Yep, but they can loose their memories, so "death" will be irreversible

**** Antilles! XD

Wait, so now every hard drive crash is murder?

Wait, so now every hard drive crash is murder?

Union, remeber that the next time you format your PC XD

Our memories probably are what we are (plus the organic modifiers like adrenaline, hormones and other science thing), but if we loose our memories, the person who we are probably would be destroyed. Based on the theory from Mass Effect that advanced ones droid are AI, and the just "simple programs" are VI can be used on SW universe (at least I use it).

AI Droids (advanced ones) are probably the same that at living being but with another based organism. We cannot say that a silicium "being" like shards aren't the same that humans, or any weird alien specie that seems a gelly XD (Yes, Transformers can be in this group too )

So, VI droids are not so much different than a intelligent hairdryer, but I will consider AI droids at the same scale that other "living" species, or better said "sentient".

So, destroying a printer (even with wifi XD) from my point of view, doesn't give Conflict unless you do it with anger and hate. But destroying (or make suffer???) an AI droid, yes.

Yep, but they can loose their memories, so "death" will be irreversible

**** Antilles! XD

Wait, so now every hard drive crash is murder?

Now I want a t-shirt with "Hard drive crash is murder!"

Wait, so now every hard drive crash is murder?

They do call it the Blue Screen of Death for a reason...

OH! Now I want a player to create a droid PC just so that when they finally meet their end I can read them the following:

"As the blaster bolts overwhelm you, suddenly everything starts juddering in your vision, and then freezes. There is a steady whine from your processor cooling system as it overloads and then finally, everything goes blue...forever."

And then I'll bring this up on the television.

Another interesting idea would be that, if you hunt an animal just for a "sport thing" or because want to make it suffer, its Conflict. If you are just hunting it for survival, I will not consider it Conflict. It's more a background than the fact itself (but sometimes the fact itself can be Conflict too).

I would actually say that this still generates a minor amount of conflict. I think a lot of guys have stories about the first thing they killed while hunting. It can be traumatic, even if it is for food. If you are only hunting for food, there just isn't going to be very much conflict (especially if you are taking great pains to make it a quick, painless death, I'd probably only assign 1 conflict point in that sort of situation). This is just representing the Force user reflecting on the fact that he took the creature's life to ensure his own survival. It was necessary, but still unfortunate. But you can see how that same reasoning can be applied elsewhere. "Well, the witnesses must die. It's necessary, but still unfortunate." Something as benign and necessary (for some species) as hunting CAN lead to the dark side, IMO. I'm not entirely sure its enough to be worth a conflict point or not. But it's worth considering contextually.

That message was written by the former IA Twi'Lek CEO, Steev Bal'Mer.

Agree with you KRKappel. As a vegan and as a personal conviction, but, I would like to put a "minor" charge on surviving Players' PCs to not "traumatize" them. But agree with you

OH! Now I want a player to create a droid PC just so that when they finally meet their end I can read them the following:

"As the blaster bolts overwhelm you, suddenly everything starts juddering in your vision, and then freezes. There is a steady whine from your processor cooling system as it overloads and then finally, everything goes blue...forever."

And then I'll bring this up on the television.

PIC

that image of the blue screen is now my desk-top wallpaper. :-)

I wouldn't put it past Palpatine to design this war with the Jedi's moral blind spot against droids in mind, blunting their senses of right and wrong - before exterminating them.

A lot of instances of self-defense, of course, so only very small amounts of conflict, constant dropping wears away a stone...

I wouldn't put it past Palpatine to design this war with the Jedi's moral blind spot against droids in mind, blunting their senses of right and wrong - before exterminating them.

A lot of instances of self-defense, of course, so only very small amounts of conflict, constant dropping wears away a stone...

Stop making Lucas look like a genius! The droid army wasn't a cunning plot to blind the Jedi! The comedy droids weren't secretly implanted with enough emotion to cause despair in slaughtering them wholesale! It was just to not have blood everywhere when they shot so it wouldn't get an R rating!

I would actually say that this still generates a minor amount of conflict. I think a lot of guys have stories about the first thing they killed while hunting. It can be traumatic, even if it is for food. If you are only hunting for food, there just isn't going to be very much conflict (especially if you are taking great pains to make it a quick, painless death, I'd probably only assign 1 conflict point in that sort of situation). This is just representing the Force user reflecting on the fact that he took the creature's life to ensure his own survival. It was necessary, but still unfortunate. But you can see how that same reasoning can be applied elsewhere. "Well, the witnesses must die. It's necessary, but still unfortunate." Something as benign and necessary (for some species) as hunting CAN lead to the dark side, IMO. I'm not entirely sure its enough to be worth a conflict point or not. But it's worth considering contextually.

Interesting - so ANY aggressive act, no matter how justified, generates a little bit of conflict? I was reading it that it was excessive and dark and gratuitous. Interrogating that slaver guard to find out where your friend (and other slaves) have been taken through being Big and Scary? No conflict. Interrogating that same guard by stabbing in the knee with a pencil - conflict.

But even being just Big and Scary will net you a point or two?

That doesn't seem unreasonable. That is probably 2 pts for Inflicting Emotional Abuse or Coercion and Threatening with Violence.

If you are aggressive a few times a session, most of the time you won't generate conflict, but you might not advance towards the Light.

I think the important clue is on p.220.

6—7 pts for Unnescessary Cruelty to Non-Sapient Creatures. this includes droids of animal-level intelligence.

That implies that such action against smarter droids, even comic, incompetnet B1 battle droids, appears elsewhere on the chart.

I'd say no. The vast majority of the SW galaxy views droids as just machines.

Agreed, the Character Creation section is quite clear about the concept that PC droids are special in the fact of being sapient. As opposed to most other droids which are simply advanced machines.

I wouldn't put it past Palpatine to design this war with the Jedi's moral blind spot against droids in mind, blunting their senses of right and wrong - before exterminating them.

A lot of instances of self-defense, of course, so only very small amounts of conflict, constant dropping wears away a stone...

Stop making Lucas look like a genius! The droid army wasn't a cunning plot to blind the Jedi! The comedy droids weren't secretly implanted with enough emotion to cause despair in slaughtering them wholesale! It was just to not have blood everywhere when they shot so it wouldn't get an R rating!

Actually you would be wrong. Lucas has said consistently since TPM and AOTC that the Battle Droid army was essentially created by Palpatine through his ties with the Trade Federation for just that purpose.

There's a reason Qui-Gon tells Queen Amidala that he would "protect you, I won't fight a war for you." In AOTC Mace Windu specifically states "We are keepers of the peace, not soldiers." The point of the war was to place Jedi in a place they were uncomfortable, no longer using their powers "for knowledge and defense," but to kill and wage a war.

These themes are further expanded on in The Clone Wars animated series, and in many episodes the Jedi even question whether they are doing the right thing. Watch the final Yoda arc, it's pretty much all laid out for the audience. Yoda finally comes to the realization, through communication with Qui-Gon, that the war is a lost cause, and the evil that is coming will not be defeated by a clone army led by Jedi.

Of course from a practical standpoint it's easier to maintain a PG rating slicing and dicing battle droids rather than people, But Lucas, certain had these things in mind when he wrote the Prequels.

But regarding the topic at hand, I would probably limit the amount of conflict created, especially if you run a Prequel era campaign fighting battle droids. But as a GM I'd certainly raise questions and plant seeds of doubt.

Yancy

Mainstream society considers treating droids as property acceptable, but mainstream Trandoshan society is cool with hunting other intelligent beings for sport and that doesn't get a Trandoshan Jedi off the hook if he scalps Wookies so neither does the legality of droid ownership get Jedi off the hook. It's not the law or society we're talking about, it's the Jedi's relationship to the Force. The higher level Star Wars droids are clearly intelligent beings while the lower order ones are clearly more questionable or subsapient. As for how much Conflict is appropriate for destroying droids, that's going to depend on the situation. Is he defending himself or others? Are alternatives to violence workable or impractical? What are the likely consequences to leaving the droid intact. Is he dealing with a higher order intelligence or a rote processing war machine?

The answer can be complicated. A rogue assassin droid is a threat to everyone around it and the Jedi (and the GM) may feel his obligation to safe guard innocence mandates that he attempt to destroy it rather than sneak away. Similarily, tearing apart stupid battle droids because it's amusing is worth Conflict because its motivated by cruelty even if the victims are lower order droids.

Thought of this on the bus this morning - how would you guys handle it if the droid was not a mass-produced droid, but something like R2, a droid that's been around for 20-30 years, had developed personality and is fully fleshed out "person". New owner acquires the droid (through whatever means), decides to flush the memory and break the droid up for spare parts.

No malice, no ill intent - just a simple dumping of the hard drive and scavenging of useful components for his other droids. If this were an organic, a lobotomy and a dismembering would land the character into Hannibal Lecter territory. But a droid? Naw, send R2 to the scrap heap after you gut his innards.

Thought of this on the bus this morning - how would you guys handle it if the droid was not a mass-produced droid, but something like R2, a droid that's been around for 20-30 years, had developed personality and is fully fleshed out "person". New owner acquires the droid (through whatever means), decides to flush the memory and break the droid up for spare parts.

If you’re taking down the Statue of Liberty for scrap metal, and you don’t understand what the Statue of Liberty is, then I don’t see how you can feel conflict over the actions you’re taking. It’s just a bunch of metal, right?

The feeling of conflict might come in later, if you ever discover what it is that you’ve done, but by then the deed has already occurred, and there’s probably nothing you can do to un-do that.

I see many arguments stating that how it is viewed by the person taking the action is what matters, but this moves away from the "fact" that in-universe, it is the Force that decides what is right and wrong. It does so without regard to an individual's beliefs. In Star Wars, there is Good and there is Evil and the Force defines them rather than subjective morality.

In Star Wars, there is Good and there is Evil and the Force defines them rather than subjective morality.

Please understand, I am not disagreeing with you.

However, if we are intended to be applying a single Universal mechanism to all actions (and the consequences thereof), then I think we need to be using a different term — IMO, the word “conflict” is not an appropriate term to be used for that purpose.

Now, if that’s the case, then don’t ask me what term we should be using instead, because I have no idea. But I do know what I think is an inaccurate word for this process.

Conflict doesn't have to be between the being and itself. It can be between the being and the Force.

Do you gain Conflict for destroying a Droid via a force power? If so, then nearly all of the poor jedi in the movies 1 - 3 got much conflict ;-)

I would say it would depend on the Droid. If luke just tossed r2 aside and cut him in half I would merit it a conflict because he has personality and what could be considered self aware and sentient. Random battle Droid in the forest of naboo not so much. I would draw a line at at least PC level Droid.

In canon, even the lowliest mouse droid or gonk seems to have animal-level emotions, capable of feeling affection, fear or pain. We see this several times in the movies.

Killing in self-defence is probably okay. Killing something just for fun or for cruelty is pretty much dark-side.

It even flags this up in the 'Jewel of Yavin' adventure, where it points out that disassembling the bank droid is essentially murder of a sentient being.

It even flags this up in the 'Jewel of Yavin' adventure, where it points out that disassembling the bank droid is essentially murder of a sentient being.

This suggests to us how the author viewed it, but I strongly doubt that most being in-universe would view it that way. As for how the Force views it, that's unclear.