Projected fighting

[Son of Fire]

Nathaniel.
No one is calling Vader’s power into question, which was not even the issue. The issue was that Vader did indeed stop gesturing while Ozzel was dying.
As for Lightsabres, I was reefing to the Force power of Lightsabre Combat, not the sabre it’s self. Since the power is used in combat to enhance the deadly nature of the sabre (bringing it up from 5D, to 5D + Control D damage) I think it would constitute using the Force in combat.
To address the eating meat thing with Jedi, I think that would fall under the whole self-preservation category, after all you need to eat to live. I don’t even want to get into a vegetarian or vegan thing here. But “bagging womp-rats” does not even seem to a kill to eat thing…it was either a thing that kids did on that planet for fun, or it was just hunting down vermin.

Crell.
I to stand by my viewpoint in this one, I have not seen enough canonical evidence to warrant otherwise. I think the main discrepancy is our methods of though on this issue. It seems to me that you are trying to reason the films to the game, while I tend to reason the games to the films.
Though I do agree with the mindset issue you brought up, I think that has a great deal to with Jedi motivation and DS pips.
_________________
"My schooling not only failed to teach me what it professed to be teaching, but prevented me from being educated to an extent which infuriates me when I think of all I might have learned at home by myself." - George Bernard Shaw

[Maximilian Bernas]

So, once again it comes down to intent...

What were the implications of the actions of the Jedi in question during the scenario presented?

This is why The Force is so easy to misuse. It is an interpretive energy and uses the guidlines of overarching morality almost like a sentient being.

"You mean it controls my actions?" "Partially, but it also obeys your commands." - Luke Skywalker and Obi-Wan Kenobi

What the Jedi means to do is what happens. If the thought is: "Whoa! They're everywhere! I gotta get them off of me to go and assist others," then you have one interpretation. However, if the thought is: "Dude! Lookit! I can smash these little bug-things to pieces," then the use of The Force is entirely different.

I'm not a purist by any means, but I do feel that in order to use The Force, one must know not only how, but why and to what end? If those ends are diabolical, or even self-serving (notice I did not say 'self-preserving'), then negative connotations could (and probably would) be ascribed to those ends.

This is the interpretive aspect of a dynamic creation like The Force that places it squarely in such uncharted and unique territory. And it is just this same creation that allows for excellent role-playing, provided the player (and thus the character) are honest about why they do what they do.

Philosophical enough?
_________________
"Let your anger be like a monkey in a pinata"
- Master Tang

[Son of Fire]

Well Max, I don’t think there is any one here that can argue with that.
I just WEG gave us something solid to work with for DS pips. Like I said before if we had a framework then we all would have a common ground. As of right now…all of us are correct, and all of us are wrong, because it is all a matter of opinion.
_________________
"My schooling not only failed to teach me what it professed to be teaching, but prevented me from being educated to an extent which infuriates me when I think of all I might have learned at home by myself." - George Bernard Shaw