"A Jedi uses the force for knowledge and defense. Never for attack." - Yoda

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes." - Obi-Wan Kenobi

Let the battle of opinions commence!!!

To the greater point: A lot of what is said by characters in the movies and shows are from that character's perspective and opinion. And sometimes, unbeknownst to the viewer, the speaker can have ulterior motives or reasons other than wishing to convey pure factualness.

We forget sometimes that we aren't watching an analytical thesis or dissertation on the galaxy or setting, but rather watching a story with characters having opinions and flaws. I don't consider anyone in the stories to be perfect or absolutely correct on anything. Not Obi-Wan. Not Qui-Gon. Not the Jedi Counsel. Not even Yoda, who had a very short time to enact his plan and accomplish what he felt needed to be done to/for Luke so the kid could be what he needed to be to succeed.

"A Jedi uses the force for knowledge and defense. Never for attack." - Yoda

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes." - Obi-Wan Kenobi

Let the battle of opinions commence!!!

To the greater point: A lot of what is said by characters in the movies and shows are from that character's perspective and opinion. And sometimes, unbeknownst to the viewer, the speaker can have ulterior motives or reasons other than wishing to convey pure factualness.

We forget sometimes that we aren't watching an analytical thesis or dissertation on the galaxy or setting, but rather watching a story with characters having opinions and flaws. I don't consider anyone in the stories to be perfect or absolutely correct on anything. Not Obi-Wan. Not Qui-Gon. Not the Jedi Counsel. Not even Yoda, who had a very short time to enact his plan and accomplish what he felt needed to be done to/for Luke so the kid could be what he needed to be to succeed.

That is a good pint, especially given Yoda's initial reluctance to train Luke at all he could have decided to give a very "no leeway ever" version of the code to him.

I think Luke's use of the Force at the beginning of RotJ is a bit more than an example of "look what this light-side guy did." Look at his clothes: all black. The Force choke is something that the original audience had only ever seen Vader do. I think the message is clear: Luke is dangerously on the path to the Dark Side, as the vision in the cave on Dagobah cautioned him.

I don't think he himself realizes it until he cuts off Vader's hand in their final duel. The link is now finally obvious to him, and he makes the conscious decision to end his journey down the dark path, tossing away his lightsaber.

I could write essays on Force usage and Dark Side tendencies (and I'm sure I have ) but the only people we've seen routinely slamming people around / choking people with the Force are Sidious, Dooku, Anakin Skywalker, Asajj Ventress, etc.

Of the Jedi we see in action, Obi-Wan serves as a good example for a Jedi to follow. Mace Windu is a special case really, and Yoda is nearly a century old, so their circumstances are not what you'd look for to establish something "normative." And Luke is hardly normative, since he only has a few minutes of on-screen time as a "real" Jedi (after he refuses the Emperor's invitation to join him and kill Vader).

I won't try to convince anyone of my views on what is Dark Side but lifting someone with the Force and dropping them to their death is NOT the same as using a blaster or lightsaber. It is using the Force *directly* with an intent to harm. And that is, from where I stand, straight-up Sith material.

(I've always found the phrase "only the Sith deal in absolutes" to be funny in its self-defeating irony. Wondering why they put that in the script? To subtly portray Obi-Wan's imperfectness? I want to give them the benefit of the doubt, here)

Awayputurwpn hits on the distinction I was trying to make. There is a difference between using the force to deflect blaster bolts back at an enemy and using force lightning.

Force move is generally a "universal power" or one that is neither light or dark side. However, I don't think there is 'neutral' use of the force. When you use the force, your emotional state, intentions, and actions all play a role in making the activation of the force "light" or 'dark.' Harming someone directly with the force, such as by throwing them against a wall or dropping them, is definitely dark side material.

My player levitates enemies and then lets them go. We use the falling damage rules. It's pretty powerful. From Short range, a person falling takes 10 wounds and 10 strain, and the strain cannot be soaked. It's almost instant knockout. And you don't need to purchase the Control upgrade to hurl an object.

I'm toying with the idea of forcing a Discipline roll whenever using Move with the goal of injuring people, but for a human-sized target, that's still only a difficulty 1 task.

Light Side? Dark Side? There will be no total agreement on that. Leave that as the responsibility of the GM and the character in question to interpret that aspect of the character's actions.

I feel like a more pressing issue is whether this character's repeated use of this mechanic is causing the other members of their gaming table to have a less enjoyable time.

If everyone at the table loves watching him fling people to their death, by all means allow him to continue. Though let him know, in-character (through a mentor, family member, etc), that his actions have drawn the attention of the wrong people, and he will need to watch his back going forward. Then escalate the response to his presence every time he flings someone about until he is forced to make an in-character decision weighing the pros and cons of continuing to use that mechanic. If he makes the choice to stop using it himself, it'll be much more satisfying, and it mitigates hurt feelings.

If the game table is not having a good time: First, have a conversation with him about restraint. Ask him to realize that he is dampening the mood when all everyone wants to do is get together and have a good ol' Star Warsy time. If his play does not improve. Do the same thing as above, just ramp that escalating threat way quicker. One or two brutal encounters and peer pressure to stop flaunting his force use is going to be high. Just find ways to make it clear to the group that these encounters are a direct result of that character's conspicuous use of the force.

Tips:

1. There is always a witness to his actions. A holocam he didn't notice, a little Rodian kid that was hidden behind some crates, a droid in the corner that appeared to be broken down but really just had a bad motivator so it couldn't move, etc.

2. Thematically appropriate, crimebosses and the Empire will take GREAT interest in this character. Criminal or Imperial bounty hunters will know ahead of time the tricks he uses, so they will be appropriately geared. They will operate in teams and they will lay traps for the whole crew, and they will be wearing magnetic boots and whipcords to help secure themselves. Use gear of that nature to add in setback and challenge dice to combat his go-to mechanic.

3. If the table is miserable, and out-of-character conversations and in-character consequences do nothing to stop him, you have to stop gaming with him. Sad but true, that person is a sure-fire gaming group killer.

Light Side? Dark Side? There will be no total agreement on that. Leave that as the responsibility of the GM and the character in question to interpret that aspect of the character's actions.

Since that was one of the points I tried to make when I brought this into the discussion, I will agree with you there...

Light Side? Dark Side? There will be no total agreement on that. Leave that as the responsibility of the GM and the character in question to interpret that aspect of the character's actions.

Since that was one of the points I tried to make when I brought this into the discussion, I will agree with you there...

*realizing he just contributed to a pointless debate* ...pardon my hot air

But yeah, I'm a fan of in-game consequences. A person lifting people into the air telekinetically is something that will turn heads, definitely. Obvious Jedi business. Expect a visit from the Inquisitorious presently.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to imply that the debate about the light side/dark side nature of the character's actions was pointless. In general terms, it's a fantastic debate that has gone on since the WEG days. My comment was advice for this specific situation, that it comes down to what's comfortable for the table.