Why do Sith even bother taking on apprentices?

[ClayPeopleCry]

I mean its pretty much an unwritten rule with them that their apprentices will eventually try to kill them in order to progress in the Sith hierarchy. So why purposefully put a gun to your head like that?

[JediAkemi]

Because they provide an automatic ally until they prove sufficiently awesome to actually endanger you.

Also, as the current Sith aren't using the Rule of Two, Apprentices are not obligated to try to kill you. Having apprentices is a sign of status in the Sith Empire. They provide part of a Sith Lord's power base and reputation.

A Sith who successfully trains multiple apprentices without getting killed is a force to be reckoned with.

[Joachimthbear]

Plus, remember that (most) Sith are not purely pragmatic. The teachings of the Sith are a philosophy for life and a vision for the galaxy. The Sith take apprentices at least in part because the master/apprentice dynamic is part of their "religion" (possibly a distant holdover from their origins as Dark Jedi, now adapted to their stark "strength versus weakness" view of all life).

 

If a Sith in the Empire fails to take any apprentices, others will perceive it as weakness or heresy, and strike. And your odds of survival are a lot less without having a few powerful, expendable Force users around you.

[Wallner]

Yes as the others said.

 

In this time it's not expected of an apprentice to kill his or her master, but it's not strictly forbidden either.

 

The sith hierarchy is a violent game for power. Open murders are officially forbidden, but taking out an opponent as part of a power play, is respected.

Edited January 26, 2016 by Wallner

[cool-dude]

The whole Sith idea at this point is a farce. The whole idea revolves around the strongest being the big dog, but it's just generally the coward and the opportunist that become masters. Take Baras for example, his whole reason for turning against Wrath, was because he was scared of him/her, and didn't want to lose his power. To me, a true Sith would want their apprentice to become strong enough to kill them, and be at peace when the day came. To me, the age of the true Sith didn't start until Darth Bane, who actually cared about the Sith way.

[EzioMessi]

The whole Sith idea at this point is a farce. The whole idea revolves around the strongest being the big dog, but it's just generally the coward and the opportunist that become masters. Take Baras for example, his whole reason for turning against Wrath, was because he was scared of him/her, and didn't want to lose his power. To me, a true Sith would want their apprentice to become strong enough to kill them, and be at peace when the day came. To me, the age of the true Sith didn't start until Darth Bane, who actually cared about the Sith way.

 

But remember (Darth Bane spoilers)

 

 

When Darth Bane realized Zannah had him beat, he tried to use Essence Transfer to control her. Sure, she ultimately proved strong enough to overcome him, but had she not, you'd basically have an older sith, strong for sure but nowhere nearly as strong in the force as Zannah, who had always used his brute strength for fighting and now no longer possessed that as he controlled a petite body. That'd have definitely weakened the sith, especially if he never got beat by an apprentice because of it. Not to forget that Palpatine killed Plagueis by deception, and at least at the time was weaker than him, so who knows how many such instances occurred.

 

 

Maybe we're misunderstanding the sith philosophy, and "strength" doesn't just mean physical or force based strength, but cunning and intellect as well.

[loctys]

the way I see this era's version of the sith usually doesn't have the apprentices trying to kill their master or their master trying to kill their apprentice with the exception of Lord Zash and Darth Baras. I also think that during this era the sith apprentice and sith master are usually happy with the way things are and are content and not interested in change really, again this is all what I think plus the dark council has rules against killing as the dark council basically said to thanaton when the Sith Inquistor confronted/fought Thanaton in front of the dark council

[Ruhun]

The whole Sith idea at this point is a farce. The whole idea revolves around the strongest being the big dog, but it's just generally the coward and the opportunist that become masters. Take Baras for example, his whole reason for turning against Wrath, was because he was scared of him/her, and didn't want to lose his power. To me, a true Sith would want their apprentice to become strong enough to kill them, and be at peace when the day came. To me, the age of the true Sith didn't start until Darth Bane, who actually cared about the Sith way.

Very few put the ideology before survival.

 

I've only seen thatwith Krayts Sith Order.

Also remember that deception is a tool every Sith needs.

[Rhyltran]

But remember (Darth Bane spoilers)

 

 

When Darth Bane realized Zannah had him beat, he tried to use Essence Transfer to control her. Sure, she ultimately proved strong enough to overcome him, but had she not, you'd basically have an older sith, strong for sure but nowhere nearly as strong in the force as Zannah, who had always used his brute strength for fighting and now no longer possessed that as he controlled a petite body. That'd have definitely weakened the sith, especially if he never got beat by an apprentice because of it. Not to forget that Palpatine killed Plagueis by deception, and at least at the time was weaker than him, so who knows how many such instances occurred.

 

 

Maybe we're misunderstanding the sith philosophy, and "strength" doesn't just mean physical or force based strength, but cunning and intellect as well.

 

No, Bane had an amazing grasp on the force. He'd have had a younger body that had higher capabilities than his own (not everyone has the same capabilities) which would mean he'd have longer to learn about the force and master new ideas while training a new apprentice who may or may not have been able to overcome him.

[Cicgnar]

Okay, I want to give my own two cents about this.

 

Apart from all the reasons already listed before me, there is something not taken into account, whether you talk about pre or post- Rule of Two Sith era.

 

First of all, Sith are not immortal. They are very proud of themselves, their achievements, their knowledge, their power, etc... But almost all of them assume that sooner or later, they're going to meet the Grim Reaper; thus they don't want to just vanish in the mist of history. So, they know they need someone to carry on their legacy, their knowledge, someone to carry their names, even as their own because they're family or worthy followers. So, that's what apprentices are for, too; after all, they learn from their masters and take further their researchs after they're gone.

 

They might kill them, but that would only show that the apprentice has become more powerful (or cunning) than his/her master. And, as shown in the game, few apprentices try to let their masters be forgotten (after all, if they killed them, they're their first victory, and they want it to be as big as it can be). So, their legacy lives on, one way or another.

 

That's why the ultimate punishment for Siths is being erased from history.

 

And also... ultimately, Sith and Jedi orders are religions, and to keep existing, they need to be spread. If no Sith took apprentices, or few did so, in a couple generations the order will be gone and lost. Think about the Jedi after Episode III... In barely a generation time, the Jedi went from trusted and ever-present defenders of the Galaxy to no more than a myth...

Edited January 27, 2016 by Cicgnar

[Eric_Skynwalker]

Because they provide an automatic ally until they prove sufficiently awesome to actually endanger you.

Also, as the current Sith aren't using the Rule of Two, Apprentices are not obligated to try to kill you. Having apprentices is a sign of status in the Sith Empire. They provide part of a Sith Lord's power base and reputation.

A Sith who successfully trains multiple apprentices without getting killed is a force to be reckoned with.

 

I also agree, I have atleast 4 apprentices which makes my character a potent character when the NPCs come to me or contact me with missions they and the whole Galactic Empire and Sith Council cannot fix.....so they come to me as the FIXER. I fix things very well without killing alot of NPCs and reforming timelines. I am a "Shadow Guardian Sith" whom believes the future can be altered with little bloodshed and though yes I have destroyed a whole Old Republic Fleet the Old Republic was going to destroy the Sith and another innocent alien race using their pet Gormaks along with some hardline Voss.

[DWRoelands]

The reason for the master/apprentice paradigm and the acceptance of murder as a means of advancement among the Sith is part of how the Sith Emperor remains in control.

 

The inherent mistrust amongst Sith for one another decreases the likelihood that any group of powerful Sith will unite against him.

 

 

Even after the Emperor has consumed all life on Ziost, Darth Marr explains that the Dark Council will need to be "brought into line" should they actually succeed in finding him.

 

 

The Emperor has always played the long game.

[EliteSeraph]

The whole Sith idea at this point is a farce. The whole idea revolves around the strongest being the big dog, but it's just generally the coward and the opportunist that become masters. Take Baras for example, his whole reason for turning against Wrath, was because he was scared of him/her, and didn't want to lose his power. To me, a true Sith would want their apprentice to become strong enough to kill them, and be at peace when the day came. To me, the age of the true Sith didn't start until Darth Bane, who actually cared about the Sith way.

 

Wasn't that exactly what sparked Bane to kill off so many sith on the first place, and create the rule of two? Because all that was happening was that the sith were getting weaker as cowards either waited for a moment to exploit, or ganged up, before challenging someone stronger.

 

Those actions were, over time, creating weaker and weaker sith as strength and knowledge were replaced by cowards and fools who valued titles and position more than true power.

[EzioMessi]

No, Bane had an amazing grasp on the force. He'd have had a younger body that had higher capabilities than his own (not everyone has the same capabilities) which would mean he'd have longer to learn about the force and master new ideas while training a new apprentice who may or may not have been able to overcome him.

 

 

I am pretty sure (or maybe I'm misremembering, I don't really know) it was directly noted in the book that while strong, Bane was not nearly as strong with Zannah with her Sorcery. Zannah herself noticed that Bane was only her superior in politics and cunning, of which she possessed much less, and their first duel (albeit with him severely weakened) ended with Zannah overpowering him hard enough that she didn't even know how to press the advantage, and didn't play to her strengths. During the second duel she just strictly had him beat, and no matter how he justified it, he'd have set back the sith progress by a generation by killing off his significantly more powerful apprentice, because even if he eventually matched her power after replacing her essence, she would have been far stronger were she alive.