Isn't the beta due out soon? How does one get their mitts on a copy?
Same as it ever was:
I think that's pretty much it.
- Maybe buy a copy at GenCon tomorrow
.
Gen Con starts next week, on the 14th.
- Maybe buy a copy at GenCon tomorrow
.
Gen Con starts next week, on the 14th.
oh $#!t, my bad! I thought it was this weekend. My dissertation has scrambled my brain.
oh $#!t, my bad! I thought it was this weekend. My dissertation has scrambled my brain..
- Maybe buy a copy at GenCon tomorrow
Gen Con starts next week, on the 14th.
That's just mean. You got my hopes up.
oh $#!t, my bad! I thought it was this weekend. My dissertation has scrambled my brain.
.
- Maybe buy a copy at GenCon tomorrow
Gen Con starts next week, on the 14th.
That's just mean. You got my hopes up.
My work here is done.
</flyaway>
A player can pick up a HBR very early on and be spraying death every which way. A Gadgeteer, Gunner, or Outlaw Tech with Jury Rigging can further turn a HBR into the ultimate hose of death with Talents that cost zero credits and not many xp at all. In regards to cost, players are given 120,000 worth of ship free of charge at chargen, so the money isn't really an issue either to me.
But Jury Rigging isn't really a starting skill - yes, you can mod and rig other weapons to be powerful, but most starting PCs will struggle to afford a lowly blaster rifle unless they take an option that gives them more money.
And the ship is surely intended to be a shared PC base - a means of getting them from one adventure to another. It's essentially background fluff for them unless you play a lot of starship combat (something I tend to handwave, personally). It's not really the same thing as saying 'here's 120k to spend on whatever gear you like'.
FFG really have had to make a tricky decision, and they cannot please everyone here. Either stay true to their initial vision of a balanced game where muggles can have as much fun as the glowstick guys, which will piss off those wanting uber Jedi right out of the box. Or make F&D the 'advanced' option, with more powerful starting characters with 10K weapons, and piss off the game-balance types who wanted to avoid the pitfalls of the 40K games and the previous SW games that broke down when Jedi were introduced.
And that's before we even get into the vagaries of a 'Jedi career' or the Guardian/Sentinel/Consular thing...
One way or another, people are gonna be upset. The only ones who know for sure are FFG and those lucky few who were pre-Beta playtesters. The rest of us will find out soon enough, I guess.
Aye. I don't see there is much to be gained by pretending people haven't shown up to a Jedi game for the lightsaber and kewl powerz.
Life is to short and gaming time to hard to arrange to waste on pissing about avoiding the issue.
There may be something in that, Erik. 'This is Star Wars, let's be epic. We want to play Boba Fett, not Greedo'. I can see that point.
My only real problem is that I don't want to see one starting PC with a full Force tree and a 10k glowstick, and the others toting slugthrowers.
For what it's worth, I think the starting F&D PCs will be 'proto-Jedi', who are just learning about the Force and have yet to earn their spurs (or glowsticks). So that way, those wanting to play balanced starter characters can do so, and those wanting to play what Shadowrun calls 'Prime Runners' can take 500+ XP and 20k cash, and start out as heroes right out of the box. The Jedi gets his telekinesis and lightsaber, the bounty killer gets his heavy armour and tricked out blaster rifle, and the Ace gets his X-Wing.
I can see why PCs would want all their toys immediately - 'it's an epic action game, why play pale imitations of the characters we want?' But I don't want the games to become 'The Adventures of Glowstick Guy And His Lowly Mundane Sidekicks'.
Edited by MaeloraFor reference, the bit that LethalDose mentioned about "would you want to play a Jedi if they didn't have Force powers or a lightsaber?" is from WotC's Power of the Jedi sourcebook for the RCR system, being a sidebar to address what they dubbed as "Lightsaber Syndrome" of which ErikB/Sylpheed is prime culprit. In spite of being for a d20 system, it's a good sourcebook with lots of valid tips and suggestions for role playing a Jedi character as opposed to just being a thug with a laser sword and psychic powers. However, that sidebar was not about stripping those traits from the character in actual game play, only a litmus test to see if the player had what could be deemed the proper mindset to play a Jedi.
Given what the designers have said about the three books, I suspect that Maelora's hope is probably going to be pretty accurate. There most likely be a Jedi career, but said PCs aren't going to be the major league players that the Jedi seen in other media are. Much like WEG and WotC before them, I suspect FFG is going to have Jedi PCs start along a similar baseline to other PCs, if only to maximize the opportunity to combine PCs from all three books into a single campaign. Which means they're biggest boon is going to be Force Rating 1 for free, something that EotE and AoR PCs have to pay out of their starting XP budget to get. If your novice Jedi wants any Force Powers, you'll have to spend some of your starting XP to get them.
As for the "well there's other weapons just as bad as lightsabers!" argument, while the HBR can be dangerous due to the Auto-fire quality, the lightsaber has enough other perks without the same number of mechanical drawbacks as the HBR to push it over the edge. Consider the HBR has Cumbersome 3 and an Encumbrance of 6; it's a big and heavy weapon. And while a PC can dish out some horrendous damage with Auto-fire, do recall that using said quality carries with it an automatic increase to your attack's difficulty, and the damage dealt still has to deal with the target's Soak Value on each hit. So not only do you now have less chance of getting the success and advantages needed to make Autofire worthwhile due to that increased difficulty, but you need an excess of advantages to really make the weapon "sing" in terms of its performance to trigger that Auto-fire quality multiple times. And as most combat-viable adversaries have a Soak Value of 4 on average, that means that with a single success you're only doing 7 damage per hit, and those extra hits only come if you have advantages. Which for a starting PC with 1 rank in Ranged (Heavy) and Agility 3 attacking at Medium Range (thus rolling against 3 purple difficulty), isn't quite as much of a sure thing as some might think.
In contrast, the lightsaber has a set difficulty of Average, with no increase needed to utilize any of it's baked-in qualities, and the damage output is quite a bit more reliable since you're only needing successes to do the job, which combined with Breach 1 means the target is taking 11 damage on a hit. And for a starting PC with 1 rank in Lightsaber and a 3 in their chosen attack Characteristic (Brawn or Agility) vs. 2 purple difficulty, getting that 1 success is far more likely, and a single advantage can be spent to trigger a critical injury with a +20 bonus. And against a Rival or Nemesis adversary, that critical hit might be far more valuable than extra hits, but that's also quite situational to the point of not really being something that can be quantified.
Also, it's a bit of a fallacy to presume that a PC with an HBR is going to have ready access to various attachments or more specifically talents like Jury-Rigged. A Gadgeteer or Outlaw Tech might have those, but the Hired Gun careers don't. And some GMs are very tight-fisted with monetary rewards, preferring to adopt the Warhammer Fantasy RP mindset of of "keep the PCs scrabbling for money." There is of course the likelihood that if there is a Jedi career, one or more of its own specializations may have their own talents to further boost the performance of a lightsaber (such as equivalents to Ferocious Might or Point Blank). There's also the matter of defensive traits that a Jedi specialization would likely include, allowing the guy with the lightsaber to have a weapon that's not only an incredibly potent offensive option but that also provides various defensive options just for having it.
As others have mentioned, while EotE does provide a ship for free, said ship is a group resource and not something that's going to always be readily available. Closest we've got to "free resource at PC creation that's always on hand" is the Base of Operations choice for Rebel Resources, which simply provides every PC an extra 1000 credits to buy gear, which is probably akin to blaster rifle if the PC doesn't opt to reduce their starting Duty to gain even more starting credits. Big difference between that and a lightsaber.
We also don't know if a F&D PC is going to have an option to gain extra starting resources (XP or credits) by increasing/decreasing whatever mechanic they have that's equivalent to Obligation/Duty. For all we know, a PC could have the option to tweak their starting value in said trait to gain a lightsaber, making it available at character creation but not something that they're assured to have.
Edited by Donovan MorningfireI don't see whatever is written for starting out PCs in F&D as a commandment. I don't follow EoE and AoR, it's like players are space transients, they start with virtually nothing. I give them what they need to play their character from go. Any kind of weapon is going to have limitations placed on it that are story driven. Lightsabers are powerful but if you are playing the game true to the story, taking one out publicly should cause PCs tangible headaches.
Even when they are employed, if PCs are playing to the light side of the Force and from a heroes perspective going at the dread evil genius will carry pitfalls for the budding Jedi. Is it ok to hack down a squad of minions attached to the boss with the squad rules who aren't resisting, but aren't allowing you access to the Nemesis? I'm thinking there would be some significant karmic consequences for a Jedi. Is it ok to win initiative and attack the enemy with one before anyone has attacked the Jedi? Is there a way short of using a Lightsaber or even the Force to defeat the opposition? Seems like if there is then someone running game should hold that player accountable for how they use the weapon, or more importantly knowing when not to use it at all.
Edited by 2P51Aye. I don't see there is much to be gained by pretending people haven't shown up to a Jedi game for the lightsaber and kewl powerz.
Life is to short and gaming time to hard to arrange to waste on pissing about avoiding the issue.
There may be something in that, Erik. 'This is Star Wars, let's be epic. We want to play Boba Fett, not Greedo'. I can see that point.
My only real problem is that I don't want to see one starting PC with a full Force tree and a 10k glowstick, and the others toting slugthrowers.
For what it's worth, I think the starting F&D PCs will be 'proto-Jedi', who are just learning about the Force and have yet to earn their spurs (or glowsticks). So that way, those wanting to play balanced starter characters can do so, and those wanting to play what Shadowrun calls 'Prime Runners' can take 500+ XP and 20k cash, and start out as heroes right out of the box. The Jedi gets his telekinesis and lightsaber, the bounty killer gets his heavy armour and tricked out blaster rifle, and the Ace gets his X-Wing.
I can see why PCs would want all their toys immediately - 'it's an epic action game, why play pale imitations of the characters we want?' But I don't want the games to become 'The Adventures of Glowstick Guy And His Lowly Mundane Sidekicks'.
I agree with the general sentiment that life's too short and gaming time too precious to waste not playing your actual character concept.
I don't know that I view it as Sylpheed does - and I certainly don't view it as you've presented it here - but there is something to having a character concept and the game supporting it on some basic level at character creation. I want a balanced group. I also want to be able to play a "Jedi". Of course that means growing into it if the group doesn't start with a big XP boost to begin with. Not all GMs like that approach (I'm fine with it, others are not) and not all games get to 300 or 500XP or whatever is needed to mechanically reach the epitome of your character concept. But there is value in being able to start the game with some approximation of your character concept (this assumes your character concept isn't a novice and is therefor encapsulated by a beginning character just fine).
For me it's primarily an RP/fluff thing - I don't want a starting character that overpowers aspects of gameplay. But I do want a starting character that IS the beginning of the character I want to be playing instead of something I had to take to jump through hoops to get to where I want to go. Donovan mentioned this is how it worked in WEG and d20 Star Wars and that's how I'd like it to work out here as well - no one expected a first level Jedi to be overpowering or the complete character concept (necessarily) but it gave you all the basic pieces.
Edited by Jedi Roninnot to start a flame war this is just my opinion. but i think that D6/D20 got one thing right in not making lightsaber styles part of the career/specialties.
Not true, I think you never played star wars SAGA, where you with the Jedi Knight Prestige class had access to the Lightsaber forms talent tree:
Jar kai
Niman
Soresu
Dem Jo
Shii-cho
Ataru
Juyo
Trakata
Vaapad
Also, there were "Lightsaber forms powers" in the Jedi Academy Training manual, designed to work along the lightsaber forms talents.
For reference, the bit that LethalDose mentioned about "would you want to play a Jedi if they didn't have Force powers or a lightsaber?" is from WotC's Power of the Jedi sourcebook for the RCR system, being a sidebar to address what they dubbed as "Lightsaber Syndrome" of which ErikB/Sylpheed is prime culprit. In spite of being for a d20 system, it's a good sourcebook with lots of valid tips and suggestions for role playing a Jedi character as opposed to just being a thug with a laser sword and psychic powers. However, that sidebar was not about stripping those traits from the character in actual game play, only a litmus test to see if the player had what could be deemed the proper mindset to play a Jedi.
Thanks for providing the citation, I had forgotten it was actually in published material. To be clear, I wasn't suggesting "stripping" lightsabers or force powers from Jedi, just that it's possible to have rewarding Jedi RP experiences without them as a counterpoint to the "no lightsaber equals no Jedi" argument.
For reference, the bit that LethalDose mentioned about "would you want to play a Jedi if they didn't have Force powers or a lightsaber?" is from WotC's Power of the Jedi sourcebook for the RCR system, being a sidebar to address what they dubbed as "Lightsaber Syndrome" of which ErikB/Sylpheed is prime culprit. In spite of being for a d20 system, it's a good sourcebook with lots of valid tips and suggestions for role playing a Jedi character as opposed to just being a thug with a laser sword and psychic powers. However, that sidebar was not about stripping those traits from the character in actual game play, only a litmus test to see if the player had what could be deemed the proper mindset to play a Jedi.
Thanks for providing the citation, I had forgotten it was actually in published material. To be clear, I wasn't suggesting "stripping" lightsabers or force powers from Jedi, just that it's possible to have rewarding Jedi RP experiences without them as a counterpoint to the "no lightsaber equals no Jedi" argument.
No worries about the "stripping PCs of what makes their class special" bit. Given the tone of some of the posts in this thread about the topic, just wanted to do my part to make sure folks were on the same page as to what was being said.
not to start a flame war this is just my opinion. but i think that D6/D20 got one thing right in not making lightsaber styles part of the career/specialties.
Not true, I think you never played star wars SAGA, where you with the Jedi Knight Prestige class had access to the Lightsaber forms talent tree:
Jar kai
Niman
Soresu
Dem Jo
Shii-cho
Ataru
Juyo
Trakata
Vaapad
Also, there were "Lightsaber forms powers" in the Jedi Academy Training manual, designed to work along the lightsaber forms talents.
thank you for demonstrating my point, the lightsaber forms in the main book were traits in an optional class which make them separate from the main class. which was my point. Now the form powers were just a power gaming joke ,and a bad one at that.(the d20/saga star war were junk) and to the part about not playing them i have played d6 star wars have all the book,d20 star wars have all the book,saga star wars and also have all the book. just because i dont like them doesnt mean i have not played. Its the star wars rpg and my players and i like star wars so were going to play no matter are feeling on the current game.(one of my players hates this version but still plays lol)
Edited by tenchi2aI don't see whatever is written for starting out PCs in F&D as a commandment.
That's certainly your decision as the GM of your particular group.
But other GMs prefer to stick with the guidelines generally provided, up to and including having very little in the way of starting funds. While I disagree with the designers on having the PCs be quite that poor (I know that for EotE it was intentional to force PCs to take additional Obligation, and like intentional for AoR to get them to reduce their Duty scores if the Base of Operations choice wasn't selected), the fact remains that it's part of the rules, and while I might do things differently for the games I run, I also accept and acknowledge that some folks prefer to stick closer to what's written. And as this thread aptly demonstrates, not every GM is okay with the idea of handing out such a potentially powerful weapon, be it a heavy blaster rifle or a lightsaber as a "for free" item, particularly if said item is only granted because the player chose a certain career for their character.
As I noted previously, handing out a lightsaber for free to the Jedi classes in the various d20 versions worked simply because the lightsaber wasn't that powerful a weapon in that system, as a heavy blaster pistol or blaster rifle did better damage with the advantage of greater range. Even for the WEG system, the only two published Rebellion Era templates (Failed Jedi and Minor Jedi) began play with a lightsaber, with the former having two Force skills and a dark side point (in a system where having as little as 2 DSPs could result in the character falling and becoming an NPC) and the latter only a single Force skill, and this in a system where the lightsaber really still wasn't that great a weapon (at least not without a specific Force power to boost it's capabilities).
Now, if the FFG version of the lightsaber did less damage (say base 5), then it might not be such a big issue if a PC with the Jedi career were to start the game with one. With the Breach 1, that base damage of 5 is still going to count, since a single success means a dead minion, and Crit Rating 1 = easy-to-trigger criticals. But the design team opted to make the lightsaber a far more potent weapon on it's own than it's ever been in a prior RPG system.
Odds are that F&D PCs are going to start out with 500 credits to keep them on par with AoR and EotE PCs, with the only question really being what the "group resource" for F&D parties will be. Who knows, maybe one of the options for the "group resource" will be lightsabers for everybody. I kinda doubt it, but then I doubted that FFG would do a Beginner Box for AoR, so who knows?
For those interested, here's the full text of that sidebar from the Power of the Jedi sourcebook...
"Do You Really Want to Play a Jedi?
Any player that decides to play a Jedi should first ask "Is this really the character I want to play?" Think about why you want to play a Jedi character. What appeals to you about the Jedi? Is it the lightsaber? The Force? If so, ask yourself if you could enjoy playing a Jedi who had no access to either one. Would it still be appealing? If the answer is no, then you might prefer a different class, because every Jedi's goal on a mission is to accomplish missions without resorting to violence or even using the Force. Take those characteristics away from a Jedi, and what you have left is responsibility, self-discipline, and public service.
If you don't think you'd enjoy a character with a code of conduct, you might want to reexamine your decision to play a Jedi. It may not be the challenge you're looking for."
Pages 30 thru 37 go into a lot of great detail about the mentality of a Jedi, especially one that was trained as part of the Old Jedi Order (and to a lesser extent by Luke's Jedi Praxuem on Yavin 4). This was probably one of my favorite sourcebooks of the product line just for that section alone (Hero's Guide takes the top spot just from the sheer volume of stuff it had).
If you've got players that you're not sure would do justice to playing an actual Jedi as opposed to a "psychic thug with a glowing sword" and you can find a copy of the book for cheap, I'd suggest picking it up.
Edited by Donovan Morningfire
I don't see whatever is written for starting out PCs in F&D as a commandment.
Now, if the FFG version of the lightsaber did less damage (say base 5), then it might not be such a big issue if a PC with the Jedi career were to start the game with one. With the Breach 1, that base damage of 5 is still going to count, since a single success means a dead minion, and Crit Rating 1 = easy-to-trigger criticals. But the design team opted to make the lightsaber a far more potent weapon on it's own than it's ever been in a prior RPG system.
this is something i think we agree on the lightsaber as write is to powerful. in all other versions of the game it was the force that made the weapon good not its basic stats.
Edited by tenchi2aIf you've got players that you're not sure would do justice to playing an actual Jedi as opposed to a "psychic thug with a glowing sword" and you can find a copy of the book for cheap, I'd suggest picking it up.
now on to the question of careers/specialties, We may not like the idea but Donovan Morningfire is right its a marketing thing.
so here are some oldies but goodies from the past
The setting constraints on a Jedi and the "proper" way to play one is all well and good but there is still a lot of room for interpretation of the setting in this regard as well as a lot of leeway in how much a character aligns with what is "proper". There are/were iconoclastic Jedi. And it's perfectly appropriate for the GM to define this for their game.
But this stuff - as fun as it is to talk about - is mostly irrelevant when it comes to mechanics and system support for playing a character archetype in general. The archetype and the mechanics need to support using the force and a lightsaber in order to create a Jedi character. You can be as philosophical as you want about what it really means to be a Jedi but mechanically it's not that philosophical.
There seems to be a lot of angst built up around the fear that Jedi characters will be too powerful - or more specifically that all the bad role-players and munchkins (or whatever label you want to employ) will go right for the "glowstick force monkeys" and ruin the game. That's not a problem with the system - that's a problem with the player. Expecting the system to completely eliminate that attitude is asking too much of the system. I'd rather a system try to open up the Jedi option and the Jedi experience at the table (same goes for any character archetype - not just Jedi) and run some risk of exposing some minor balance flaw in the system rather than being so cautious and fearful of introducing a character archetype that it becomes cumbersome and frustrating to get into and create at the table. I think it's reasonable to expect the designers of a game to try to make it as balanced as possible but it's unreasonable to expect defensive design aimed at dealing with the lowest common denominator and what are essentially player problems or mismatched play groups.
It will be interesting to see how or if F&D deals with the dark side and how that acts as a temptation/constraint on the actions of force users and non-force users. And if there will be any tool for GMs in this regard in interacting with PCs.
Edited by Jedi RoninThe structure of the system is not irrelevant to the how the game supports roleplaying. One of the major points where roleplaying and mechanics come into conflict is when there are options that are so mechanically superior to more "roleplaying appropriate" options that they can't be ignored or "fluffed over".
There's a lot of angst built up because it's been a severe problem since 2000 when WotC released their SW-RPG, and possible even prior to that, depending on your point of view.
And for future reference, two sentences do not a lecture make.
Yes a lot of angst has built up and I think people are over-reacting. They're expecting a system to compensate for what is really an issue with a player or a mismatched gaming group.
And I didn't say the system was irrelevant to the roleplaying aspects I was saying it looks like people are expecting the system to solve problems that are primarily role play issues and not system issues. If you want to argue that d20 Star Wars were horribly imbalanced then fine (though SAGA was a vast improvement over it's previous incarnation and was actually quite easy to balance and completely unnecessary to balance with house rules if you didn't have problematic players ).
You're never going to get rid of the temptation to take something more mechanically powerful over something more role play appropriate (and that's highly subjective as well so it seems like folly trying codify that in a system).
And maybe you're conflating two separate though sometimes co-occurring things - game imbalances and players who don't fit the preferred style of the group.
Edited by Jedi RoninThe setting constraints on a Jedi and the "proper" way to play one is all well and good but there is still a lot of room for interpretation of the setting in this regard as well as a lot of leeway in how much a character aligns with what is "proper". There are/were iconoclastic Jedi. And it's perfectly appropriate for the GM to define this for their game.
I agree totally. I find myself wanting to argue less with my players when it comes to morality. I certainly see Donovan's point - that in some cases, 'kewl powerz' should be tempered with role-playing considerations - but I think that's up to each table.
If you've got players that you're not sure would do justice to playing an actual Jedi as opposed to a "psychic thug with a glowing sword" and you can find a copy of the book for cheap, I'd suggest picking it up.
Donovan, I know you've mentioned this quite a bit, and I see where you're coming from (I feel that way about Paladins in D&D, with is why the last few editions grate in some regards) and I respect your views.
But I don't necessarily see it as the 'One True Way'. I fully respect anyone who wishes to interpret a strict role-play line at their table, stressing the Light/Dark aspect. But as far as I can see, Star Wars 'alignment' is very flexible, as we see Jedi falling to darkness and being redeemed all the time (in KotOR, Revan and Bastila both take a turn at redeeming the other!)
As it stands, using EoE rules as written, I can make a Marauder with GM approved glowstick skill, max it out with maxed-out Force trees, and run around behaving like the worst kind of murder hobo. The only rules I'd have to abide by are the ones where I burn a Destiny and then some strain to use my DS points.
And yes, it says that F&D may have rules for 'falling to the dark side' but I for one won't be using them, just as I don't use the numbers for Duty and Obligation. I don't want fiddly systems and lots of book-keeping in my narrative games. I'm happy to handle the resolving of any Obligation, and any 'fall to darkness' purely in role-playing terms. Maybe I'm lucky enough to have players who will go along with that, without me having to hit them with artificial 'alignment penalties'.
(And also, in our case, Light side equates to 'Law' anyway, and 'Dark side' to Chaos, both of which are perfectly valid approaches for Force-users. Our Jedi/Sith/Seperatist faction, the Confederacy, is opposed to the Alliance/Fringe/Imperial ones and for the most part, are arrogant, complete jerkbags who have no issue with genocide if they feel it's 'necessary'. And explains why Ben Kenobi is with the Alliance. Our playable PC faction - Lucas Lars and his Children of the Temple - are much more in keeping with canon Jedi being good guys, but even then, they are more about balance and Zen than denial and restraint...)
So I guess everyone's mileage may vary, and I'd sooner these issues were handled by each GM than the core books having some fiddly system about how to role-play 'correctly'.
Edited by MaeloraI guess it boils down to "What is Star Wars to you?" in terms of what is and isn't acceptable at one's table when it comes to how a Jedi should be played in the game and how available such a thing should be in the Rebellion Era.
Some folks what to try and keep things truer to the movies where actual Jedi are rarer than hen's teeth and are generally the good guys in the settings. Others want to go the route of Star Wars Galaxies post-combat upgrade and make it so that you can't swing a dead monkey-lizard without hitting a room full of so-called Jedi.
Me, I've always seen Jedi as being more than just a cool weapon and cool powers. It's a mindset and way of life more than anything else. And there is a sense of morality involved, as you've got a character with access to some fairly incredible powers yet a self-imposed mandate of restraint to only use those powers when necessary. Qui-Gon Jinn and Obi-Wan Kenobi from the prequels are actually a pretty good examples of a how a Jedi should be played if you want to stay true to the general feel of what a Jedi is as presented in the films.
if someone wants to play a Force user that's picked up a lightsaber and simply uses their powers willy-nilly to satisfy their personal whims, that's their decision. But don't call that character a Jedi, because that's what they're not. They are simply a thug with semi-psychic powers and a flashy weapon. I've played in games with multiple Force users, only one of which (usually me) was playing a Jedi while the others were just Force users that ranged from detached pacifistic mystics with an almost saint-like bearing to fairly savage marauders on the fast track to the dark side, and we made it work (though the saint-like mystic was much easier to get along with than the ax-crazy marauder), and none of them called themselves a Jedi since that's something they were not. I also ran a short campaign in Saga Edition where one PC was a recently-redeemed Sith apprentice and another was a by-the-book Jedi (this was set around the KOTOR era), with the ex-Sith struggling not to return to "old habits" and the Jedi taking the role of a supportive counselor (and making a point not to be as preachy as Bastilla was in KOTOR1) In spite of having a lightsaber, the ex-Sith never considered or called themselves a Jedi.
Like it or not, morality does play a part in the Star Wars story, as it's ultimately a tale of good vs. evil, a fairy tale set in space. It's not WH40K where the only morality is "very dark shades of grey vs. black." And as FFG is subject to the whims of Lucasfilm/Disney in the later's position as holder of the license, they're going to have to play ball and incorporate that sense of morality, particularly where the Force is concerned. In AoR, the Alliance are the undisputed good guys, while the Empire overall is evil (there might be individuals in the Empire that are decent people, but they tend to be the exception). EotE already touches upon the "shades of grey" in the setting, but even that tends to lean towards the lighter shades such as Han and Lando rather than the darker characters such as Boba Fett (a man that only cares about collecting the price on your head and not one whit if you're actually guilty).
if an individual GM want's to deep-six that for their games, they can certainly do so. But I start to wonder at what part does the game cease being Star Wars and simply becomes "wandering murder-hobos in space?" as opposed to D&D's "wandering murder-hobos in dungeons?"
Sorry if all that comes across as a bit preachy, but I am a fan of the Jedi and it irks me to see people thinking at being a Jedi is nothing more than a flashy weapon and nifty semi-psychic powers and that they can kick morality into the trash bin. But then again, I play RPGs with the idea of being a heroic character that's trying to make the world they live in just a little better as opposed to the "wandering murder-hobo" or the 90's vigilante anti-hero that solves their problems with overwhelming power and high body counts.
Keyword spotted.