| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16382
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2011 9:46 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| cheshire wrote: | | Then call me an anomaly. I was always uncertain of what he was doing there. Long before I'd even heard of WEG, I'd watched this film on VHS hundreds of times. I noticed that at least one Gamorean moved his hand near his neck, showing a similarity to what people do being chocked. Though Luke made a different hand motion than the trademark Vader chocking, and the rumbling sound effect was absent which was usually indicative of the choke. |
There are some obvious dissimilarities, but Vader's hand gesture was absent in both instances of Force Choke in ESB (no hand gesture at all while Ozzell was choking, and you couldn't see his hand at all when Needa died), plus the background rumbled was either absent or blended in with the ship's background noise for Needa. As for any ambiguity over the choking, I've been through CPR/First Aid enough to know that both hands to the throat is the universal sign for choking. Lucas may have set his gilm in a galaxy far, far away, but he made it primarily for American audiences, using symbolism we could all understand. In this case, the Gammorean didn't have to say he was choking; he used the universal sign to indicate that he was choking (specifically, both hands to the throat while gasping for air). You may consider it ambiguous if you wish; to me, it was never in doubt.
BTW, did you mean for this quote to be here instead of further down?
| Quote: | I'm not sure what it said in the final script that the director had in hand, though I did look at a script online that says:
| Quote: | Luke raises his hand and points at the puzzled guards, who immediately lower their spears and fall back. The young Jedi
lowers his hand and moves on down the hallway. |
|
I have always been of the belief that, should something from a source other than the films contradict the films, whatever occurs in the films is what actually happened. In this case, it is pretty obvious that the guards were choking. Star Wars isn't exactly huge on subtlety, so I'm going with the idea that, if the guards appear to be choking, then they were most likely choking.
| Quote: | | To call it revisionist apologetics is doing little more than poking fun of the idea that some question whether he's actually choking him or not. |
Yet to me, it is the only explanation that makes sense. I have found more than a few errors in WEG's interpretation of Star Wars: errors that we, the fans, have had to explain and invent convoluted explanations as to why something happens in the films that contradicts the rules of the game still occurred (and how it did so within the RAW). WEG blatantly disregarded or ignored film evidence in a variety of situations, including Force use, a variety of stats for both ships and weapons, and the character write-ups for the film's main characters, all while showing an amazing ability to pull random numbers out of thin air and pass them off as fact.
Now don't misunderstand me; I love Star Wars, I love the D6 gaming system, and I thought it was a very sad day when I heard WEG lost the license for SWU. But I still can't help but wonder what happened to WEG's editing staff that so many errors made it past them and into publication. I've gotten tired of trying to justify "the SWU according to WEG", and find it much simpler to say "if the WEG RAW is contradicted by the films, throw out the RAW and write something new." This is one of those cases. In essence, thanks to WEG, we are trying to justify the films according to the RAW, when it should be the other way around. The WEG game proceeds from the films, not the films from the game, and to attempt to make a primary source conform to a secondary source is the definition of revisionist.
As for apologetics, it means literally "to speak in defense", usually referring to religion, but in this case I'm talking about the RAW. As much as I love the WEG SW D6 RAW, it is rife with errors and inconsistencies when compared to the film. These errors and inconsistencies are the Achilles' Heel of any attempt to speak in defense of the system, as their presence automatically undermines the validity of the work as a whole. I realize that the films also contradict themselves, but that is no excuse for the publishers to assume a license to contradict for themselves. What WEG published should have been as internally consistent with the films as possible, and yet it is not.
So, in the end, we have an internally inconsistent RAW that contradicts the films from which the RAW is derived, yet most people insist on defending (apologetics) the RAW and attempting to define the films by the RAW (revisionist), not the other way around.
It is not poking fun; it is a statement of fact as I see it.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14306
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Which many of us are not agreeing with.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16382
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2012 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Which many of us are not agreeing with. |
So you disagree with my describing the RAW defenders as revisionist apologetics? That's perfectly alright. Care to elaborate?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | Which many of us are not agreeing with. |
So you disagree with my describing the RAW defenders as revisionist apologetics? That's perfectly alright. Care to elaborate? |
Revisionist Apologetics v.s. Crack-Brained Reactionaries! The cage match of the century! 
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16382
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2012 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LMAO. Just to make sure I understood where you were coming from, I Googled the phrase "crack-brained reactionary." The first two links were articles on crack cocaine, but links 3 and 4 (on spacebattles.com) both led with the phrase "Crack-brained reactionary. Fallon Kell's avatar." I can only assume you were welcoming me to the club?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MacRauri
Ensign
Joined: 26 Nov 2011
Posts: 47
Location: Twin Cities MN
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Having played some other roleplaying games and now coming back to WEG’s Star Wars I have to say that I really enjoy their interpretation of the Force from a mechanical standpoint. I love the fact that the Force truly is the ultimate power in galaxy, but if it’s not used appropriately you lose control of your character. None of these losing XP, downgrading a level, being stripped of your prestige class slap-on-the-wrist penalties; you lose control of your character and they become a villain. All other systems nowadays are so watered down by trying to balance all the classes. I love the look of the various Kotor games, but every time I see a Sith hacking their lightsaber into your companion 5-6 times and only taking off a portion of their HP I just cringe. You want to play a system where a force-user who can read people’s thoughts, affect people’s thoughts, parry blaster bolts, lift space ships and choke people all with their mind is as ridiculously overpowered as it sounds? You can with WEG’s rules! And the balancing factor is that if you choose to make that kind of character you have to live by a code.
WEG’s rules provides a rough and conservative, but functional moral calculus for incurring DSPs. What I recall bothering me most when we first played wasn’t that we weren’t allowed to have the fun lightening and choke abilities, but rather that WEG didn’t publish any clarification for their take on the scene where the hero used the force against two lowbie guards. And now in 2012 we continue to have this debate. But I’ve made my peace with this lack of consistency precisely because of the countless arguments and debates that my gaming groups have gotten to have over the years. No other system has spurred us to the same levels of contention and I think that that’s an incredible gift that WEG gave us.
So I guess I would come down on the apologetic side of this crack-brained cage fight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16382
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree on the code. Force use without an ethical code would cease to be Star Wars. My contention from the beginning is that, whatever form the Code takes, it should not be different than what we see in the films (i.e. the universe that WEG set out to emulate). If something is possible in the films, then it should also be possible in the RAW. I agree completely with atgxtg's earlier statement, in that it is highly unlikely that Luke would take such a grave emotional risk as to gain two DSPs just to impress the doormen.
I have never once said that it should be possible to use Telekinetic Kill without restriction and not receive a DSP. My proposed fix is simply this: A Jedi may use TK Kill to inflict stun damage only. In order to do so, he must make a successful Willpower roll against the number he rolled on his Control dice to use TK Kill in the first place. If he succeeds, the target takes Stun damage only and is knocked unconscious. If he fails, he inflicts full normal damage and receives a DSP as per the RAW for TK Kill. And supposing a player manages to build his character's Willpower so high that he can use TK Kill in stun mode on a regular basis? Well, that's his reward for putting so many CPs into Willpower when he could've spent them somewhere else. To me, that's like complaining because the character with 16D Blaster can fire 8 kill-shots at 8 different targets in a single round; he paid his dues to become as good as he is, now he gets to experience the rewards.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14306
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2012 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | I agree on the code. Force use without an ethical code would cease to be Star Wars. My contention from the beginning is that, whatever form the Code takes, it should not be different than what we see in the films (i.e. the universe that WEG set out to emulate). If something is possible in the films, then it should also be possible in the RAW. I agree completely with atgxtg's earlier statement, in that it is highly unlikely that Luke would take such a grave emotional risk as to gain two DSPs just to impress the doormen.
I have never once said that it should be possible to use Telekinetic Kill without restriction and not receive a DSP. My proposed fix is simply this: A Jedi may use TK Kill to inflict stun damage only. In order to do so, he must make a successful Willpower roll against the number he rolled on his Control dice to use TK Kill in the first place. If he succeeds, the target takes Stun damage only and is knocked unconscious. If he fails, he inflicts full normal damage and receives a DSP as per the RAW for TK Kill. And supposing a player manages to build his character's Willpower so high that he can use TK Kill in stun mode on a regular basis? Well, that's his reward for putting so many CPs into Willpower when he could've spent them somewhere else. To me, that's like complaining because the character with 16D Blaster can fire 8 kill-shots at 8 different targets in a single round; he paid his dues to become as good as he is, now he gets to experience the rewards. |
Then why not 'slap the same restriction' on all dark side power? Beat the willpower and get to use it without getting the DSP. Cause to some of us that itself smacks of revisionisting things much like some of the newer novels seem to allow/have jedi using formerly known dark side powers light wise (ELECTRIC JUDGEMENT) without the hate cause they "are at peace"..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16382
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2012 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Then why not 'slap the same restriction' on all dark side power? Beat the willpower and get to use it without getting the DSP. Cause to some of us that itself smacks of revisionisting things much like some of the newer novels seem to allow/have jedi using formerly known dark side powers light wise (ELECTRIC JUDGEMENT) without the hate cause they "are at peace".. |
Because applying the same rule to all Dark Side powers would be pushing it too far. I am merely suggesting applying this rule to some of the known Force Powers (at this point, TK Kill, Injure/Kill, and the DSP rule for direct attacks with objects using TK), specifically those which could potentially be used in non-lethal fashion. I'm on the fence with Electric Judgment, for a variety of reasons. It could be a candidate for applying the Willpower rule to Force Lightning, but I'm currently withholding judgement. There are a few other potential candidates as well (Electronic Manipulation, Doppelganger, etc.) but most of the other Dark Side powers (Create Force Storms, Drain Life Energy, Waves of Darkness, etc.) are out and out evil.
As for my reasoning behind why I allow the Willpower rule for certain powers? Well, let's run down the list:
TK Kill - Covered, hashed and rehashed for the last 60-odd posts, in case you need a refresher
Injure/Kill - Same justification as with TK Kill, even though the power is never actually used in the canon. However, per the EU of the prequels, there is a power that allows a Jedi to put someone into a hibernation trance against their will, so I see no reason a Jedi shouldn't also be able to Stun someone against their will as well.
Telekinesis - I've covered it once or twice, but I'll give it another go. In keeping with my beliefs on the two previously mentioned powers, I see no reason a Jedi shouldn't be able to use TK'd objects to inflict non-lethal damage. If a Jedi can use the Force to enhance his lightsaber skill to allow him to kill, maim or otherwise inflict permanent injury on his opponent without getting slapped with a DSP, its ridiculous to assume that he can't use the Force more directly to inflict a much less traumatic level of damage.
And while we're on the subject, i distinctly recall posting some Force power re-writes several months back that were practically built around my Willpower rule, in that they allowed a Jedi to make non-lethal attacks if he passed a Willpower check. You didn't say a word about it then, so I can't help but be curious about the opposition now...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2012 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | LMAO. Just to make sure I understood where you were coming from, I Googled the phrase "crack-brained reactionary." The first two links were articles on crack cocaine, but links 3 and 4 (on spacebattles.com) both led with the phrase "Crack-brained reactionary. Fallon Kell's avatar." I can only assume you were welcoming me to the club? |
It's a title Bren jokingly gave me and a few others here. I latched on to it and wear it proudly whenever I express a controversial viewpoint on sci-fi stuff. I've mostly taken your side in this debate, so I'm grandfathering you in to the collective title.
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16382
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallon Kell wrote: | | crmcneill wrote: | | LMAO. Just to make sure I understood where you were coming from, I Googled the phrase "crack-brained reactionary." The first two links were articles on crack cocaine, but links 3 and 4 (on spacebattles.com) both led with the phrase "Crack-brained reactionary. Fallon Kell's avatar." I can only assume you were welcoming me to the club? |
It's a title Bren jokingly gave me and a few others here. I latched on to it and wear it proudly whenever I express a controversial viewpoint on sci-fi stuff. I've mostly taken your side in this debate, so I'm grandfathering you in to the collective title. :lol: |
LOL. Count me in! As I understand it, crack-brained generally refers to something that is a bad idea, but if it is a bad idea to stop drinking the WEG Kool-Aid and keep thinking for myself, I am all for it.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14306
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Injure/Kill - Same justification as with TK Kill, even though the power is never actually used in the canon. However, per the EU of the prequels, there is a power that allows a Jedi to put someone into a hibernation trance against their will, so I see no reason a Jedi shouldn't also be able to Stun someone against their will as well.
|
Maybe i am not as well read as you, but this is the first i have heard of a potential power to force someone into hybernation trance against their will. Heck to me that would definitely be a sith power.. as it flat out ignores free will.
| Quote: |
Telekinesis - I've covered it once or twice, but I'll give it another go. In keeping with my beliefs on the two previously mentioned powers, I see no reason a Jedi shouldn't be able to use TK'd objects to inflict non-lethal damage. If a Jedi can use the Force to enhance his lightsaber skill to allow him to kill, maim or otherwise inflict permanent injury on his opponent without getting slapped with a DSP, its ridiculous to assume that he can't use the Force more directly to inflict a much less traumatic level of damage. |
Now here is where again i disagree. The LS combat enhancement is not a direct use of the force to attack.. TK is.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gamer
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 20 May 2010
Posts: 125
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I Googled the phrase "crack-brained reactionary." |
I dare you to google (with the quotes) "crack-brained reactionary" again the very first link comes right back here!
Seriously, a light side choke? naaah.
But i did away with that b.s. awhile ago there is no force choke to me its part of Telekinesis.
How you use that makes a difference, with a tk "force choke" either squeeze the life out of somebody or just knock them out.
Some beings are resistant to mind tricks so what are you going to do to get past that badguy?
A song and dance?
*Cue*
Michigan J Frog |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gamer wrote: |
| Quote: | | I Googled the phrase "crack-brained reactionary." |
I dare you to google (with the quotes) "crack-brained reactionary" again the very first link comes right back here!
Seriously, a light side choke? naaah.
But i did away with that b.s. awhile ago there is no force choke to me its part of Telekinesis.
How you use that makes a difference, with a tk "force choke" either squeeze the life out of somebody or just knock them out.
Some beings are resistant to mind tricks so what are you going to do to get past that badguy?
A song and dance?
*Cue*
Michigan J Frog |
Thats why Im against a DSP-free TK Kill. Its a specialized power meant to kill/maim. It has no other use. If you want to make it also cause stund damage then its not TK Kill. Force choke, even if it does cause stun damage, is a power only meant for attack. No grey zones. However, a 'stun attack' might only give you a 'DSP-pip' in my games. Again, vs a Willpower roll if you stay 'untainted'. Its as far as Im willing to go.
However, if you use the original TK power in a 'creative' way and get the same effect (ie, a stun-choke) I might be more lenient towards a grey area. The effect is the same, but you have not used a power you have specifically learned to hurt other people. To me the risk of a 'taint' should be smaller. Then again, if you go right out and smashes someones head with the ordinary TK power then its a sure DSP.
And I agree when it comes to the lightsaber. Lets all be honest here. Lightsabers were invented as a Jedi weapon because they look cool in the movie. If Jedis are supposed to be such nice guys why isnt there a stun setting as standard? 
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16382
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gamer wrote: | :lol:
| Quote: | | I Googled the phrase "crack-brained reactionary." |
I dare you to google (with the quotes) "crack-brained reactionary" again the very first link comes right back here! :lol: |
HA. I'll take your word for it. Apparently, Google is letting everyone know I have officially joined the club.
| Quote: | Seriously, a light side choke? naaah.
But i did away with that b.s. awhile ago there is no force choke to me its part of Telekinesis.
How you use that makes a difference, with a tk "force choke" either squeeze the life out of somebody or just knock them out. |
I'm not sure I'd go that far. For starters, TK is limited to line of sight, and with TK Kill, you are manipulating body parts that you can't see (hence the Sense roll). Granted, if you were using TK to squeeze a person's throat externally, you wouldn't need the Sense roll, but there is no sign of external constriction in any of the film evidence. The person's throat looks perfectly normal and "unclenched:, yet they are choking. Having the Control roll makes sense to me as well.
On top of that, this is not a power I want just anyone to be able to use, whether there is a Stun option tacked on or not.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
