According to EU the title Darth was adapted by Darth Bane when the Sith were all but wiped out. This was about a millenia before the events of the Battle of Yavin.

After Darth Bane only two Sith would remain at any given time. As it is said in Episode I, always two there are, a master and an apprentice bla bla bla...

In KOTOR however the title of Darth is used far before Darth Bane ever adapted this method.

BioWare had this to say when they commented on it specifically..

BioWare

We’re very careful to keep everything within Star Wars continuity. LucasArts also works with us and Lucasfilm Licensing to ensure that everything in the game ultimately makes sense within the Star Wars timeline. And of course, people will always have questions about how certain things are possible within our timeline, but rest assured that we have spent a great deal of time making sure that the story is as accurate as it is compelling.

With regard to the Darth issue, the title of Darth actually refers to Dark Lord of the Sith, which was a traditional title held by the most powerful members of the Sith. Thousands of years before Darth Bane created the new order of the Sith, the Sith were not dark Jedi, but were actually a civilization of people. The dark Jedi came to their planet after being banished by the Jedi and became intertwined with their culture, creating a cult around the dark side of the Force. The leaders of this cult took the traditional name of Dark Lord of the Sith, and some were referred to with a shortened version...Darth. This all occurred well before the time period of the game.

Though some of the Dark Lords in the Star Wars timeline prior to the game didn’t use the actual title of Darth in their name, Malak does, for reasons that will become apparent within the story...

BioWare's own explanation is actually contradicted in their own game...

I'm curious to see if anyone else had thought of this before and what you guys think about it.

Couldn't care, to be honest. A lot can happen in a thousand years, maybe they just forgot about earlier Darths or something.

I was always under the impression that "Darth" refers to the Dark Lord of the Sith. Meaning any of those king shit baddies back in the day could have been referred to as Darth whoever. Excerpt from some thread I had going about the Sith at TGC in 01'.

"In this Golden Age, which is usually a reference to time of existance for the Sith roughly 25,000 to 5,000 years before the Battle of Yavin, there was only ever ONE Dark Lord of the Sith. There could be no more. However, towards the end of the Golden Age of the Sith Empire, as you probably know, there was much internal as well as external strife. As conflict within and without tore the Sith Empire apart, many declared themselves Dark Lords. Centuries of treachery and betrayel culminated up to the Battle of Ruusan (sp) and all the "Dark Lords" but one, whom we know to be Darth Bane. Over the thousands of years the Sith trained in secret from the NR (the years between the formation of Bane's "2 sith" idea that lead up to the battle of Naboo), they left many of their traditions behind in exchange for power. The rule of ONE Dark Lord of the Sith, was one of these. Darth Sidious and Darth Maul were both "Dark Lords" for example. The title "Darth" is a reference to the Dark Lord of the Sith. Both Palpatine and Vader were also Dark Lords. While most know of the history that there was only ever one Dark Lord in the ancient times, most don't know of this evolution of the Dark Lord title."

This attempts to explain why, if "Darth" is a title given to only the "Dark Lord of the Sith", Palpy, Maul, and Vader all use the "Darth" title. Evolution of the tradition and terms, basically.

I'm not sure exactly where you read that Bane was the first to use the Darth title, though I'm not doubting it's true. Maybe he was just the one to popularize the term? :b It is pretty cool, after all.

Well a few things about your interpretation..

First off the EU explains that Darth Bane is the one who first started using the title Darth, this was explained in the TPM Novelisation, New Essential Guide to Characters, Jedi Vs. Sith and somewhere else I believe.

Secondly I never heard of any of the Sith from the Golden Age of the Sith referred to as "Darth" anything.. Marka Ragnos, Ludo Kressh, none of them.

BioWare also stated that the title referred to the Dark Lord of the Sith which like I said earlier they even disprove in their own game. As you said Hyfe back then there was only one Dark Lord of the Sith at any given time yet in KOTOR you've got Darth Malak, Darth Revan, and Darth Bandon? So basically they've killed their own logic right there because even if there were the "master and apprentice" traditions Darth Bandon would not fit in.

Yeah. They screwed up and pulled an explination out of their ass.

Nothing new.

True. They goofed.

I can't recall one SW video game that doesn't fuck with EU continuity other than TIE Fighter, though.

The thing that I don't get is they've got a whole CONTINUITY FUCKING DEPARTMENT at Lucasfilm that deals with this kind of shit.

Ya I'm sure small things are gonna slip here and there given the sheer size of the Star Wars Universe. But come on 2 main characters with the name Darth in their title knowing full well this game was set 4 millenia before ANH? This should have been easilly remedied early on.

Words to the wise: as long as it makes money, LucasArts doesn't care.

I believe Darth Revan was the first person to called himself then Darth Malak and Exar Kun didn't had the title of having Darth before his name. I think it was us humans to create the title of darth first. Darth Maul wasn't the Dark Lord of the Sith and there was three Sith Lords in KOTOR 2 having the title of Darth. So it doesn't really matters.

I'd still play TIE Fighter if I could find the disk. TIE fighter kicks ass! But back on topic, Darth Bandon fits in with the 'Master/Apprentice' thing because, well, Revan was supposed to be dead, Malak took the place as master, and Bandon was his apprentice. But either way, yes, they screwed the pooch. Even the techs are messed because they are identical to the standard Star Wars fair (and in some cases more powerful) and gives the sense that NOTHING, beyond design, changed.

Maybe if the game was based closer to the movie eras, then things would be better. Personally, I would've had the game with as a Jedi Knight of the Old Republic (not some freelancer), trying to accomplish a smaller goal. Like deal with a Sith cult that had spread to multiple worlds, which would offer the same things in terms of gameplay and freeform things. And could take place about 50 years before the Clone Wars or something.

One day...I shall make my own games and laugh as I make a game based on the advice of forumers instead of some scriptwriter who's only seen the movies. Our writing skills combined...*begins to salvate*