Those ranks are simply bad. I know you probably spent a lot of time on them - but they are simply bad. The nomenclature breaks with the other Order's ranks and creates an irritating inconsistency (One rank without a "Sith" in front of it, another that has the "Sith" directly in its name).

I know that a lot of Star Wars stuff comes from inspiration from our world - but Angels sure as hell aren't a good inspiration for Sith ranks. While the terms "Angel of Vengeance" or something may be appealing, the overall impression generated is positive emotional one, nothing the Sith should. If you say "Angel" somewhere (or "Seraph", which most people understand as well) you are giving the impression of a heavenly choire of peacebringers and enlightened beings - the Sith are neither.

Last but not least, the choice of names directly is a bad one aswell. Apart from the nomenclature-issue mentioned above - why suddenly the need for two different designations? And as much as you love spending nights over old books or websites to dig out holy names, nobody will understand them. And if people don't understand the rank names, they are meaningless.

Those are three good points against this new structure - but I know you probably won't listen anyways. My hope is that somebody else will, or join.

Mike, the only thing I would like to reply is, go ask Oberst where the Seraphim come from. Or, if you so choose, go read hsi response to the same effect on the Sith forum, about this issue. I listen to every response, but most especially, those that are informed on the subject matter.

Well, I have similar problems with the overall feeling of the Seraph name, not only the light-side-ness of it but the general flavor. Seraph is a very high order of Angel (in fact THE highest) and if we see the GM as "God", the only group for whom the epitome of Angelness would fit would be the GM's direct messengers and that would be the Sith of the Dark Council - for which I BTW would not object to using this honorific. A rank in the Equite class however is something that is still distinctly in the realms of "mortal". (Ask a few dozen people whether a Seraph or an Adept is more powerful and you'll see this problem...)

Also, an Order rank schema should be consistent and reflect what the Order is doing. All Krath ranks have a priestly connotation, going from a mere Priest to the Pontifex designation (which is the epitome of Priestness, being associated with the Pope). Obelisk ranks generally reflect political status, the only problem there being the not-quite-fitting Templar. Prelate, Exarch and Primarch (the latter being "first ruler" if translated literally) all signify some senatorial status. Sith ranks have traditionally been associated with Warriors and the obvious epitome of this class would be somewhere along the lines of a Champion. Or, if you believe the focus should be changed, all four ranks would need a revision (a path I'd personally prefer as I don't really like "WarMASTER" due to the Master term having a very special meaning within the Dark Side).

So, how about brainstorming anew - in my opinion your "angel" path isn't even a bad reflection of Sithness in that it implies flying and vengeance to some degrees, but considering we have already gone through the angelic titles and found nothing useful for multiple ranks, it somewhat blows in our face. Yet, why not consider dark and fallen "angels" - demons and devils. The source literature of many fantasy systems is chock full of demonic classes (I know that D&D alone has at least six classes for demons and I think about seven or eight more for devils, so a bit of research might lead us to as of yet unknown treasures). At the same time, we might consider three names from a more noble hierarchy to denote Elders / Council members who are keeping an allegiance to their Order and proving themselves to be more than just your run-of-the-mill Adept. What if Seraph were a title you earn for life after having spent a successful term of at least a year in the Council while keeping the ideals and interests of the Sith even beyond your formal time of affiliation with the Order (read: after making DA and thus transcending the implied "Orderness" of the Equite ranks). That's a feat more worthy of an immortal title than simply making it to the doorstep of Elder-ness without ever being guaranteed you'll enter.

Let's rethink it - I am sure we can do better.

As said before, and restated for information so that everyone actually has the full story, Seraphim were not incited with Judeo-Christian beliefs. To quote Oberst's post from the Sith forum,

"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."

I've also made mention, Prelate, Exarch and Templar have holy connections, in addition to every Krath Order rank. The idea of having nothing to do with "holy names" is contradictory, if Seraph is singled out from the lot. Personally, I have no problem with getting rid of Warrior through Warlord for other names, but people like those. Yes, I actually have conducted discreet queries from among the Sith about this. Many weeks ago, in fact, I asked several members of the Order, and there was no general dislike (though I don't count PredFish's preference to call it PredWarrior, PredLord, PredMaster, etc. instead).

In response to the idea of it being an honorific, the only reason I can't agree with that is this: if the Elders are supposed to be above the normal connotations of Order, why do they need to have an honorific singling them to an Order? Is an Adept more powerful than an Overlord? Sure. Is an Adept closer to the Dark Lord of the Sith in the hierarchy of the Order? Not necessarily. I don't see everything as being defined by rank. Yes, I see things abstractly. Yes, I see things differently than some people. I've never been one to follow along with the rest of the cattle, and do what's been done before, simply because it's "tradition."

I take your points BF (although my suggests was far better then anything else) however consider the point of the ranks are titles describing levels of power, not relative positions within the order.

To give an example I was a relatively low ranking SHW as I was that position in my current rank of warlord, now you might say doesn't matter Pred that's one person at a time that affects but it also effects the elite Sith (Sith Ara or what ever they are called :P) it is possible to be a Knight and be part of that, does that mean you are an honored and trusted member of the order above a Sith Overlord/Consul who has served in and lead Sith houses? (ok I don't know if we have one but you take the point) within this system they would be, but in terms of respect the latter ranks higher so I would careful about making too much of link between rank and position wthin the order, For example where does the Sith staff fit in?

And although i hate to exclude people can we have more vocal SITH here not Jedi Masters or Krath or Obbies, hate to say it guys but its the Sith who this will mostly effect not you lot (and after a massive campain by myself to get you to turn Sith you didn't so butt out!)

Sithy: The idea of an Order honorific stems exactly from the fact that you transcend your Order ties. It is intended for those who demonstrate a loyalty to the Order that made them what they are now beyond the point they would be required to do so. In my vision, a Sith Seraph would be someone who has, in spite of a greater calling, never forgotten that he owes the Sith Order thanks for making him what he has become. That is a distinction truly worthy of a title as powerful as you are suggesting.

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:

ISSUE ONE: THE WORD "SERAPHIM"

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 thinking 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.

ISSUE ONE: THE OBELISK RANKS

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? 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 causes problems, the people who like it... it doesn't actually achieve anything, a new name isn't going to increase their activity, but it will run the risk of alienating those who dislike it.

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?

ISSUE THREE: THE SITH

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 jjust 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 t hat 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 Kraht, 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.

ISSUE FOUR: THE SITH PART 2: WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A SITH

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.

And... yeah, I can't count, I had two issue ones...

I disagree Pred, it affects all of us.

The Seraph rank is dumb, sorry to say it that way. I don't care what it originally meant, nowadays it's associated with angels and goodness and even certain fantasy RPGS. We do not need this in the DB AT ALL. The Seraph rank already sucked in the GMRG and I was hoping never to see it again but here it is.

OK, I forgot about where Lucas took his names from, but again, it doesn't matter. How many people speak ancient Persian or know it even exists?

That said, I do like the general idea on making the ranks more meaningful than just having warthis and warthat. but this should then go for all ranks. And while you're at it, please find something new for Pontifex. This popish stuff is kinda off in the SW universe as well, although it is not as bad an issue. It would also be very cool if high ranks would include Order still. Krath Adept or Sith Adept sounds a lot better IMO. But that's not a big issue, just some icing on the cake.

I would love to have the ranks all start with or include the Order. I don't know where the Sith'Aran were taken from, but something along those lines would be good for all ranks. If it is based on some existing thing from another language, it's at least unknown enough to use it.

I'm not at all happy about assigning meanings to the ranks like "military leader" etc. In the DB, ranks are just to show your general standing (pun intended). Not what you are specifically good at. What if someone has a Sith who is just a good fighter but not a leader in battle? It sounds a bit too cliche to me.

And BF, one thing I noticed - while you are really always open to ideas, you are also terribly, terribly stubborn about things YOU really like. And you often go ahead without thinking about the effect it has on others and their work because "nobody cares" - which in turn implies those of us who do care are nobodies. I know that's not what you want to convey. But it's what comes across.

And yeah yeah, I know I'm as stubborn when it comes to my ideas. :o)

However, if you really really really want this Seraph rank, can you at least write it in a way so it's not recognized? Like S'raf or something? :o)

Shame, on all of you that are attacking this man! I happen to agree with the point, he is the SHW --> you are not! I see very little protest from the Sith Order (that is, the people being effected). What I do see is a group of people writing essays on... rank?!?

Kaiaan seems to be the only DC'er with an objection, Xanos the only Sith, so why are people from other Orders ganging up here? If you are trying to save the Brotherhood from some great peril; please, work with the man. Tearing him down is not a solution, working with him to tweak the ideas however is something worthy of the honorific title of Brotherhood.

BF, stick with it... while every DB'er is not a historian that does not mean we should role back the mat and play dumb. The ranks will be whatever ends up in the DSC. And people only care about what our text says! They do not consult the bible for DB knowledge... so keep up the work!

Frankly I feel ignoring the views of two thirds of the Dark Brotherhood about a change to its fundamental structure is an offensive concept.

Furthermore, I'll mention what I said on the Message Boards. Theres a new film coming out, you may not have heard about it... its called Revenge of the SITH. SITH. SITH. SITH. SITH. SITH.

The new recruits we get affect EVERYBODY. Members under the command of Consuls and Quaestors (OF ANY ORDER) affect EVERYBODY. Activity and general moral and enjoyment of the entire club affects EVERYBODY.

Frankly I feel ignoring the views of two thirds of the Dark Brotherhood about a change to its fundamental structure is an offensive concept.

Furthermore, I'll mention what I said on the Message Boards. Theres a new film coming out, you may not have heard about it... its called Revenge of the SITH. SITH. SITH. SITH. SITH. SITH.

The new recruits we get affect EVERYBODY. Members under the command of Consuls and Quaestors (OF ANY ORDER) affect EVERYBODY. Activity and general moral and enjoyment of the entire club affects EVERYBODY.

But most importantly are the new recruits. Revenge of the SITH. Those recruits are going to be looking for a club that lets them roleplay Darth Vader. The success of this club affects ALL three Orders. The success of the club also is going to depend pivotally on the Sith Order over the next twelve months given that Revenge of the SITH is going to give rise to a majority of new recruits joining the Sith Order.

That means the Sith Order will have a direct responsibility toward the future prosperity of this club. That means 20 people liking the new rank name right now is irrelivant. The ONLY thing that matters is if in 12 to 24 months time all those new recruits are going to like the new rank...

And, frankly, I don't think new Star Wars fans who join because of Revenge of the SITH are going to like the term Seraph. They're not going to have been here for this debate. They won't be able to talk to BF or Oberst about the real meaning of the word Seraphim being warrior not angel. They're just going to think what they think. If that means angels then its angels.

And I don't think most new age Star Wars fans will like it.

I'm an Elder. Seraph doesn't affect me. It won't affect a Sith Guardian either. It affects a Krath Jedi Hunter just as much as a Sith Jedi Hunter. The only people it affects any differently are the Sith Overlords who would be using a new rank.

A Krath Protector isn't going to be a new Sith Seraph. A Sith Guardian isn't either. This issue affects the whole club... to quote a phrase "think outside the box". This isn't just about the Sith Order.

Eugh... ok... I don't get why that second post happened. And I hate having to use caps rather than bold, it looks too much like shouting :P

And just to shock nobody I like the idea. I personally like Seraphim, I will grant you that it may just be because I dislike Overlord so much. I dislike all 4 of the Sith ranks. As it focuses to much on the Warrior, for my liking whereare the backstabbing, moraly corrupt, decietful, scheming names?

Also to Goats point about the Obelisk Ranks, this is nothing like the Obelisk names, in as much as BF is tossing this idea out there, before going to get it approved.

Also I am going to throw it out there, that those people that have agreed, that the names need some changing, but dislike the Seraphim might try coming up with some names of their own and some descriptions of why they came up with the names that they did. As this topic is now open and on the floor now is a great time to speak up while everyone is listening.

First of all can we stop using the comments as a MB ?!?!
There's a topic in the Sith MB about this issue where Goat made some good points not only about this specific issue but also about the DB as whole.

http://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=775

Why not keep the ranks? Theyre as good as they are. And if you dont like them, then look up to SW lore for good names. Take KOTOR2 or the WOTC D20 SW RPG (long live acronyms) and derive something from there. "Sith Marauder" comes to the mind quite easily and... whatever else youll find when browsing those. I dont have em, but Kaiann does.
Stick. To. Star. Wars.

And listen to Goat for a change. That guy is right - people will be joining the DB to roleplay Darth Vader, Emperor Palpatine or Darth Tyranus - not His Exellency The Enlightened Seraph of Doom.

I'm just going to add one more point here: A change in a rank name or an order's powers does not affect the order only. It affects the Brotherhood.

A rank name affects anyone viewing a dossier of a member of that rank, addressing a member of that rank, writing a story involving a member of that rank, battling such a member in the ACC etc. pp. I-could-go-on-forever. It also affects other Orders indirectly as a major change (like having an "immortal" name) will inevitably trigger the desire of getting something equally cool.

Changing the order structure and the meanings of Equiteness in the Sith requires that the other two Orders get something equally meaningful. It also has to balance against all existing and upcoming powers from other sources (to which there at least are: Racial abilities, Basic DSC Force powers, Clan powers and Order School powers, plus anything granted from approved artifacts and items. Gonna add another dimension to this ? Better crosscheck against all the other items on this list.

So, yes, both suggested changes affect Krath and Obelisk quite a lot, so they should have a voice in this. And I haven't even gone into the "setting examples" aspect of changing some established DJB customs yet.

I'd like to direct everyone's attention to http://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=775 , and not for the poll, but for the discussion afterwards. :P

Go to the message board section for this.

I hear there will be punch and pie after the discussion.

Xanos, not everyone in the Sith disagrees with your objection. I personally support your rebute. I vote for keeping the old ranks, and leaving 'angels' to be holy creatures. I do not believe in oxymoron's and thus the idea of a 'dark angel' personnaly annoys me as it weakens the Sith affiliation to the darkside.

Whilst I generally support your ideas, Master Long, I think this is one instance where one of them shouldn't proceed.