Jump to content

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, penpenpen said:

Only if you think of it as a sentient will. Think of it in grander terms. It is the will of the universe, and death is meaningless, because it's simply a transition from one state to another with nothing lost.

If you say it has a Will, which is what is said over and over.  "The Will of the Force."  "All is as the Force Wills it".   That smacks of real world religious wording of things like "Thy will be done" etc.  Which absolutely implies a sentient will.  If it's not sentient, it doesn't have a will.  In every definition and common understanding of the word and it's usage, Will implies a mind imposing that will on the world around it.  So yes, I assume it's Sentient, otherwise it's not a will, and the term is being used horribly incorrectly.  

If death is meaningless then it doesn't matter how someone dies.  You can be a murderhobo and it's totally fine, because it's simply a transition from one state to another with nothing lost.  Same for torture, or slavery, it's just a transition from a Not-State, to a State, and it's all meaningless.   If you're going that loose with the Force, then it's frankly a pretty lame story element.  It's a nihilistic fuel tank to just power spells, with zero consequences to the actions of those using it.   And I find that fairly boring to try and use in a campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

If you say it has a Will, which is what is said over and over.  "The Will of the Force."  "All is as the Force Wills it".   That smacks of real world religious wording of things like "Thy will be done" etc.  Which absolutely implies a sentient will.  If it's not sentient, it doesn't have a will.  In every definition and common understanding of the word and it's usage, Will implies a mind imposing that will on the world around it.  So yes, I assume it's Sentient, otherwise it's not a will, and the term is being used horribly incorrectly.  

If death is meaningless then it doesn't matter how someone dies.  You can be a murderhobo and it's totally fine, because it's simply a transition from one state to another with nothing lost.  Same for torture, or slavery, it's just a transition from a Not-State, to a State, and it's all meaningless.   If you're going that loose with the Force, then it's frankly a pretty lame story element.  It's a nihilistic fuel tank to just power spells, with zero consequences to the actions of those using it.   And I find that fairly boring to try and use in a campaign.

Well, you're still missing my point.

Death is not meaningless to the people of the galaxy, and perhaps not even to the grand will of the force either, but we don't see any direct intervention by the force either. The will might not be more aware or capable of directly affecting us than we are of our blood cells, and is only acts in subtle ways. Compare it to you changing your diet or start exercising. It does your body good, but you have no control how it effects your individual cells.

So, why then does the force seem to judge us on morality?

Because using the force directly might be, on the whole, bad for the body. Individuals lack perspective by default and tend to fall into ultimately selfish acts. Such people amassing power in the force might be akin to a disease (if we continue the body analogy) that the force can only adress indirectly.

If you want to insist on a sentient will, think of it as theodicy:

If the will of force is all-knowing and all-powerful how can it be good if evil exists?

It then follows that if the force is good, it cant be all-knowing and all-powerful, because it doesn't stop darksiders from abusing the force. So, the force might only be vaguely aware what's going on a microscale? Perhaps, while benevolent, it might simply not comprehend the minds of such tiny beings as us, perhaps only being aware of us as bundles of emotion, or perhaps fully aware, but unable to act directly. The will of the force might simply be that we are calm, comfortable, content and at ease. Using the force to cause conflict, turmoil and aggression and the force might work in subtle ways to counter it (like awakening Rey, perhaps) or providing flashes of insight when most needed.

It's getting quite out there at this point and pretty much just spitballing at this point in order to procrastinate what I should be doing...

I am pretty firm on that whatever the will of the force is, it is not simply an entity or intelligence with a personality that one can engage in conversation. Benevolent but beyond comprehension perhaps? Maybe it's simply the gestalt of those who have become one with the force and found peace? 

Regardless, it's not something that will lay down commandments set in stone.

Edited by penpenpen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Interesting debate you guys are having on a fairly convoluted topic, but here’s some food for thought-

Regardless if the “will” of the force is sentient or not, the beings who become one with it certainly are. Whose to say that the will of the force isn’t just the collective will of those who have joined with it, like penpenoen pointed out, such as the force priestess on the wellspring of life? Mortis also seems relevant to the conversation, but who is to say if those beings are manifestations of its nature or if they're just parasites of a sort that discovered how to control it in a more absolute fashion and have been directing it as they see fit?

Canonically, all we have are unreliable narrators to go off of as far as the nature and will of the force are concerned. Interesting for sure, but fairly impossible to discern who is a reliable source on this matter from what we’ve been shown. 

Edited by AnomalousAuthor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

One thing that I do with my players is to frequently ask them how the "audience" would view them. This construct of an "Audience" is an imaginary group of observers who are consuming the game as a story. I ask the players to sometimes remove the tunnel vision goggles and view their choices and actions through the eyes of the audience to evaluate how their character is coming off. 

For someone attempting to play a Grey Jedi in my games there is the mechanical layer of what is going on and then there is the story layer. Best case scenario is that someone plays like a Qui Gon Jinn and is basically doing the ends justify the means --but specifically for a good cause-- and doing as little "bad" as possible. If the mechanics and the audience both agree the character is functioning like that then fine, but most of the time players will succumb to the temptation to power play or ego stroke and then the dark side has them. When I witness a player pull off the balance thing I'll be more accepting of this concept, but as of yet I have never seen anyone stay in the middle in real gameplay in my presence. 

Edited by Archlyte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, KungFuFerret said:

The only problem with this system, is that there are more dark side faces (7) than there are light side faces (5).  So with your system, as people gain more Force die, they will see an almost guaranteed drain on their Strain, as more dice means more dark side pips showing up.  So they will either constantly be spending strain to simply use their powers (a mechanic that FFG wanted to avoid when they built this Force system), or be forced to use dark side pips, (and thus constantly be gaining Conflict), simply to use their abilities.  Which basically just flips the "slow climb to Paragon status" that people dislike, with a "steady slide into the Dark Side status."  

Now this might not be a big issue when you are talking about a PC with 1, maybe 2 Force Rating.  But a LOT of people play their characters for a long time, and power them up to 3+, heck with the right build, you can almost get a FR 3 at character generation, if you're willing to forgo other investments.   So it seems equally imbalanced to me, and not fair to the players who want to play a Force user (like myself), instead of a lightsaber user (something I find fairly boring honestly), because simply using their powers, will push them steadily to the Dark Side.  Something that is not suggested with the canon material.   

I disagree. Canon Jedi with lots of dice walk around with canes and talk about how they must not get involved with the world. Those who do, like Qui Gon, are considered "Grey" by the council. Every member of the council sees how dangerous it is to get involved with the Clone Wars, but they see no other choice.

 

Quote

 

Your system ends up actually making the Dark side more powerful, not just more inticing, as trying to not use Dark pips will eventually end up straining out any Light side user within a handful of turns, just from trying to use their powers.

It does, which is why there's another half for Dark Side users. Because the free pips are only for those on the quick and easy path.

When a Darksider rolls force dice, they get a conflict for every dark pip they use, and a strain for every light pip they bend to their will. They only get the light pips they force to do their bidding. (A destiny point, of course, bends them all)

Edited by Rakaydos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rakaydos said:

I disagree. Canon Jedi with lots of dice walk around with canes and talk about how they must not get involved with the world. Those who do, like Qui Gon, are considered "Grey" by the council. Every member of the council sees how dangerous it is to get involved with the Clone Wars, but they see no other choice.

Nowhere in the films do they ever use the term Grey jedi.  That's a made up term by fanboys who don't like how the Jedi code restricts their behavior at the gaming table.  Period.   Also this has nothing to do with what you highlighted in my quote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

Nowhere in the films do they ever use the term Grey jedi.  That's a made up term by fanboys who don't like how the Jedi code restricts their behavior at the gaming table.  Period.   Also this has nothing to do with what you highlighted in my quote.

"(Qui gon jinn) was seen as a maverick Jedi, one who would disobey the Jedi Code if he felt it was the right decision. " Sounds Grey to me. Perhaps you could clarify?

As for the rest of your quote, I'm clearly talking about yoda and the other jedi masters, who find any excuse they can find to not use their force dice pools. This is reflected in my mechanic. IF you just want to move a rock, just roll 2-3 dice and take the strain- your Paragon bonus will cover it. Dramatic big effects, like Luke's Xwing, are a destiny flip. (Yoda vs Sidius in the senate chamber... That's a destiny flip every round for as long as the pool lasted, as you would expect from a climactic final showdown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't like the idea of game mechanic benefits for morality status.  I think the benefits or DRAWBACKS should be narratively based.  I'd rather the players not worry about or even know their current moral standing in mechanical terms.  I'd still inform the player that their actions could incur a conflict consequence, but they will never know how close to the tipping point they are one way or the other.  My hope is that for those characters who are truly trying to walk the path of the light, my warnings will serve as a meaningful deterrent with the flexibility to make some mistakes along the way that they can atone for later.  For other characters that want to try dancing along the razors edge will find they fall to darkness.  I find players will game any system they can track mechanical stats.  It's harder to do if they are missing a key piece of information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 6:16 PM, Rakaydos said:

"(Qui gon jinn) was seen as a maverick Jedi, one who would disobey the Jedi Code if he felt it was the right decision. " Sounds Grey to me. Perhaps you could clarify?

At this point you're getting into your point of view though. No one in the films calls someone else "grey," at best we get the Bendu in Rebels. This doesn't mean "grey" character can't exist, only that the formalized concept of a "Grey Jedi" isn't recognized in canon as being really anything special, or having any kind of unique ability as a direct result of their greyness.  Indeed a major thread in the Bendu's development was that he was just using his neutrality to avoid action, but it didn't provide him with any kind of special benefit. 

So someone who discards the Jedi code or council rulings from time to time, may be considered "Grey" by you, but in-universe they're probably just considered somewhere between "loose canon" and "Not a very good Jedi" by the council. Indeed there's not a whole lot to confirm that going along with the council and code = being light. The code certainly encourages light behavior, but it's not a sure thing and can be easily mis-applied. And the council are just people, fallible people. So going against the council doesn't imply any darkness requirement at all, only disagreement and a willingness to act on it.

That said, the game system by RAW essentially already supports the Grey concept, as the Morality system is slanted light, ensuring that a Player will really have to be more than a mere a-hole to go dark with any kind of speed or reliability. And indeed Morality isn't even required at all, per AoR and EotE. Add in that force powers can have different effects depending on if you activated them with light or dark pips, and you're covered. So a player that wants to be Grey, need only be grey.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ghostofman said:

At this point you're getting into your point of view though. No one in the films calls someone else "grey," at best we get the Bendu in Rebels. This doesn't mean "grey" character can't exist, only that the formalized concept of a "Grey Jedi" isn't recognized in canon as being really anything special, or having any kind of unique ability as a direct result of their greyness.  Indeed a major thread in the Bendu's development was that he was just using his neutrality to avoid action, but it didn't provide him with any kind of special benefit. 

So someone who discards the Jedi code or council rulings from time to time, may be considered "Grey" by you, but in-universe they're probably just considered somewhere between "loose canon" and "Not a very good Jedi" by the council. Indeed there's not a whole lot to confirm that going along with the council and code = being light. The code certainly encourages light behavior, but it's not a sure thing and can be easily mis-applied. And the council are just people, fallible people. So going against the council doesn't imply any darkness requirement at all, only disagreement and a willingness to act on it.

That said, the game system by RAW essentially already supports the Grey concept, as the Morality system is slanted light, ensuring that a Player will really have to be more than a mere a-hole to go dark with any kind of speed or reliability. And indeed Morality isn't even required at all, per AoR and EotE. Add in that force powers can have different effects depending on if you activated them with light or dark pips, and you're covered. So a player that wants to be Grey, need only be grey.  

And with that being said it's pretty clear the the Council and Qui-gon still respect each other.  When they reign in Qui-gon he accepts it (like not training Anakin until the Council makes a 'final' decision).   And he goes to them and works within the Jedi system (the code).  He is defiant at times but he's not antagonistic.  We also don't get much indication of how much of an outlier he is - Obi-wan remarks to Qui-gon that if he'd follow the code (and not defy the council regarding his insisting on training Anakin) he'd already be on the Council meaning Obi-wan thinks Qui-gon is a bit out of the expected (by the Council at least).  By the end of Ep I Obi-wan is being just as defiant as Qui-gon insisting he'll train Anakin against the wishes of the Council if he must (having the right within the Code to choose a Padawan presumably).

Anyway, I don't think "Grey Jedi" has typically described a Jedi that doesn't follow the Code exactly at all times but a Jedi that plays with the dark and the light (and it's more of a gaming concept of to get cool Jedi powers without any expectations on behavior or morality).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I think we've gotten a bit afar from KFF's complain about my houserule. He seems to be saying it punishes lightside force wizards. and pushes them toward darkness. My point was that there are no lightside force wizards in canon- everything is rare feats explanable by a destiny flip, or a climactic battle involving the entire tables destiny pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...