark Jedi?

The Sith are the single most canon entity in the whole of the Star Wars universe. To change them would be, qutie frankly, the second greatest perversion of the Star Wars galaxy thats possible (the only greater one would be to change what the Jedi are). One of the principle aims of the existing ranks was to maintain as traditional a Sith "feel" as possible.

Sith Warriors and Sith Warlords both existed in the Sith Empire. Sith Warmasters didn't, but the word comes from the Yuuzhan Vong, who were a very war-like Star Wars race and behaved a lot like the Sith, so showed the right type of meaning. The word Overlord simply came across as something of a logical progression from the other Sith Ranks, it also was still a word that has appeared on occassion within Star Wars and would appear somewhat fitting in terms of the ancient Sith Empire.

Seraph I'm afraid doesn't achieve any of that. It perverts the Sith into an entirely different entity. People don't join the Sith because they want to join something unique, they join it because they want to be a Sith.

Sith... Darth Maul. Darth Tyranus. Darth Vader. Darth Sidious. Darth Bane. Darth Revan. Darth Malak. Darth Sion. Darth Nihilus. Darth Traya. Exar Kun. Ulic Qel-Droma. Freedon Nadd. Naga Sadow. Ludo Kressh. Marka Ragnos.

THAT is what people think about when they choose to be a Sith. They certainly aren't thinking, nor care, about something that WE have made up completely- which the whole Seraph idea would be.

Moral of the story here? Keep it to Star Wars. People aren't joining to roleplay in a Fantasy club, they join to be a Sith from Star Wars. If they don't like that that's what the Krath Order exists for- its different.

I don't think I need to point out the Sith Order isn't the Krath Order.

If you're going to change the ranks, then do that, do it plural and just change what the Sith Order stands for. I think you'll find it'll alienate quite a lot of members of the Sith Order though, as a lot are only Sith to roleplay Darth Vader. They're not here to roleplay something we made up. I might stay Sith because its in the blood, but I honestly can't say I'd feel comfortable roleplaying something completely different to what the term Sith means in the Star Wars universe. To be frank, I'd rather roleplay a Krath, at least it'd be keeping to the Star Wars universe, and not turning Christian.

Sith isn't our creation. Its a creation of Star Wars. If we want to play with an Order then by all means... do so with the Obelisk Order.


I felt compelled the bring this up as soon as I read through the document outlining the "choirs" idea.

"They have spent years developing their powers, and are the mightiest of the Angels of the Brotherhood."

Well that's just a plain breach of what the Sith Order is. Everyone really should go and watch the films again, or maybe just pick up a Star Wars book. I'd especially recommend, if you haven't done so already, going and reading a spoiler page about what is said in Episode III, because this concept is a complete deviation from what the Sith Order IS.

Point #1: If you're not going to make it roleplay the Sith Order, change the name, because this wouldn't be the Sith Order anylong. Call it the Kyronal Order or whatever, this isn't the Sith Order we're describing here.

"They are the angels of darkness, the shadows of impending doom, and the heralds of unholiness."

Again, we're forgetting the fundamental ideas of what the Sith Order is about. I'm going to pull slightly from a debate on the Message Board about reasons why the Sith shouldn't use "holy" ideas.

Because, IRON RULE #1 of what it means to be Sith is: SITH ARE NOT JEDI.

That is the most fundamental essence behind the entire existance of the Sith Order. They are not Jedi and their single most important goal in life is to destroy the Order of Jedi Knights. That's what the Sith Order is.

So, why are they different? Because the Sith Order doesn't follow a strict doctrine of "how to teach the Force". It does what it thinks is better. The Sith were the radicals, so to speak. It's rather inappropriate to think of them as angels, even dark ones, or having anything to do with unholiness, as if anything, Sith are about the middle road. They do what they want to do, that isn't necessarily unholy. Palpatine thought he was the greatest thing since sliced bread, and that he was waging a rightful and just war to bring peace and prosperity to the galaxy (his words, not mine)- and that was something he genuinely believed he was doing. He didn't just think the Jedi Knights were corrupt, he passionately believed it.

Sith aren't just mad people with pitchforks running around stabbing people without a brain. However thats the impression a Dark Angel gives, as Dark Angels tend to be percieved in the "devils & demons" category (just thinking that makes me shiver, this discussion is getting too D&D for my liking). Devils and demons are almost always single minded and without much room for thought, Dark Angels typically exist in fiction to do one thing: kill and destroy.

Sith aren't like that. Palpatine didn't want to kill and destroy everybody. He just wanted to bring order to a galaxy that had lost its way. That wasn't one of his lies, he genuinely wanted to just bring peace and justice and remove the corruption of the Jedi Knights.

Again, going back to Issue Three, don't forget what the Sith Order is.

"The Order of the Sith are the angels of the Dark Side"

I'm not going to go into a lesson on the dark side, if anybody wants to see that go and read the "Dark Side Values" discussion on the General Forum of the Message Board.

I will say a few things though. The Sith don't believe in the dark side. The dark side doesn't have a "consciousness". It isn't like the Force.

Here's another distinct Sith-Jedi difference:

1. Jedi follow the will of the Force.
2. Sith ignore the will of the Force.
3. Sith DO NOT follow a "will of the dark side". There isn't one.

Everybody seems to like the idea of doing the dark side's bidding. Its just not true. There isn't a consciousness to the dark side. The dark side is about IGNORING the consciousness of the Force and doing what you personally want to do. Thats what I dislike this term "Angels of the Dark Side". Its implying the Sith are serving something... a "dark side entity" of sorts. Thats just not appropriate for what the Sith Order is about.

The Sith Order is about using the Force for... whatever you want to. Its the opposite of "serving" any greater mystical power.

If philosophical movie terminology is too vague those of you who have played KOTOR2 will probably know roughly what I'm talking about in regards to what Darth Traya says. That's largely the same thing as is described in the upcoming film.

"The Sith Order reveres the Dark Lord as a deified individual. The fact that he's also the Grand Master is secondary. As such, the Order is likened unto his "choirs of angels."

I want to talk particuarly about this revering of the Dark Lord.

The Sith hate their masters. The Sith envy their masters. The Sith want to kill, slaughter, destroy and usurp their masters. The Sith most certainly don't revere their masters.

I hate to point it out again everybody, but this is Star Wars. If you want to roleplay a made up group of Dark Jedi then the Obelisk Order is always happy to accept new recruits. The rest of us are happily Sith because we like roleplaying a real part of the Star Wars universe.

A Sith is a power hungry and self loving individual. The only way the Dark Lord maintains control is through fear and displaying greater power. The Dark Lord isn't in charge because people respect him, he's in charge because he acts like a dictator and kills people who piss him off.

The Empire blew up planets to get people to obey it. It didn't get people to obey it by being nice and having them bow down before it as gods.

People didn't like Darth Vader. Even Admiral Motti, Grand Moff Tarkin, and most other Imperial officers didn't exactly treat Vader as one of their drinking buddies who they'd have a night out with. The man had their respect because he scared the crap out of them and would kill them if they pissed him off.

People don't revere Sith in the holy, spiritual and happy sense. Unfortunately that the impression ANY likeness to angels, choirs, seraphim and so on produces.

I'm going to close by coming full circle back to a point I began with:

People know the Seraphim as the archangels who "guard" God.

I mentioned I'd address the word "guard". I more or less already have in the section we just talked about. Sith don't guard their masters. If a Sith Master needs guarding his apprentice isn't going to have much respect for him and is quite likely to slaughter him at first chance- or stop guarding him and allow him to be slaughtered.

That's another issue with the term Seraph as an actual rank name. The Seraphim aren't going to be guarding the Dark Lord or High Warrior. That isn't what Sith do. They're far more likely to work together to depose and destroy the High Warrior and Dark Lord.

Which brings us to one final point: working together? Again, what are we, Jedi? Obviously knobody has heard of the rule of two.

Darth Bane created the rule of two because the Sith were incapable of getting along and working together. They did nothing but fight with internal struggles and back stabbing. That, again, is part of what the Sith Order is about and part of what people want to roleplay when they choose the Sith Order over one of the others.

I noticed on the Message Boards that it was said if people wanted to roleplay a military group then there are plenty of other clubs for them to join?

How true. If you want to roleplay a Jedi Knight there are plenty of other clubs to join too. This however is the Sith Order. We don't get along, we're not angels, and we're not a bunch of happy go loving knights who kiss our leaders asses and worship the ground they walk on.

We're backstabbing bastards who slaughter our masters at first dawn, usurp their positions, horde knowledge and power and seek the destruction of every last Jedi Knight in the galaxy.

If somebody isn't happy about that then its time to stop being a Sith. Its not time to go and undo the second most fundamental part of the entire Star Wars mythos.

Summary for those too lazy to read my essay:

We're playing Star Wars here kiddies. If you don't like being a member of the Sith Order then go join a happy-clappy club and roleplay a Jedi Knight where we all get along.

I want to keep my evil bastard character though, thank you very much. When I want to roleplay a Dark Angel I'll be sure to go and join a D&D Forgotten Realms club and play a devil, until such time I'd like to keep my Dark Jedi Knight intact.


04-05-2005 06:23:24

I gotta say, I agree with most of what Goat says.


04-05-2005 06:34:42

I do have a problem with people saying, "omg, that sucks, change it," "that's not Star Wars, change it," etc. This is what we make it, and quite honestly, this Order is what you make it.

If we were talking about the Obelisk Order you'd be right.

Unfortunately how many people do you think click "Sith Order" when they join the Dark Brotherhood because of some made-up story that we've written (that they know nothing about at the time) as oppossed to how many who choose to join the Sith Order because its the Sith Order?

People join the Sith Order on first instance (a.k.a. when they join the Dark Brotherhood) not because they're looking for something different. They don't know its different. They're looking for something that emulates the Sith Order of Star Wars.

I don't know about you but with Episode III around the corner I think we should be worrying about our new recruits. Those people aren't going to give a crap about what your or my view of the Sith Order is. They're not going to a give a damn about some make believe idea involving angels and mythological holy warriors.

They're going to be wanting to roleplay Darth Vader.

If you want to go and turn the Sith Order into something completely different, for existing members, who are already in the club, who are already active in the club, who won't care what the rank names are again in two months, by all means do so. However, do bare in mind, you'll be alienating Star Wars fans from joining the Dark Brotherhood, because the Dark Brotherhood will no longer contain any place for people to roleplay a real Dark Jedi from Star Wars. In the past the Sith Order has always been the place for people who want to stick with real Star Wars, not completely made up Obelisk Order Star Wars, or slightly made-up Krath Star Wars.

I really do worry at times about the direction this club is going.

And before you all say the same things you've been telling me for months. Need I point out we get far less recruits these days? Need I also point out that we should be getting hundreds following the release of Episode III like we did with Attack of the Clones, and The Phantom Menace, and during the aftermath of the Special Edition releases?

If we don't it won't be because we can't. New film releases always see huge influxes into clubs like us. It will be because we didn't provide what the fans were looking for. And how many Revenge of the Sith fans are looking for a quasi-occult club? I think few. They're looking for a Star Wars club. You'll notice, the majority of long term dedicated Dark Brotherhood members who have been around for over five years are also usually some of the bigger Star Wars fans. The ones who aren't that big on Star Wars come and go. People only stay in the Dark Brotherhood because of its Star Wars atmosphere. If you're just going to recruit dark gothic occult fans who like demons and devils and dark angels etc. don't be surprised if they don't hang around for more than a year.

If you want a military Order, we have some wonderful allied Clubs who focus on the military.

Yes, we also have plenty of allied clubs who roleplay Jedi Knights. If people want to roleplay happy-go-lucky Jedi who get along and play sing alongs and run around in their robes at night singing hymns then I'm sure the Rebel Squadrons would be more than welcome to let them roleplay Jedi Knights. Likewise I'm sure there are many fan clubs who would be more than willing to accept a few D&D fans looking to roleplay dark angels and devil characters.

This is the Dark Jedi Brotherhood however. Not Dark Brotherhood generic. Dark Jedi Brotherhood.

People join this club to roleplay Dark Jedi. This club may be unique but don't fall into the disillusion that thats actually a good thing. That's quite possibly the biggest problem with the club right now. People join the Dark Jedi Brotherhood and then discover when they finish the Shadow Academy that they're actually in the Dark Occult Brotherhood.

We've been trying this "lets be occult dark side fanatics" for two years now. Everyone keeps telling the Star Wars fans among us that we're the ones who are wrong but perhaps one day somebody should actually try running a poll to find out how many people genuinely prefer roleplaying something entirely made-up rather than something that actually suits the Star Wars galaxy. There are lots of far more successful Star Wars clubs and groups out there than us, and guess what, they actually stick to the Star Wars galaxy. The most hardcore Star Wars fans (who also tend to be the most loyal and active Dark Brotherhood members) aren't looking for an occult club. Right now though that's what they find.

I do have a question for people... explain to me which of the following is more beneficial to the club:

1. A Star Wars setting that attracts new recruits and ensures the future prosperity.
2. A quasi-occult Star Wars setting that alienates new recruits and only benefits existing members who are coming up for retirement already.

Like I said earlier... I really think at times we're heading completely the wrong way. Its no surprise to me at all that the Dark Brotherhood has trouble attracting new recruits and more importantly keeping them once it gets them. Sure, we might appeal to ourselves, thats not hard when we're the ones writing our own stories. That doesn't mean they appeal to anybody else.

And we're not the one who has to live with them. Many of us won't be here in twenty-four months time. New people will. How many of those new people who join because they want to be Sith after watching Revenge of the Sith are going to want to roleplay something we made up?

This is just committing yet another change to our destiny. This idea is highly controversial. Even if enough people like it right now are any of you actually going to stand there and swear under oath that in two years time people will like an idea you might have liked? This club isn't about you or me, its about Star Wars fans in general. Keep the non Star Wars material out of the official history books as much as possible. If we had done that in the first place we wouldn't be needing to change the ranks right now. If we would just leave them something purely Star Wars we would never need to worry about changing them. Ranks like Seraph are just asking for another bunch of people to have to change them in two years time when the few people who do like them retire.

Which brings me to my final point:

Revenge of the SITH

Have a guess which Order is going to benefit the most from the new film?

That means right now the Sith Order has a high obligation to the ENTIRE Dark Brotherhood (meaning any changes to it affect the Krath and Obelisk members too currently) because we'll be the ones getting most of the new recruits.

Those new recruits aren't joining because they want to play in our made-up occult club. They're joining because they want to play in a club that emulates the universe they'll be watching on the big screen later this month in Revenge of the Sith.

I'll point you back to the Obelisk Ranks too. Those affected all of us. I didn't want to see the club I was a member of made into a laughing stock. Any changes to the fundamental structure of this club affect everybody meaning a Sith only discussion is, frankly, offensive to the Krath and Obelisk Orders. Changes to the Sith Order affect the members under the command of a Krath Quaestor of a Multi-Order House. They affect Obelisk members who change to Sith in six months time. They affect anybody interested in the overall roleplaying experience.

The only people changing the rank affects differently to anybody else are the current Sith Overlords themselves. However it affects a Sith Jedi Hunter just as much as a Krath Jedi Hunter.

So it really boils down to this: what's more important? Putting the few first, or putting the entire club's future first?

If changing the ranks was able to have an immediate positive impact (read: giant activity surge) then I could see the sense in it, but that idea is clearly absurd. Ranks don't affect activity. The current ranks aren't affecting activity and have been around for long enough now that people have just come to accept them. They also are vaguely appropriate for a Star Wars setting. Seraph however isn't. The only thing Seraph will achieve (because it won't generate activity) is to take the Sith Order further away from the real Sith Order and risk causing problems in the future with new fans. It brings us back to what I said in my previous post about "what is the necessity?".

If there isn't a necessity, and it isn't going to produce direct positive benefits, why take the risk of alienating the rest of the Star Wars community from the Dark Brotherhood? While I can already hear the response "its only a rank and that won't happen" the point is... this isn't about a rank. This is about increasing ignoring Star Wars and becoming the Dark Occult Brotherhood. We keep making small changes that "won't matter" but after so many of them the Dark Brotherhood is starting to look more and more like a generic gothic fan club than something devoted to Star Wars and Dark Jedi.

The present ranks may not be the best and it might be a good idea to change them. However. They should be changed to whatever is most appropriate in order to make the most out of the new film and appeal to future members and present members.

We're not just hear to appeal to the present members (ourselves). We're here to ensure the future prosperity of this club. Our predecessors didn't do that, that's why we have so many problems right now. Learn from our own mistakes. If you want this club to be in better shape in a years time be sure to do things that are actually going to help it in the long run.

That means thinking about the future. Not just our present situation. Its about all members, past, present and future, not just the dozen right now who think this is a "cool idea".


04-05-2005 06:47:09

I don't like Overlord either. I dislike Pontifex as much now because after the pope election thingy my son pointed out to me that it really sounds too popish.

While at the issue of the new movie title - could we make our history a lot more canon, please? I could've gotten 16 new members from another club of mine but they want something real and not the made up Sith history stuff we have. Although they were cool enough with adding things. Guess I'll need to open another thread about that, though.

Mike Halcyon

04-05-2005 08:21:24

I can only recommend that people read thoroughly through both of Goat`s posts. He is 100% right.


04-05-2005 08:35:01

If we were talking about the Obelisk Order you'd be right.

I won't quote the whole two posts but I want to say that, Goat you are hereby appointed as my personal HERO !

And I agree with Arania about our history. STAR WARS people, that's what we are all about.


04-05-2005 09:05:20

I can only recommend that people read thoroughly through both of Goat`s posts. He is 100% right.

Indeed, for once I was glad to read one of his post compleately, not to mention BOTH !!

I don't understand what's wrong with the current Sith ranks, EXPECIALY Overlord. We (Siths) are here because we like to be live Vader and Co., we want to be the DARK LORD OF THE SITH ! So why you don't like Overlord is far from my understanding.. sounding wise is also the closest thing to Sith Lord you could be, and there's nothing cooler for a Sith.

Macron Sadow

04-05-2005 09:41:04

Seraph- " Burning ones", angels of severity and justice. Kabala..... ironically, they are not "cool" like people think of angels for the most part. They punish people.

Just a thought. However, I like things the way they are, except for Overlord. I'm just a noob, though.


04-05-2005 09:55:16

Well as a Overlord myself I figure I should say something about this topic so here goes, first of all I never really did like the name Overlord, I liked the old sith ranks, but of course we wont get those back now so I for one don't mind that you want to change Overlord.
The name Seraph in itself I like but I must admit that the first that came to my mind as well was 'angels' so I guess in the end I like the name but it also sounds... non-sith to me.


04-05-2005 11:45:50

I dislike Overlord and Warlord as it is just to much Lord for my liking. I had a few ideas awhile back before I knew of BFs thoughts (which I like)
But anyway here is what I had come up awhile back.

Sith Overlord
Sith Warlord
Sith Warmaster
Sith Warrior

My Idea
Sith Warlord
Sith Sorcerer
Sith Assassin
Sith Marauder

I like it mainly because it takes out all the "War” There is more to Power then just straight war. There is manipulation, deceit and much much more. It also shows a progression to me. It starts with Marauder, which is still a bit young and brash and more prone to rush to conflict. Progresses to Assassin who has learned to wait for their mark before attacking. Then Sorcerer /Alchemist when they start to really delve into the Powers of the Sith. Finally Warlord where they have a firm command of what the Sith are.

Macron Sadow

04-05-2005 11:47:26

I like those!


04-05-2005 11:58:23

I really don't like Sith Sorceror...I really don't think it fits, but I do like the other names...although would Assassin be better before Marauder? Depends on how they're described I guess.

As for a replacement for Sorcerer...not sure at the moment, but I'm sure there's a good name that involves the progression being made in that list.

Currently, I don't like Overlord either, but it does fit in much better than Seraph...and this coming from the guy who made Seraph a GMRG rank :P (which, btw, noone ever told ME they disliked...but eh :P)

Spears' list is in line with more of the SIth the D20 game and KOTOR..and I do like our current names as well. Just Seraph since it doesn't fit into any real category.

Oh, and Goat, nice post. It'll actually help me flesh out my own character a bit better now

Nekura Manji

04-05-2005 12:05:54

In the end it just comes down to what connotations the average member is going to assign to the rank 'Seraph'. They'll think, hey, cool! Sith Warriors and Warlords, and.... Seraphs? Why the hell are they named after angels? The only people likely to realise the alternate meaning of them being unholy warriors are, like Goat said, those historians and scholars who happen to know that kind of thing.

Suggestions? I suck at suggestions. But needless to say, concerning Spears' theory- I do like those rank names. However, I think they apply more to what path you choose to take along the Dark Side- you could choose to be a Marauder or a Sorceror, but somebody who roleplays a bad-ass killing machine would probably be pissed off if they got promoted and their rank name had them as a wizard. They're more suited to the KOTOR 2 path, where you choose which one you want to follow.


04-05-2005 12:13:04

I'll do a little analysis of the Order ranks here, so bear with me.

Krath (first because they're easy):

Priest: the baseline
Archpriest: something better than a Priest
Epis: a word that Wikipedia does not know, but it stems from Epistle - a pastoral letter. Thus, it can suitably be translated as someone who writes spiritual teaching letters (like the apostles and some other folks in neo-Christian times)
Pontifex: a moniker for the highest of priests since ancient Rome, today generally reserved for the Catholic Pope (Pontifex Maximus).

Thus, we have a clear progression from a basic something to the epitome of the same somethingness.


Templar: the baseline rank, or rather should be (I'll get to that in a second)
Prelate: usually a bishop, but also used in a more government-oriented sense as a medium to high administrative officer (used in several fictional settings too, e.g. Prelates of the Romulans in Star Trek)
Exarch: provincial governor in the Byzantine Empire
Primarch: literally "First Ruler".

In this case, Prelate-Exarch-Primarch present a hierarchy of rulers where the lower grades are dependent and have more a mediating function while the highest one has supreme authority. The Templar however, as a crusading knight, does not fit this at all (he only fits the church-sense of "Prelate" somewhat). So this hierarchy breaks down somewhere and we might want to look into a replacement for Templar that is more remniscent of a governor's aide. Maybe a more fancy term for "Mayor" might be in line.

finally, the Sith:

Warrior: An undisputed baseline that very well reflects Sithness.
Warmaster: A compound term that essentially implies a Warrior of high skill, as in a martial arts master. Has however the problem of using the term "Master" which in itself has very clear meanings in the Dark Jedi realm.
Warlord: Usually used for the more-or-less recognized ruler of a tribe or otherwise not really organized bunch of people. Implies some skill (to get the status) but mostly power.
Overlord: Can only be explained as "more than a (War-)lord" in this context. A somewhat clumsy placeholder.

We have a clear power progression and we stay warlike, but that's it. At least the second and fourth term are problematic in themselves and the warlord term as leader of a (usually renegade) faction would more befit a Consul of a "tribe" (aka Clan) warring other "tribes".

A different progression could keep the Warrior and stress skill:

Elite (as was suggested)

(the ??? might go lower - I just have no fourth word right now).

Or, we might borrow from the Roman Legion and try:

Warrior (I'll keep this one instead of Legionnaire)
Optio or Optimate

Whoops, that's actually five. I don't like the Legate too much by connotation (it is used in diplomatic corps of today) - and I'd also prefer the "Optimate" version to "Optio", so one (rough) draft for a well-established Warrior hierarchy is:

Sith Warrior (SW)
Sith Optimate (SO or SOP)
Sith Centurion (SC)
Sith Tribune (ST)

I used SOP as an alternative for the Optimate rank just in case we want to avoid any confusion with the current Overlord in historic records. SO looks nicer to me however.

This would also play into the "choirs" concept, as the roles of these four were quite different in a Roman Legion.


04-05-2005 12:46:35

I kind of liked the old ranks..having the 'real' Sith terms (Warrior and Warlord) at the two 'ends' of the scale works..maybe go back to having SW and SWL where they were in the past and make up names that are somewhere in between for the current SWM and SWL ranks?


04-05-2005 13:00:19

(NOTE: I'm coming from the discussion on the DB news page, which Mav redirected here, so that's what I'm referencing, in case there is any confusion with the current discussion in this thread.)

To my perceptions, it sounds like the changes that are being discussed move our Sith Order away from what is currently accepted as the definition of the Sith Order from the Movies/Expanded Universe. In my opinion, one of two things should happen:
1) Don't make this change and try to keep our Sith Order aligned as closely as possible to the Sith from canon sources.
2) Make the change, and completely redefine the current Sith Order, including renaming it.

Option 1 is pretty self-explanatory. Option 2 is probably much more controvertial, so let me explain my line of reasoning.

The Krath, historically (i.e. Tales of the Jedi comics) were basically a sub-sect of the Sith. While true that the basic organization was in place before Satal Keto and Aleema came in contact with Freedon Nadd or King Ommin, it really only became a source of Dark Side power after they had obtained some Sith artifacts and began to receive instruction in the Sith arts. While the Obelisk Order is simply a creation of the DB for its own purposes (at least, that's my understanding), it too could be defined in this way: as a sub-sect of the Sith.

So why not redefine our current Sith Order with another name, and then define the Sith to be something special and honorary, like the current discussion is about. So to become a Sith would be something to strive for, an honor accorded to the few who have devoted themselves to expanding the power and influence of the Dark Brotherhood. The Grand Master, as the Dark Lord of the Sith, would then have a body of Sith, as well as 3 distinct sub-sects of the Sith, over which he ruled.

(Yes, yes, I know this will probably never happen, because the people who currently are Sith would like to remain Sith and a thousand other reasons.....I just thought I'd throw the idea out there and see if it gets any kind of response at all.)


04-05-2005 13:46:11

Hey folks,

I realize people intend to join the DB in order to roleplay Star Wars. However, I've never heard the term "Overlord" used in Star Wars movies in relation to a Sith leader. So, I don't think that it is necessary to keep Overlord to maintain the Star Wars feel.

If Overlord is not fit for a rank name (which appears to be up in the air, anyway), then we may want to change it.


A few comments:

On Kaiann's proposed rank names: The idea itself is alright. But, I don't know... If we're going to abandon the War progression entirely, we may be better off with some other form. It's not terrible, mind you, but I like most of our current progression save for the very end.

On Spears' proposed rank names: I don't know if I really like all of them - Because I don't think that an Assassin is necessarily "less powerful" than a sorcerer... they just fight differently. Of course, if we wanted "spellcaster"-esque titles, we could come up with those just by looking at a few D&D class names and making some adjustments. =P But, I do realize that taking on a new name doesn't mean they aren't also that, as well. And, if we want to stick to Star Wars, this is by far the best idea I've seen yet for rank names.

On Seraph in general: There's a lot of good reasons not to use the name, as well as a lot of good reasons to use it. I like the idea behind Seraph... but, much like some of the past names we've used to describe positions, what it sounds like or what it is most commonly seen as is going to play more of a role in what people think of when they read the rank name than what the true historical background is. However, I don't think this means we should abandon the idea behind it... Nor do I think we necessarily have to always shy away from something because it has a real world meaning or history that might cloud what we intend by it.

Anyway, keep the ideas coming. Remember to stay civil and all. :)


04-05-2005 14:14:16

Just as a side note I still like BF's idea, but I think looking at some other suggestions beats writing a multi-page color coded thesis on why Seraph sucks. Doing that is a waste of time and accomplishes nothing. other then over working the fingers.

I am not a big fan of the Roman Sith, that Kaiann floated out. I do think What Lenzar said has a bit of merit.
So here is another idea on the subject. Keep in mind this a

Sith Warlord
Sith Overseer
Sith Marauder
Sith Warrior

For me it is about progression as much as anything.
Warrior- still young in the Order and usually acts under the direct command of a superior. IE most Warriors aren't running campaigns or large missions. (Typically AED/QUA)

Marauder - Has taken steps and is striking out on missions on their own. They are starting to be a force to be reckoned with, but they still take most of their Orders from a higher up. They have been known to strike out on their own for smaller targets of opprotunity. They are often found leading a house into battle. (Typically AED/QUA)

Overseer - At this point the member by and large has the power and authority to take on larger targets of their own. They have been know to lead the assaults on Planets and in some cases entire star systems.(Typically PCON)

Warlord - Has reached the heights of the Order. They lead whole armies into comabt. A Warlord thinks in terms of Star Systems and Clusters. (Typically CON+)

I am sure better descriptions describing their other powers with the Force and possible politcal ties can be created but this a quick and dirty lunch time creation. Again just an idea.


04-05-2005 14:48:41

Well, I don't like the Warlord too much, especially at the high levels. Warlord is too undisciplined for an Equite-4 Sith and questionable eve as Equite-3. I'd rather see that one as a 2nd rank if anything, comparable to Archpriest.

But while we're at it, I'd like to see support or "yuck"s for a complete redesign of all three Order scales. Now that the discussion is open anyway, I think it would be a good time to rethink all three scales and ultimately come up with something that has some serious horizontal (equal level = equal coolness factor) and vertical (clear progression within one's order) correctness. And, while we're at it, how about having names for the "Order Knights" (DJK-rank members who have already committed to their Order in preparation for their Equite career), "Order Adepts" (for those DAs who want it) and maybe even new, truly supreme titles for the Order Leaders ?

So, the challenge:

Let's come up with seven titles per order: A 0-level title for the order-aligned DJK, equite levels 1 to 4, a fifth, "Adept" title for Order-aligned Elders and a supreme title for the Order Leader.

(Yes, if you want it done, do it right.)


04-05-2005 14:57:21

Let's come up with seven titles per order: A 0-level title for the order-aligned DJK, equite levels 1 to 4, a fifth, "Adept" title for Order-aligned Elders and a supreme title for the Order Leader.

I'm really against redesigning our entire rank structure... It's just something I don't think we need to do. It's one thing to rename a rank name, another to resdesign all three Order Progressions. :P Plus, one person's opinion of "equal coolness factor" is different from another person's. Furthermore, the Adept is not meant to have an Order'd name, as they are at the beginning of transcendence over Order 'limitations,' at least as far as I think on it. *shrugs*

Anyway - I don't mind Spear's latest suggestion, though I think Overseer is nearly as weak as Overlord... I guess if there is unanimous disapproval of Warmaster, then major changes do make sense.


04-05-2005 15:01:25

I am just tossing out some ideas. I agree Overseer is a bit weak. I am hoping someone else can trump it. That is if changes even happen.

As for the complete rebuild, why don't we take it one step at a time before getting dreams of rebuilding the whole suite.


04-05-2005 15:02:49

I really dislike the Roman Legion ranks for the same reason as Seraph and the angel ranks: they don't feel appropriate.

Again, what's going to bring up in a search engine? People looking up Roman history aren't looking for us. However the people who are, those looking up Sith terms, won't find us. The main problem I have with Roman terms, and its probably more because I'm English than anything else, is my language is almost entirely derived from Roman. The words nearly all have direct translations. The Roman terms just sound silly more than they do unique.

I don't mind the Marauder/Sorcerer/Warrior/Assassin set however they all feel more like "roles" than progressive ranks. A person who gets a promotion isn't necessarily going to suddenly want to redefine his or her character's role from being an assassin to a sorcerer which is where problems arise.

This is why I always disliked the Obelisk Ranks going through the whole polling solo without thought put into the other Orders at the same time (do we all see why I made a big fuss about how one Order affects all the others now?). The role one Order assumes limits the roles the other Orders can take up. If the Krath dropped the whole wierd Catholic priesthood thing and took up the "Sith Sorcerer" role then it would make the choice a lot easier for the Sith.

As it is, there is a giant void that the Sith Order has to fill: Sorcerers, Warriors, Assassins, Marauders, etc. are all part of that void. Thats why anything too specific is a problem because it limits the options people have to define their role.

Do I have any better ideas? Well, yes, what we have currently. I'm the one that made what we have currently so that is my suggestion, hence why I'm not particuarly bothered about trying to come up with any others. I can quite easily see somebody addressing Palpatine as their overlord, its generic, I can't really see them addressing him as their seraph though. That said we all seem to dislike the word Overlord it seems (I'll stress though that I'm still untaken by the argument against Overlord, half a dozen people [primarily high ranking leaders] doesn't really shout all to me, not when my foremost issue is how it all looks on the outside to prospective new recruits).

One thing I will point out is that everything I'm hearing right now is exactly the same as what was said two years ago. If nothing more thats an example of how times change. That should be saying that generic is better than specific. Its best to avoid going with the present "fad" or the current "in thing" or "cool idea". Those are short-lived.

That said, I wouldn't mind the ones Spears suggested of:

Sith Warrior
Sith Marauder
Sith Overseer
Sith Warlord

Those work reasonably well. I'm not entirely sure I like the Overseer bit, it sounds kind of bleh and not befitting of the grandeur of the Sith Order. To be honest I'd rather bring Battlemaster back, so something like:

Sith Warrior
Sith Marauder
Sith Battlemaster
Sith Warlord

Or something of that nature, you don't have many repeating terms (War- only occurs twice at the start and end) and they all fit a similar trend.

I'll actually mention something else... I'm not against going back to the original ranks all together:

Sith Warrior
Sith Battlemaster
Sith Battlelord
Sith Warlord

Why? Because the only reason we changed them in the first place was because (if you remember back) we originally let the Obelisk Order keep Battlemaster and Battlelord:

Obelisk Crusader
Obelisk Battlemaster
Obelisk Battlelord
Obelisk Templar

Those sound familiar? That's the only reason the Sith ranks changed in the first place, because we tried to be fifty-fifty and split the changes equally. That's why the Sith ranks were kept as similar to the old ranks as possible, because at the time 99% of the Sith Order didn't want their ranks changed at all.

I'm partial to the rank Marauder though and did originally want to include that two years ago though, again, nobody wanted the ranks to be changed at all so change was kept to a minimum. If we did have Marauder I'm unsure whether it should be placed above or below Warrior. A Warrior sounds more like a professional role while a Marauder sounds more chaotic.

I've never been a huge fan of Warlord, it just conjurese up thoughts of the Imperial Warlords and the idea of, as has been mentioned, more of a Consul and running a rogue group of people rather than a position of high standing. Its very feudal I suppose.

I can't say I'm a giant fan of Battlemaster or Battlelord either. I only don't mind them because I'm so used to them and they're inbuilt into the history of the Dark Jedi Brotherhood, if they were new ideas I'd hate them most likely. Warmaster is an established Yuuzhan Vong rank (essentially the equivalent of a High Warrior in their hierarchy) which is why as unusual a word as it is I still like it.

The big problem here though ultimately depends on who the Sith Order are, and we've never really answered that. In the world of Star Wars they vary a lot from the subtle (yet still fully deadly) characters like Palpatine to the cold empty individuals like Vader all the way up to those with regal stature such as Marka Ragnos. They have represented kings and emperors, rogues and assassins, shadows and public figures, sorcerers and warriors.

The big problem right now is that the Krath and Obelisk are completely different altogether and don't really cut anything off the list. That said the Sith Order, as it exists in the Dark Jedi Brotherhood, most emulates the ancient Sith Empire in terms of its character etc. However we are (essentially) in hiding from the New Republic so the idea of playing the phantom shadow is possibly appropriate also.

Heck, if we went for a completely different approach you could go for a whole range of hidden assassins term:

Sith Marauder
Sith Assassin
Sith Shadow

I can't think of a third one, as I'm sticking to names from actual Star Wars sources again but you get the idea. There are lots of different "roles" the Sith Order can protray itself in its ranks.

Think about the Krath Order for a second though. How many Krath hate being called scholars, bookworms, non-combatants etc? Is it really any surprise when their ranks represent people who live in a church (Pontifex is an archaic version of the word Pontiff which is another word for Pope still commonly used today). That's one very important reason why the Sith Order actually benefits from the very generic feel of what it has currently, as it isn't forced to roleplay a single role.

Whatever happens I'll reiterate what I've said before: Revenge of the Sith is released in two weeks today.


04-05-2005 15:04:10

Mav, I heard disagreement with Pontifex, I heard disagreement with the "too religious" flavor of some Obelisk names, why not do it right instead of making some half changes. A change in all three orders would also allow us to do some things that would otherwise be "unbalanced".

(And the Adept part wasn't my idea, I just mentioned it because I heard demand for it)


04-05-2005 15:08:12

I'm not happy with Kaiann'S ideas because they don't take away stuff like Pontifex - and it's all too catholic. We really need rank names not overly used in the real world in any form when it comes to myths and religion.

Maybe we should find out if the ranks should keep the Order or just forget about it. Bascially, everyone knows a Priest is a Krath, so in theory it makes no sense to add the Order. It makes sense, however, to add it where ranks are same for each Order. Yet, we don't have Krath adepts.

I'll read the rest asap.


04-05-2005 15:09:49

I'm really against redesigning our entire rank structure... It's just something I don't think we need to do. It's one thing to rename a rank name, another to resdesign all three Order Progressions.

I answered this in the last post but I thought I'd highlight it.

Any change really has a knock on affect. Just look at the current Obelisk Ranks. Those have restricted changes to the Sith Order Ranks. The three Orders are all very intricately intertwined. Make one change and it's like hitting a pack of dominos, they'll all start falling over.

Change one rank, later people will think "well the other three don't really fit" and will want to change all the Sith Ranks. Then the next step would be "since the Sith Order now does this the Krath Order wants to change its role too" etc.

Personally I'd rather look at the big picture if we're going to do anything. At least that way we would be able to give more scope to the actual role of the Sith Order. Right now the Sith are forced into being especially generic to cover all the open ends left by the Obelisk and Krath. If the Obelisk and Krath both took a more clear role then it would make life easier for the Sith.

For example: Sith Sorcerers. I'd like to see that covered by the Krath Order. Right now though its still got to be covered by the Sith Order, meaning we can't have ranks that are too warrior like, but likewise we can't have them too passive like.

Its the same when you think about the (dare I use the term) "political" Order. Its a toss up between the Krath and Sith as to which Order you treat as the more influencial and corrupt diplomacy Order. I'd probably label the Sith given the way Palpatine, Exar Kun and Naga Sadow all waged more of a war of fear than a war of brute force. The history of the Sith as the "TIE Corps Clone" though means very few of its members want to be turned from soldiers to shadow hunters though.


04-05-2005 15:14:09

Mav, I heard disagreement with Pontifex, I heard disagreement with the "too religious" flavor of some Obelisk names, why not do it right instead of making some half changes. A change in all three orders would also allow us to do some things that would otherwise be "unbalanced".

(And the Adept part wasn't my idea, I just mentioned it because I heard demand for it)

Because, Kaiann, you are going to hear disagreements and complaints with any rank name, because there isn't a single term we can all agree that we all love. :P Our goal, then, is to just find terms which people dislike least.

And frankly, I don't want to change the Krath ranks - If we did, I'd reccomend it be to something sorcerer-esque, and even then, I'd really prefer we just leave it how it is. If the Krath wish for the rank names changed, they should speak with Telona and she could gather a discussion to consider alternatives to the current.

I'm beginning to wonder if we'll ever find a rank name everyone likes...

Save for Dark Jedi Master. Mmmm.


04-05-2005 15:15:08

Greetings all,

Well as a Sith myself I have to say I personally don't like the title of Seraph. It just doesn't strike me as a very Sith title to have. There has been lots of interesting idea's bounced around which is good but I am curious about why this is being brought up, I mean is it that essential to consider at this stage?

Perhaps as I believe Zorrixor mentioned in one of his earlier posts or rather hinted at would be to begin some sort of poll. Allow the membership to choose a rank they feel is most fitting to the Order.



04-05-2005 15:22:22

I have only been a member for a little over a month and stumbled upon the DB while searching for Ep III spoilers. I chose the Sith Order because that's what I knew and loved from the movies. I had never heard of Obelisk or Krath. Therefore I have to agree with Goat's views on considering the new recruits. While I will remain a Sith no matter how this plays out, I'm not sure how I would have reacted had I seen the Sith described as angels when I first signed up.

Personally, I like the current ranks, but if they must be changed I must say I like Spears' ideas. They sound more fitting to me. Like I said though, I am very new.


04-05-2005 15:24:08

If we do a poll I think we should definately start thinking about incorporating change to all three Orders. I remember hating it when we ran the Obelisk Rank polls as they went through a lot of ideas (thankfully that didn't get picked but had a lot of support) that would have stolen half of the Sith Order's identity. It wouldn't have mattered had the Sith Order been able to change it's identity along side but that wasn't an option.

I actually thought I'd mention also that another problem is to remember all these ranks are above Knight.

That's why I've always questioned Warrior to a certain extent, as it seems significantly below a Knight, the same is even more true in the case of Marauder. Its the main cause of why finding ranks that have decent progression is so difficult because all four have to sound considerably high-status. If you compare these to the Jedi ranks:

Jedi Apprentice
Jedi Padawan
Jedi Knight
Jedi Master

Those are actually half the problem. Once you hit Knight you're already at the top of the scale. Its a pain really that Padawan hadn't been created years ago when the ranks were first created so that we could have separated the four Classes (Journeymen, Yeomanry, Equites, Elders) more efficiently.


04-05-2005 15:54:26

Taking into account Spears being unsure about Overseer..

Sith Warrior
Sith Marauder
Sith Adjudicator
Sith Warlord