The Rancor Pit :: View topic - Light Side Force Choke

Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

FAQ :: Search :: Memberlist :: Usergroups :: Register :: Profile :: Log in to check your private messages :: Log in

Light Side Force Choke

The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules -> Light Side Force Choke

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering

Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:57 pm Post subject:

ZzaphodD wrote:

crmcneill wrote:

But targeting the power has nothing to do with the damage inflicted.

Who says it doesnt? Aiming with the force might have nothing to do with aiming a blaster/rifle, ie point and pull trigger. You could rationalize it with the force user having to 'lock on' the power to the individual or whatever you like. I dont specific idea, what I mean is that give that it is a 'supernatural' (midichlorines aside) power, who is to say for certain what plays a role and what doesnt. You were ok with resisting it with force skills IIRC. All living things are part of the force, Per is just 'mundane' peoples version of resisting with a force skill.

I am OK with Per resisting certain Force skills, specifically mental effects like Affect Mind which require the target to notice something being done to them or to notice that something doesn't quite fit with what they are being told, or whatever.

As far as targeting, you're still missing the point. Even if TK Kill requires a targeting process to lock onto the target's energy, the targeting is still part of the delivery process, not the actual damage inflicted. Telekinesis, by definition, is a physical process. If the power were called Mental Kill, I would agree that we have no idea what sort of damage is actually being inflicted, but because the power is called Telekinetic (literally, the power to move an object by thinking about it) Kill, we know that the end effect (regardless of what path is used to achieve that effect) is still one of physical movement (specifically, moving body parts in such a way as to cause harm). The 2R&E Rulebook defines Perception as the ability of the character to notice things about his surroundings and other characters, while Strength is defined as representing the character's physical strength, endurance and health. Now, are you really going to try and tell me that physical damage to a character's body will be better resisted by an attribute that allows the character to perceive his surroundings as opposed to one that represents his actual physical condition and health?

Quote:

Also, before willpower came along Per was the default willpower, which is why its used to resist the force. Now, as willpower is an 'ordinary' skill it cant be used 'as is' to resist, otherwise that would make much more sense.

If the power was called Mental Kill, and the character was rolling Willpower to resist, IMO, you would have a point. I am OK with Perception, Willpower or Strength being used to resist Force powers, but which one is dependent on what power is being used, and for what purpose. If the character is aware that he is being manipulated into doing something he doesn't want to do (Affect Mind), then of course Willpower is a perfect fit. If he isn't aware that he is being manipulated, then Perception is the right choice. But these are both skills used to resist mental powers, when TK is by definition a physical effect.
_________________
"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

CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering

Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 1:10 pm Post subject:

ZzaphodD wrote:

If you take away certain chock weapons, what is 'stun damage' exactly? If I hit someone in the head so they pass out for 10 minutes, is he Incapacitated (needing long time to heal) or Stunned. If I hit him as hard as I could (lethal damage). If you choke someone to unconsiousness, is that stun damage? If I keep choking, when does it become lethal and how is the switch made?

Another failing of the WEG system, I guess. The difference between Stunned and Incapacitated is exactly as you describe it, in that with one you wake up with a nasty headache and a bruise, and the other you wake up with a serious injury that requires medical care and hospitalization.

As to the difference in the degree of damage inflicted? From what I understand, it is actually more difficult with a choke to avoid inflicting permanent damage than it is to just choke someone to death. If the choke is held too long, the target is in danger of permanent brain damage from lack of oxygen, and it requires specific training and timing to choke someone "just enough" to knock them out but not inflict long-term damage.

From a gaming standpoint I use a simple rule: Choking inflicts Stun damage. Once the target is stunned into unconsciousness, if the character continues to apply the choke, the damage switches to normal damage.
_________________
"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

Fallon Kell
Commodore

Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA

Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:15 pm Post subject:

What is wrong with the idea that a force choke simply prevents new air from entering the lungs, a process which can kill, but never kills instantly, and always causes unconsciousness before death? _________________ Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier Complete Starship Construction System

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:47 pm Post subject:

Fallon Kell wrote:

What is wrong with the idea that a force choke simply prevents new air from entering the lungs, a process which can kill, but never kills instantly, and always causes unconsciousness before death?

Nothing. But I wouldn't describe that power as Telekinetic Kill. Telekinetic Kill seems to me more like what we see in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Something that is intended to kill, is a negation of life, and is by its very nature strongly connected to hatred, uncontrolled anger, and evil. Using telekinesis to choke someone seems different - more like using your invisible telekinetic hands to encircle his throat and choke him - something we might call, oh I don't know, Force Choke if you want another Alter power? Or just an alternate use of the existing Alter power, Telekinesis, to do choking/crushing damage to an opponent.

But this argument is seeming very familiar to me for some reason. The date is January of 2012 right? Wink

CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering

Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 6:41 pm Post subject:

Bren wrote:

Well, consider the evidence of the films. We see the technique described as "Force Choke" used a grand total of 6 times in the films, starting from:

In 2 out of 3 canon occurrences, Force Choke is not, in fact, lethal. However, when writing up their Force powers rules, WEG decided to give us Telekinetic Kill, not Force Choke.

Now don't get me wrong, I think TK Kill is a very cool power for what it does. The idea of using the Force to manipulate the target's internal anatomy in a harmful fashion seems a natural outgrowth of the concept of Force Choke. Using this technique, it would be possible to pinch off the blood flow going to the target's brain just long enough to make them black out (Stun attack). If you weren't interested in controlling yourself and wanted to kill someone, it would be even easier to collapse their trachea, crush their heart or mash their brain (as described in the TK Kill description). But that's definite DSP material right there.

My issue all along has been that WEG's decision to award DSPs for any sort of offensive action (such as using a mild application of Force Choke to inflict Stun damage) is overly harsh, and not in keeping with film evidence, where Jedi are far more martial and offensive (in the attacking sense) than would be permitted under WEG rules. Now this is a free forum, and you are allowed to do whatever you wish, so if you feel that WEG's rules are a better representation of what the SWU should be than what we see in the films, go right ahead. I, however, have seen too much in the way of WEG screw-ups to think they got this one right.
_________________
"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

MacRauri
Ensign
Ensign

Joined: 26 Nov 2011
Posts: 47
Location: Twin Cities MN

Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:17 pm Post subject:

Skywalkers just love choking people. To get back to the original citation of Mace Windu using Force Choke / TK Kill on Grievous I was of the opinion while watching the episode that he should receive a DSP. It's been awhile since I watched it, but IIRC the chase went on for quite some time and the Jedi simply were not able to stop his escape. In a last ditch effort Windu reached out with the Force and tried to bring him down. Was he trying to kill him? Was he trying to exert just enough pressure to make him fall unconscious and arrest him? If a Light Side version of the power existed why wasn't it used earlier before Grievous could get on the ship and fly away? Mace seemed to walk that line were he'd go a little dark if he felt it was necessary. Would others have given him a DSP for that instance?

CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering

Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:56 pm Post subject:

MacRauri wrote:

Skywalkers just love choking people.

To get back to the original citation of Mace Windu using Force Choke / TK Kill on Grievous I was of the opinion while watching the episode that he should receive a DSP. It's been awhile since I watched it, but IIRC the chase went on for quite some time and the Jedi simply were not able to stop his escape. In a last ditch effort Windu reached out with the Force and tried to bring him down. Was he trying to kill him? Was he trying to exert just enough pressure to make him fall unconscious and arrest him? If a Light Side version of the power existed why wasn't it used earlier before Grievous could get on the ship and fly away?

Mace seemed to walk that line were he'd go a little dark if he felt it was necessary. Would others have given him a DSP for that instance?

All excellent points, however, while I enjoy the imagery presented in the Clone Wars TV series, I take it all with a grain of salt with regards to... pretty much everything, especially the ethics of Force use. A lot of what they show happening in the series is almost exclusively for cinematic effect, not adherence to or continuity with the canon.
_________________
"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

garhkal
Sovereign Protector

Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:28 am Post subject:

Combine that with the CW cartoon seems to show force push as being dodgeable.. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

MacRauri
Ensign
Ensign

Joined: 26 Nov 2011
Posts: 47
Location: Twin Cities MN

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 7:54 am Post subject:

garhkal wrote:

Combine that with the CW cartoon seems to show force push as being dodgeable..

Well that's because the person dodging rolled high enough on their perception soak Wink

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:59 am Post subject:

For the record, I am unconvinced that the Telekinetic Kill power is what Darth actually uses on various Imperial officers or what Luke uses on the Gamorreans. Given Vader's Alter score, if Vader had used the TK Kill then Motti would be dead. Explanations of why Motti isn't dead require us to assume that Vader can either choose his level of damage or can roll with less dice than he has. Neither of which are described as possibilities in the RAW. So to me it seems an equally valid explanation to assume he is choking Motti with the Force - possibly with telekinesis alone, possibly using Affect Mind (though I find that unlikely as I would then expect the usual verbal component - "you cannot breathe Motti, you are choking for air") or possibly with some not previously described Force Choke power.

crmcneill wrote:

Yep me too. I have the same problem with the prequels. Bouncing, spinning Yoda and using TK to smash Palpatine does not fit either the ethos or the style of the original films where the good guys don't hurl objects at the bad guys. In AOTC Anakin's slaughter of an entire village of Tuskens - men, women, children is just a prelude to his really evil action in ROTS - you know trying to kill his Jedi mentor Obi-Wan. Wink

Murdering Tuskens in revenge does not seem to be much of an evil action in and off itself. Padme hardly seems to care about his slaughter of the Tuskens and Obi-Wan and the council don't even notice anything being amiss or even bother to get any news from Tatooine about what the missing Anakin has been up to. How hard would it have been to do a little checking?

Anchorhead News Net wrote:

This just in. Bantha herd found wandering loose in Dune Sea. Entire village of Tuskens found mysteriously sliced to pieces. And the weather in the Anchorhead area tomorrow will be very hot and and very dry...

Apparently in GL's view if you are ugly (Gamorreans and Tuskens) using the Force for attack is AOK and doesn't and shouldn't actually get you much in the way of DSPs. WEG is much more unforgiving of using the Force to attack or kill sentient beings. Which suits me better from an ethical standpoint.

That being said, I like the idea of having a bit of gray area to both tempt the Jedi and to allow for things like using TK for Force Push like we see in the films/TV shows. I just think that using TK to attack another is always a bit risky and has the potential to cause more damage than intended - and when and if that occurs, I think ZzaphodD's notion of Dark Side Pips fits pretty nicely. I also think a Dark Side Pip award works nicely for things like acting selfishly without actually physically harming someone. Saving the Dark Side Points for causing harm while acting in anger or choosing to do evil works better for me.

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:00 am Post subject:

MacRauri wrote:

garhkal wrote:

Combine that with the CW cartoon seems to show force push as being dodgeable..

Well that's because the person dodging rolled high enough on their perception soak Wink

Good point. Laughing

garhkal
Sovereign Protector

Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:48 pm Post subject:

Maybe they were under the impression that tuskens and gammoreans, like droids are not sentient so its ok to kill them! _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral

Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:10 pm Post subject:

Bren wrote:

This is the simplest way of handling this. It doesnt cause stun damage, but you can chose to roll less Alter dice.

In the RAW it doesnt say you can 'pull your punches' either when attacking either with your fists or with a weapon. I guess the designers just didnt think of the possibility that a character might want to. I have always let combatants 'pull punches'. Why wouldnt you be able to 'pull your punches' with TK Kill?

The Gamorreans are then attacked probably with just a few Alter dice. If you see it from a IU perspective, suddenly being choked with no explanation how will probably affect you more than just the game mechanic result of being stunned.

Still leaves the DSP question open. In general I think its to easy to get DSP from using such powers (if there is little result). Hence my idea of DSP 'pips'.. A willpower roll is another way of handling this..
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course..

CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering

Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:43 pm Post subject:

Bren wrote:

I wouldn't go that far. I certainly don't think WEG got the Force perfect, but I do think they got a lot of their Force powers "close enough for government work" (as my father, the former employee of the state of California, liked to put it). IMO, the idea is there, just lacking in refinement and clarity. I like TK Kill as a power because it covers a general scope of abilities that would include the power Force Choke, but I dislike it because it is not an accurate depiction of the action in the films. In this case (as well as in the case of several other powers that don't fit with film evidence), my preferred choice is to edit the power so that it does fit.

For starters, I do like the idea that WEG had of it being a DSP power. I do think it is a good fit that, to use this power to inflict damage, you have to have a little malice in your heart directed at the target. However, as I have repeatedly stated, I do think that it should be possible to use this power to inflict Stun damage and not receive a DSP. That does not mean that doing so should be easy, or something that the average Jedi character can do just because he has a few dice in Alter and the player has a bright idea.

As far as reducing damage goes, my idea is this: use the Control dice roll to reflect the degree to which damage can be reduced. IMO, in-universe, unrestrained use of Telekinetic Kill results in just that, so to reduce the degree of damage inflicted (usually in the interests of toying with the target, ala Vader) requires the TK Kill user to moderate the degree of energy delivered, if not necessarily the degree of negative emotions used to fuel it (I use a Willpower roll for that). In game terms, TK Kill requires an Easy Control roll to bring the power up. My proposed solution is that, for every 5 points by which the TK Kill user beats his Easy Control roll, he is allowed to reduce the damage level rolled by one level.

To quote the Vader/Motti example above in game terms, lets assume that Vader, with his obscenely high Force skills, successfully uses TK Kill on Motti. Putting aside the argument of Per vs. Str. when defending against a Telekinetic Force attack, Vader's 10D+1 Alter would completely overpower Motti's 2D+1 Str or his 2D+2 Per (Random dice #'s, factoring in Vader's -2D MAP = 49 vs. 12. Vader wins by 37 points, easily exceeding the 16+ required to kill Motti). However, Vader also rolled his Control dice (11D) to bring the power up, with a result of 31, easily beating the Easy (10) difficulty level by 21 points. Vader may then choose to lower the damage inflicted by one level for every five points of success on the Control roll: 21 equals 4 levels, so a Killed result can be reduced all the way down to Stunned, if he so chooses. Per ZzaphodD's suggestion, Vader could reduce it even further by not using all his Alter dice on the roll, making the subsequent Control roll even easier.

Stunned damage, IMO, is probably too narrow a term to cover what it needs to cover in this game. It covers people knocked unconscious, but otherwise unhurt, but it also (according to the power Inflict Pain) covers people who are conscious but in too much pain to do anything but be in pain. I would go so far as to say that Stun damage also covers people who are conscious but slowly being choked to death and are unable to perform any action apart from gasping in vain for their next breath. When Vader stops applying the choke, the Stun damage goes away after a round or two and Motti recovers relatively quickly.

Quote:

I have the same problem with the prequels. Bouncing, spinning Yoda and using TK to smash Palpatine does not fit either the ethos or the style of the original films where the good guys don't hurl objects at the bad guys.

In your opinion, you mean. Saying that the prequels violates the ethos completely ignores the fact that the story's primary hero did, in fact, use Telekinesis offensively. And seeing as how WEG is supposed to be an accurate reflection of the films, not the other way around, they should have done a much better job of it.

To get my degree in Social Science, I had to take a class called Historiography, which is essentially a study of the way history is recorded and passed on. We learned the difference between a primary source (a source which either was present at the historical event in question or is the actual event itself) and a secondary source (a source which is derived from the study of the primary source). In every case, a primary source is considered to be more accurate and more official than any secondary source.

I bring this up because this is exactly the problem. The films are THE primary source when it comes to Star Wars. Everything else is derived from them and is, by definition, a secondary source, including WEG. To be an accurate reflection of a primary source, a secondary source must take all facets of that primary source into account, including its inconsistencies. What WEG has done is take most of the facets of the Force presented in the original film and develop its own, more restrictive philosophy, while ignoring the details of key pieces of film evidence that contradict their philosophy. In addition, they have written up descriptions of Force powers that do not accurately reflect what those Force powers are seen to do in the films. I can't explain why, yet the errors in the WEG system are apparent to anyone who cares to look.

In earlier posts, I used the term revisionist apologetics. More recently, I've begun to call it "drinking the WEG Kool-Aid". This is because of a phenomenon I've seen a lot on this forum. People who are otherwise highly intelligent and logical thinkers insist on viewing and interpreting the primary source (the films) through the lens of an inaccurate secondary source (WEG), and will fight tooth and nail to undermine the primary source because it doesn't fit with their view of how they think the SWU should be (which generally coincides with WEG's flawed perspective). If Star Wars were a religion, people who define it by WEG terms would be a cult.

Quote:

In AOTC Anakin's slaughter of an entire village of Tuskens - men, women, children is just a prelude to his really evil action in ROTS - you know trying to kill his Jedi mentor Obi-Wan. :wink: Murdering Tuskens in revenge does not seem to be much of an evil action in and off itself.

Does it? I would certainly disagree, and I think that, while Anakin was already leaning in the direction of the Dark Side, slaughtering the Tusken village was his first actual step in that direction. The problem is that things in RL (and IU) are much clear-cut than a simple 1 DSP for every evil act you commit, then once you hit 6 DSP, you become an evil NPC. WEG's DSP mechanic is fine on a simplistic level, but it really isn't an effective measurement of a character's slow slide into evil, especially for something like what we see in the films.

Quote:

Which is exactly what I'm talking about above. You are interpreting the film action through the lens of WEG's "the Force absolutely can't be used to attack another being for any reason, no matter how justifiable it may seem" perspective. I'm looking at it from the perspective of "WEG says this, which contradicts the films. Since the films are the not merely the source from which WEG is derived, but are, in fact, the entire reason the WEG Star Wars system exists, any conflict between the two sources is automatically decided in favor of the films, not WEG."

In short, rather than saying that "Well, Lucas must be OK with using the Dark Side against ugly people; it's a good thing WEG is so much better than that," we should be asking ourselves, "If this is allowable in the films, even though WEG says it shouldn't be, how do we adjust the WEG rules to better reflect what we see in the films?"

Naturally, some will insist on drinking the WEG Kool-Aid and continue with the mindset of "Well, the films got it wrong, because WEG says things should be this way."

Quote:

That being said, I like the idea of having a bit of gray area to both tempt the Jedi and to allow for things like using TK for Force Push like we see in the films/TV shows. I just think that using TK to attack another is always a bit risky and has the potential to cause more damage than intended - and when and if that occurs, I think ZzaphodD's notion of Dark Side Pips fits pretty nicely. I also think a Dark Side Pip award works nicely for things like acting selfishly without actually physically harming someone. Saving the Dark Side Points for causing harm while acting in anger or choosing to do evil works better for me.

I agree. My Willpower rule works nicely for me, but it's a free universe, so people can choose to do whatever they like.
_________________
"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

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:22 pm Post subject:

crmcneill wrote:

Quote:

In your opinion, you mean.

Well naturally its my opinion. I'm writing it after all. But is not an uninformed opinion. In the original three films the only characters who hurl objects are the bad guys. That is factual, not opinion. What Luke is really doing to the Gamorreans and what power (if any) best reflects that in the rules is inference and opinion since the film does not make it clear what the fate of those two Gamorreans was.

Quote:

Saying that the prequels violates the ethos completely ignores the fact that the story's primary hero did, in fact, use Telekinesis offensively.

No it doesn't. See above.

Quote:

And seeing as how WEG is supposed to be an accurate reflection of the films, not the other way around, they should have done a much better job of it.

This is your opinion. One not universally shared. In my opinion, the WEG rules are an attempt to allow one to play characters in a roleplaying game in the Star Wars universe in a style similar to that of the original films. Since the rules are attempting to create a roleplaying game matters of rules, game balance, etc. may trump the narrative concerns and the experience of watching a movie.

While I am familiar with the distinction between primary and secondary sources, that distinction it is only relevant if we all agree that the point of the game is to simulate the movies (I don't). But even if we did all agree we would have to agree on which primary source material to include (do the prequels count? what about the Clone Wars animated film? what about the Clone Wars TV shows? how about the old Droids or Ewoks TV shows and what about the infamous holiday TV special?). These are all primary source material so the issue of primary source material is not a simple one. Like the study of ancient history the question of what counts as a primary source material is not uncontroversial.

Quote:

I bring this up because this is exactly the problem. The films are THE primary source when it comes to Star Wars.

According to whom are the films the only primary source material? I know you believe this and it fits your point, but why do you think I necessarily should accept your selection of which media to include and which to exclude as definitive primary sources for a roleplaying game?

Quote:

Everything else is derived from them and is, by definition, a secondary source, including WEG.

Logically in that case it would seem like only the original version of Star Wars is primary material since the other films are derived from it with the script writers and directors of the later films filtering their ideas through the lens of what was presented on screen.

Quote:

In earlier posts, I used the term revisionist apologetics. More recently, I've begun to call it "drinking the WEG Kool-Aid". This is because of a phenomenon I've seen a lot on this forum. People who are otherwise highly intelligent and logical thinkers insist on viewing and interpreting the primary source (the films) through the lens of an inaccurate secondary source (WEG), and will fight tooth and nail to undermine the primary source because it doesn't fit with their view of how they think the SWU should be (which generally coincides with WEG's flawed perspective). If Star Wars were a religion, people who define it by WEG terms would be a cult.

So you want to be the Inquisition to our heretical cult of WEG? Wink

Quote:

Slaughtering a village of dozens or more sentient beings including females, children, and infants by cutting them apart with a lightsaber is not, in my opinion, "a slow slide into evil." It is an atrocity. It would be a war crime except for the fact that the Jedi were not even at war with the native population of Tatooine. How Anakin commits that act and then continues on without any apparent attempt to attone is, for me, a serious dramatic and moral failure.

Quote:

In short, rather than saying that "Well, Lucas must be OK with using the Dark Side against ugly people; it's a good thing WEG is so much better than that," we should be asking ourselves, "If this is allowable in the films, even though WEG says it shouldn't be, how do we adjust the WEG rules to better reflect what we see in the films?"

Well we could do that or we could just decide that some things are wrong even when they happen to ugly people and the morals of the WEG Jedi are superior to the Lucas Jedi and adopt the WEG morality and then try to reconcile what we see in the films in a way that preserves a better and more clear cut moral code with a clear distinction between heroes and villains. Your mileage clearly varies.

BTW describing us as "drinking the WEG Kool-Aid" is offensive. You might want to assume that other folks besides you actually watched the films and read the WEG rules and just came to a different conclusion than you did about how to best resolve the contradictions for their own game. If you are intending to offend others go right ahead and continue. But it doesn't do much to bolster your argument against the RAW or demonstrate an serious attempt to argue in good faith.

Display posts from previous:

	The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules	All times are GMT - 4 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
Page 7 of 9

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum