Dark Side Points

[vanir]

Several Jedi have gotten married, some of the Order's famous heroes have been married to each other. It's also certain the Jedi Code has been rewritten at least three times with changing inflection and characters.

The Jedi Order has undergone a shift in general ideology since the early days of the Republic, it was mentioned in Tales of the Jedi that the galaxy used to be a much rougher place. Jedi Knights functioned like Sector Rangers and later became more enigmatic. As fitting for a Knightly Order they evolved during a combat phase to become a monk like establishment proficient in martial arts.

Yoda said many of the older, more experienced Jedi had become as arrogant as some of the new students in the Rise of the Empire period.
In the Kotor series inactivity of the Jedi Council to respond to the Mandalorian Wars led to a split within the Jedi and many fell to the Dark Side when they joined up with a Sith cult which went to war with the Mandalorians under the Republic banner.

I'd say extreme conservatism was often a presence within the Order, but it was never an integral element to being a Jedi Knight. I think this conservative presence seemed to always herald waning periods of the Jedi.

Qui Gonn and his Living Force philosophy was a different take to Yoda and his Unifying Force, which I think maybe difficult for non-aliens to appreciate without trying to turn themselves into robots.

I think actually the little green guy didn't understand how simple humans are, our reverence needs emotional content to keep us straight. If we're awed too much by something without having any emotional investment we're as likely as a species to try to destroy it as we are to make friends with it. The Living Force was a more evangelist interpretation but Qui Gonn just seemed as fun as Yoda and less stubborn rather than more.

So I think some of the stricter Jedi codes of conduct are the product of extremist conservatives within the Order and don't reflect the institution or ideology so much. It doesn't say in the Jedi Code itself "you may not have sex ever again nor marry or anything fun like that, you must be miserable and alone and smile and pretend you love it"

The Sith might prohibit marriage. So you can rape more.

[Kilgore]

The group I am about to start GameMastering a campaign for are pretty mature, so in that case I will most likely use the strategy of being the voice of the Dark Side trying to sometimes tempt a Force User if the group includes a character like that, by acting like their subconscious telling the player that the easiest way to handle a problem is this way or that. Trying quietly to persuade them into doing things that are not all that wise.

[vanir]

Sure you could say, consistently offer them the dark side alternative.
"Another option is to torture the Stormtrooper for information, but is clearly streamrolling the rights of a sentient and would obviously get you a dark side point. It may save the Rebellion however."

The Jedi Code does involve a degree of Faith. You believe as a Jedi Knight that if you exercise the Code justly and true, that matters will somehow always manage to work out for the best. That is the statement of belief.

The Sith simply embrace the view that it is all therefore a combat of wills. The Dark Side itself are the temptations of impatience, anger, presumption, greed and represent the road to the Sith.

So that there are actually Dark Jedi as very distinct from Sith. Something they never explained very well in the movies but gets handled in the Dark Horse comics nicely. They're my favourite SW universe.

[CRMcNeill]

Something worth considering in that scenario...

If the stormtrooper knows the correct answer to the questions being asked, it is human nature to automatically think of the correct answer even if you don't say it out loud. If the stormtrooper doesn't know he is facing a Jedi (i.e. someone who can read his mind), the Jedi may be able to use Receptive Telepathy to pick out the answers to the questions without resorting to torture. The Jedi doesn't necessarily even have to be in the same room.
_________________
"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

[vanir]

Come now, if the person you tortured had the answers you seek the need for torture never would have arisen.

[Bren]

[CRMcNeill]

[Bren]

[CRMcNeill]

[ZzaphodD]

[Bren]

[vanir]

I was being facetious, torture is an ineffective means entirely because you can only be sure the individual is coming clean when they are detailing everything you wish to know, every other possible response results in more torture. You can never be sure they are telling what you want to hear until they do, there is no way to know what they know because you are not them, even if they told you there is context, misunderstanding, lots of possible issues.

The decision to end the torture rests entirely on the satisfaction and assumptions of the torturer, a fallable human being whom probably does believe they can read minds, or at least know truth from lies with some kind of personal ability gleaned from acting like a brutal animal.
What you tend to get though is a psychopath with delusions holding electrical clamps on kidnapped peoples genitals.

Samual Jackson was in a good American movie examining the legimitisation of torture in the war on terror issue, I think it was called Unthinkable. Fairly recent release, should look it up for a dramatisation from the eyes of a torturer whom is of course, a murdering psychopath probably a bigger danger to society than the people he tortures with military sanction, the fact the torturer and his family have brutal personal backgrounds is no excuse and ultimately plays out to the torturer's excuse for being a torturer.

Every kind of detailed investigation into the success of torture as a military Intelligence technique has come to the same conclusions, the results are only ever minor leads gained by gross collatoral damage in terms of international and domestic policy of the nations involved. From military tribunals (Geneva) to psychiatric colleges (the AMA) the conclusions are always that it is an unconscionable practise which yeilds no demonstrably results in any way proportionate to the method.

Torture is not only morally wrong, it doesn't work. Everything the victim tells you is the truth under torture, if they tell you the sky is pink while they're being gutted alive with autopsy tools, believe me it's the truth.
Not a lot of use to Military Intelligence to know the sky looks pink while you're being disemboweled though.

[Random Numbers]

[garhkal]

[Bren]