Lit Why do Sith Masters encourage their apprentices to kill them?

Which is defined by whom? Even if we assume Darth Bane is "setting the rules", the Sith themselves are individualists. They won't care for a so-called philosophy of Sith. Or the strength of the Sith order. Or about the master getting soft and be killed by Jedi.

Sith care for themselves, usually.

Also lol, you just called one of the best villains in movie history broken and pathetic. Vader was learning how to be emperor and that requires lots of time.

 

But not everyone. While my avatar lead lots of attacks on rivals, he didn't really care about losing or winning or having a huge empire. Just about the sweet, sweet pain he causes.

Darth Nihilus also didn't care for power. He was just hungry.

Darth Traya didn't care that much for power, she gave her life willingly in the end.

Darth Talon just wanted to get laid and enjoyed messing with Cades head.

And so on. In the EU there are many Sith who didn't care for power and could still cause a lot of damage. Unless you want to say they died because they didn't care for power? I don't think that is true as the megalomaniac type of Sith is usually also assassinated or beaten by the Jedi. They are not more successful than the others.

 

Okay. I admit I am a bit confused. True loyalty in which you set aside all personal goals to serve another doesn't really exist in real life either. Pretty much any action we take in some way serves selfish desires.

 

Agreed, and this is exactly what happens in the Rule of Two. Darth Zannah's an excellent example. She had a chance to kill Bane after their battle with the Jedi, when he was poisoned by the Orbalisks, but she didn't, even though it would've made her the Master. Why? Because Bane was still useful to her, she could still learn from him and thereby increase her power even more.

 

"It's too late for me son."

"I must obey my master."

-broken and pathetic.

 

It is important to remember that we can't properly consider the motives of Sith, or that of any committed dark sider, through the lens with which we view the mental approach of normal people. Sith are consumed by the dark side. It distorts their minds, their desires are not entirely their own, certain emotional responses are exaggerated, others are closed off entirely.

Love is the obvious example - a truly committed Sith is flat out incapable of what Western civilization would commonly define as love, because it requires a commitment to the sovereignty and agency of one's partner. That's why Malgus kills Eleena Daru - because she's a limit on his ability to full embrace the dark side. The remnant of Darth Vader's love for Padme, extended through his children is powerful enough to drive away decades of commitment to the dark side. So the idea of any Sith who is truly is love means the aren't really, totally, completely a Sith (Vestara Khai's struggle with this precise issue is one of the few good parts of FotJ).

Now, such truly committed Sith are quite rare, in large part because the presence of a dark lord of overwhelming power seems to crush the ambitions of all but the most devious or just plain fearless, hindering their development. The majority of Vitiate's dark council, for example, are so terrified of him that his ghostly presence holds them in fear even when he's not even spoken to them for years. That's actually the ultimate reason why the Rule of Two proclaims that the apprentice must strive to replace the master. Without that inducement, clearly stated, the apprentice is entirely too likely to simply become a thrall. If the apprentice isn't actively plotting to replace their master then they aren't being properly committed to the dark side.

 

Plus it keeps the master on the toes. Although I think building a Sith Army is definitely a much quicker method of seizing galactic control then the rule of 2. Provided a course you got a true powerhouse to puts a fear of revolt into his followers because while the Sith Army might seize power quicker much more prone to infighting bringing things crashing down.

 

I agree with this, and it should apply to the Sith as well. Also to the Jedi, or any denizen of the SWG.

 

Although really I think the build an army method has more payoff. The Builder at least gets to rule for a while. Bane's method might take a thousand years to work and you could be a cog in the machine that never gets to enjoy time as Emperor.

 

But he still wanted to turn Leia and was triumphant when he found out about her. Explanation: Vader's a manipulative bastard. Part of him may have felt like he claimed, but it is really only him using the tired excuse of "My superior made me do it" to whitewash himself.

 

A large army/order is quicker, but in any example where it's actually somewhat worked, it's always been shown that this quicker path to rule leads to a shorter rule.

 

I really like that idea. I'm sure it doesn't explain all sith apprenticeships but for a few sith, I could totally see this being a reason for taking an apprentice, particularly a young one.


Sent from my ASN assassin droid

 

No, since the moment of his turn in ROTS, Vader was completely controlled and manipulated by Palpatine. Finding out about Leia doesn't make him any less pathetic. she would have simply been another pawn for Sidious to use so he could finally rid himself of Vader,

 

If you are so set on your opinion I won't be able to change your mind.

 

The novel tends to emphasise Vader's ambition:

Vader was impressed by Luke's speed. Pleased, even. It was a pity, almost, he couldn't let the boy kill the Emperor yet. Luke wasn't ready for that, emotionally. There was still a chance Luke would return to his friends if he destroyed the Emperor now. He needed more tutelage, first - training by both Vader and Palpatine - before he'd be ready to assume his place at Vader's right hand, ruling the galaxy.

So Vader had to shepherd the boy through periods like this, stop him from doing damage in the wrong places - or the right places prematurely.​

 

Please 20 years is hardly a long time. Its worked more often then the Bane method as well.

 

Yeah, but the novel's 30 years old. The Ultimate Visual Guide, released 2005, and its updated & expanded edition supports His Excellency, The Supreme Chancellor. It has a passage in the ROTJ section that says Vader abandoned his ambitions when "faced with his Master's apparent omniscience" and "accepts his place as a pawn in his Master's schemes" or something to that effect. Whatever the case, Vader isn't close to being in Sidious's league as a manipulator.

 

I'm just explaining how Vader is represented in the films. Most notably ROTS and ROTJ. He is shown to be a powerful man who is hungry for more power, who happens to reach too far and ends up becoming another man's slave.

 

Still longer than any other Order lol I don't know why people constantly mention how it isn't a long time, when they have no example of another order lasting longer. What's the point of a certain method working more often if it doesn't last as long? Doesn't really solve anything.

 

It depends on how you rate it other Sith Empires might not have had the whole galaxy but they held on for much longer periods of time.

The Sith Army method works more often and can lead to longer reigns. Palpatine need other Sith to do the dirty work for a long time to get him in the position to rule for 30 years. No true Sith should ever sign up for a plan that might take a thousand years and not result in the having a chance to rule.

 

I rate them by who was the most successful, in which holding on for longer doesn't mean anything if they didn't hold as much.

Longer reigns of war without any actual victory.

And every other Sith needed armies backing them to help do the dirty work to achieve some semblance of success. No Sith Lord's ever gained control of the galaxy without actual help, whether it be from an army or centuries of work from two people at a time.

I'd think that every Sith of Bane's Order would've considered himself/herself the one that finally accomplish the grand plan and defeat the Jedi, and then end up falling shy of that belief.

 

The most successful example of a Sith Empire long term is that of Vitiate's Empire, which managed to survive centuries in hiding and several decades of open conflict with the Republic. Whether or not this can be considered more successful than that of Palpatine is debatable. However, what is not debatable is that Empire was never Vitiate's goal. He wanted to consume the galaxy to achieve eternal existence. A vast military apparatus was simply a means to an end, more cover than anything else. Palpatine too, eventually moved away from the idea of controlling anything resembling a conventional Empire and wanted to rule the minds of every sentient being in the galaxy via the Force, an approach eventually also more or less adopted by Darth Krayt.

Empire is a stepping stone, but it is an absolutely critical one, as below a certain critical mass it is impossible for a Dark Lord to have the breathing space and insulation from the champions of the Light in order to successfully pursue galaxy altering experiments. Vitiate needed an Empire to engage the Jedi while he sent his agents to trigger endless destruction he could absorb. Palpatine needed tens of billions of lives moved to Byss to fuel his experiments. Krayt needed hundreds of Force sensitives and secret bleeding-edge shipbuilding facilities to produce his mindlessly loyal troopers.

The Rule of Two was not established as a be all and end all guide to the Sith - it was devised as a means to gain an Empire. There are only two ways for a massive dark side power to arise in the star wars galaxy: schism within the light side (which produced Exar Kun, Darth Ruin, and similar movements) or secrecy. Vitiate had the shield of the unknown regions, as did Revan. Bane didn't have that, so he relied on concealment, and limiting numbers was a big part of that. Krayt would also rely on concealment and treachery much as Palpatine did, though his One Sith was arguably able to succeed because Palpatine's legacy meant the galaxy was still divided over a century later.