Well I guess it really depends on the overall theme of the set. It may well contain a lot of bounty hunters but that's assuming a lot. We know there are many named bounty hunters that never got minis and of cause there are new ones from resent books/comics and Clone Wars TV show, but as for new versions of ones we already have i would not count on there being a lot.
Why? Well so far we have been told that there are 29 unique characters in the set, with 19 of them being new characters. So that leaves 10 unique for repeated characters, well we already know 2 of them, 1 being a Luke and 1 being Darth Vader Agent of Evil. So only 8 left. OK all remaining 8 could be Bounty Hunters but personally I hope not. Also if the 8 were bounty hunters and most bounty hunters being fringe, seems a little over kill on the fringe characters.

I really really hope they make the vader a sith not imperial. He was able to keep himself alive with hate for a short periods of time without his life support. If that isn't sith i dont know what is.

The title is not up in the air - learn to deal with it :)

The reason for not calling it "Scum and Villany" is that the set isn't designed around that theme. "Rogue" has a couple of connotations in SWs lore, and the set includes aspects of both. But remember, we aren't doing heavy theme based sets either, more like sub themes and such, and naming them then will always have significantly more difficulties than what WotC typically produced.

Without revealing too much, I will say there are not 8 new BHs, or anything close to that. We also did not make a unique of every character ever in Rogue Squadron either for those thinking we went that route. Instead, it's a 10 faction set, with a variety of sub themes and improvements for several different aspects of the game. The name Rogue does represent one of the sub themes in a general way however :). And the name Renegades does represent some of the other minis in the set. But with that said, we also have plenty of minis that won't fit either parts of the name as well, and other sub themes of things we wanted and the community wanted to work on - some of which have at best a cursory connection to the name of the set.

Now, if we had called it "Scum and Villany" it would have had to have been a set that better utilized the BHs and Gangsters of the Universe, and would have been heavily fringe based. However, Dark Times did this for a lot of the BHs, and it isn't nearly as important of a need for the game at the present time.

And allow me to state it again, Vader is in the Imperial faction, and should never be put in the Sith faction. He never as a character existed outside of Imperial rule as Darth Vader. Darth Sideous and Maul I could argue for Sith inclusion, but Vader and Dooku never. The Imperial faction is a Sith faction, during the reign of Palpatine and then extended into the Legacy era in a way that really doesn't fit. But Vader never existed outside of the Imperial era in anyway. Even the brief time from his turn to the DS, until the end of Epi3, Palpatine is clearly in charge, and Vader works only to consolidate his power into Empire. He is a Sith in the general sense, but not a Sith in faction sense.

Actually, I don't really think it is debatable. Was Palpatine not already functioning as the head of state? Vader does not ever join the Sith for the normal reasons. He joins because of Padme and Palp's being the only one who can help. But he also sees is as a continuity to his service to the Republic. Remember, he talks about consoladating power, and so forth, and fully supports it. He goes to Mustafar not to ensure the Sith dominate the galaxy, but to end the War with the Seperatists.

I fully admit, Vader is a Sith, that isn't a contentious point. However, the Imperial faction is an Empire controlled by the Sith. The faction rules in Star Wars are meant to define time lines, not define titles and connections. Why is Luke Grand Master then, not considered part of the Old Republic faction? Should those two not be consolidated? Vader in the Sith makes as much sense as Luke as a Republic or and Old Republic piece. At best, you've got about 3 days of Vader existing until Palps fully consolidates power, but that's a stretch to say he should be Sith for 3 days.

Further, we have two Vader's already made that fill that very brief time period, and both WotC put into the Imperial faction. I think that pretty well nails it down, that he doesn't belong to the Sith Faction in this game.

And with that said, my point is more, that as a designer, I don't see a single compelling reason to ever put DV in the Imperial faction, and I have not seen any one else interested in doing so either. So if you are wishing for one, I would suggest stopping.

I don't know that I have any burning desire to see another Vader just for the sake of having one in the Sith faction, but for some reason this question intrigues me and I think the question is anything but easy to determine. I think that the points made are good ones and that certainly the most functional arguments are that the Empire is indeed a subset of the Sith faction in a way. The arguement regarding Luke in the Republic or OR is frankly rediculous because both of those factions are timeline-bound in a very specific way (in their very names, also). Old Republic (direct reference to timeline) Republic (indirect reference to timeline) and New Republic (direct reference to timeline) are very finite factions. Rebels (indirect reference to timeline through a timeline bound movement) & Separatists (indirect reference to timeline through a timeline bound movement) are nearly the same, though there is a bit of ambiguity near the ends of the movements and as such we see characters like Kota or Nightsisters who might appropriately be assigned a "mobile timeline". The Yuuzhan Vong are singular because they represent a species that only exists in the lore in a specific timeline and thus they are a finite faction but for slightly differenct reasons. The Mandalorians represent a species/alliegience and are far more open to variable forms of inclusion in the faction due to the fact that they are not timeline bound. The culture, nuances, and nature of the faction are much more fluid than other factions when considering the entirety of literature on the subject spanning thousands of years (including, for sake of discussion, the seeming "faction-nature-disparity" introduced by the Mandalorians in Clone Wars). The Mandalorian question, however, is still simple because of the specific allegiance to Mandalore that binds all of its constituents (with the rare exceptions of characters whose association with the Mandalorians can easily be represented by Affinity with the faction) and that the most famous Mandalorians (Boba & Jango) happen to be fringers, in general and able to move factions.
The Sith are the absolute (bar none) most ambiguous faction in play because they represent no timeline, no species, no geographical confines, no true unifying allegience, and they most clearly bleed into two of the game's largest and most specific factions!
These factors alone identify the fact, for me at least, that the "Vader/Sith" question is no closed book for the miniatures game. We've already established that Vader was a 'canon-sith' but the question as to the miniatures game should really be about whether Vader fits the confines of what defines the sith in the game. As stated, the Sith have very little confining their faction and in my view the only thing they really have is an ideology that defines them. Vader served the Empire and thus he should be an Imperial piece. Vader also served himself and his desire to rule the galaxy regardless of the Empire (in my opinion) as evidenced by the entire story line of The Force Unleashed I & II as well as the most famous scene in all of Star Wars "...we can rule the galaxy as Father and Son!" This line seems clear as day to me that Vader's primal motivation was identical to the Sith ideology which would fit him perfectly within the confines of the miniatures faction. A Sith faction, Vader/Starkiller combo would be a couple of fun minis to play and although I don't think the game will suffer without such additions, I certainly don't think that the argument for such is anywhere near out of the question.

Han Solo is a rebel piece. Period. Anyone who has any experience with Star Wars knows that Han (as a functional character) is a good guy and that he belongs with the rebels. Here I'm talking in general, which is what the miniatures game most appropriately follows. For a character with only one or two iterations it would make sense that only 1 general interpretation be made (Han as a rebel, for example). However, when many iterations have been explored it becomes more intriguing to interpret the specifics of a character rather than the general (in Han's case, by way of example, the line "...I ain't in this for your revolution... ...I expect to be well paid- I'm in it for the money."). Such is the reason that it was both appropriate and timely (perhaps overdue) for the V-set to create a fringe Han that can function in the game in any faction he wants (though, obviously, it makes no canonical sense that Han would fight for the Mando's or the Sith). Han is, from a literary persepective, an anti-hero and thus should primarily be considered (despite the widespread criticism of Wizards' choice) a "good-guy" and represented by the rebel faction with which he was primarily affiliated. Don't get me wrong, because the fringe Han is awesome and opens interesting avenues of play whether plausible or not in the Star Wars universe. The point is that it doesn't matter that Han IS a good guy. He IS a good guy, but there are pieces of his fuller personality that are interesting to explore and evidence can be shown that despite the fact that he is obviously a GOOD GUY he had other machinations within.
This is the point that has yet to be disputed by all the antagonists of the Sith Vader. We are all aware that Vader IS IMPERIAL, WAS IMPERIAL, etc. He functioned in an Imperial capacity, was suppported by an Imperial infrastructure, and held designs to advance said imperial identity through various designs. There are at least 10 versions of Darth Vader that explore many facets of Vader's Imperial identity and no one can dispute that Darth Vader should be an Imperial piece.
That being said, the argument for why he SHOULD be an Imperial is not the same as the argument for why he SHOULD NOT be Sith. You can't say that Luke shouldn't be a Mandalorian on the basis of his faith in the rebel cause- you CAN say that Luke shouldn't be a Mandalorian because HE ISN"T A MANDALORIAN AND WAS NEVER AFFILIATED WITH THE MANDALORIANS. Likewise, the enormity of Vader's contribution, ambition, and involvment with the Empire has nothing to do with anything but the Imperial faction.
In order to argue that Vader doesn't belong in the Sith faction you have to provide opinion/evidence/information that identifies him as outside the realm of the Sith faction (see previous post). The only confines that the Sith faction bares is the ideological pursuit of absolute power through the dark side of the force (and specifically the Sith teachings). My OPINION is that regardless of what you can say regarding Vader's "Imperial-ness" (all of which I agree with) you cannot deny that he said "Rule the galaxy as father and son" not "Rule this enormous empire that I love so much". The Empire was the vehicle for Vader's quest for power, not Vader's quest itself. Anakin did say, "I have brought peace... to my new empire" but again, listen to the scene and follow Vader's progression through the ensuing movies/games etc. The "Empire" that was so important to Vader is markedly similar to the Sith empire of a former generation or Krayt's empire of a later generation, namely; vehicles to obtain power.
Until you can specifically deny that Vader (1) was in a quest for absolute power & (2) utilized sith teachings, you can argue only that he in primarily Imperial and NOT that he out of line with the Sith faction.

I am a creative thinker with an analytical process. I am studying Biochemistry while writing a historical fiction novel. Hence, the long windedness... anyone that made it through this entire post gets a gold star!

FYI I have nothing but respect for everyone on these boards and the V-team that is working so hard to keep this game alive. You guys rock. I only take the time to post when something interests me enough to add my two cents. I disagree with you totally, Bill (and those who are behind you on this point), but there's no animosity in that- only my opinion on the Vader question which absolutely IS debatable...

Happy gaming and thanks for all your work, knowledge, and passion for this game we love so much!

jedinightowl,

Good posts, but you need some blank lines in there to create some paragraphs.

I don't see any particular need for a Vader in the Sith faction, but there's also no reason not to have one.

I have the same problem. I identify with the Sith faction, however vote liberal.

Yo, might as well make a Fringe Chewbacca to compliment the Fringe Han. Then a Rebel Princess Leia piece that forces any Fringe Han or Chewbacca to join her team for the remainder of the game.

Cause, a fringe Han? Really? He's a Rebel all the way! Cause you know if he and Leia were at a party together, and someone asked him if he was fringe, it would go something like this...

Party-goer: "Mr. Solo, I've come to understand you swing both ways, in terms of light and dark"
Han: "Well, there was a time..."
*Leia throws a stern look Han's way*
Han: "Nah...I'm a Rebel"

Vader being in the Sith faction seems a bit dumb to me. It just wouldn't make any sense. I don't know how to explain it, but it just feels like it doesn't fit in our game.

Would it make sense to have an Imperial Luke from when he got turned to the Dark Side by the cloned Emperor?
Would it make sense to have an Imperial Han from when he was in the Academy?
Would it make sense to have an Imperial Kyle Katarn from when HE was in the Academy?

While these things did happen, they don't necessarily need to be made in minis, nor should they be. If Luke was taking a really heinous crap one day and got angry, should we make a Sith mini of him?

Then I guess we just fundamentally disagree on the types of pieces we should be getting in this game, which is fine since everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion. =)