I know they are almost never selected, but there are options to start with higher or lower morality, putting you on the verge of light or dark side paragon. But whhile starting on the verge of light side paragon is fine, starting on the verge of darkside is counterproductive and painful... for the darksiders.

There are two architypes for a darkside main character. First there's the "deep end" murdurhobo "Kill the jedi children" sith, for whom Confict is a measure of his aliegence to the dark side. With the way the Morality mechanics are biased, there's no reason to start with -20 morality. He can start with extra stuff, then just kill 2 extra people and fall in the same amount of time it took the person who went for the "head start" option.

The other architype is the Grey Jedi, the well intentioned extremist, the person who fell but still holds a code. Sometimes a player even wants to run a redemption arc starting from evil. But again, they dont start play on the darkside- And that first session where you guarentee your fall may ruin the plan you had for your character, as you do acts your character is never planned to do again, just to slip down into Darkside territory.

I see two possible solutions. Either replace the -20 morality option with -30 morality (do NOT change the +20 morality option) to start you as a Dark Side Paragon, with -1 strain and a Dark Destiny Flip, Or simply say "-20 morality and are on the Dark Side for the purposes of the force die and powers." (wording may need cleaning up.)

Either solution removes the "First session" split personality and/or cash grab, and lets you start being a darksider from the start for RP reasons... which would be the entire reason for making that morality choice in the first place.

If the player can justify it - especially if they justify it from a story standpoint - I would let someone pick whatever morality they wanted. If they wanted a super dark character that is working on his redemption, I'd let them start with a morality of 1-5. If they wanted to be slightly leaning towards the dark, they could start at 35 or 40.

Thing is, I dont think I'd take away their XP or cash for doing this, either. Well - unless they went with the 70 Just-About-Paragon option. Any other point on the scale, I would just let them go with for story reasons. . . .

Yeah, I'm with you. My first reaction to the negative morality option was just "Why?".

If the player can justify it - especially if they justify it from a story standpoint - I would let someone pick whatever morality they wanted. If they wanted a super dark character that is working on his redemption, I'd let them start with a morality of 1-5. If they wanted to be slightly leaning towards the dark, they could start at 35 or 40.

Thing is, I dont think I'd take away their XP or cash for doing this, either. Well - unless they went with the 70 Just-About-Paragon option. Any other point on the scale, I would just let them go with for story reasons. . . .

The idea is to get something like that coded into the game, so that it's a reconized option rather than houserules.

Maybe starting at 50 gives you +5 XP and +1,000 credits. For each +10 Morality, you can choose to lose the bonus XP or the credits, so you can give up both and start up at 70, or give up one and start at 60. For each -10 Morality, you can get an extra +5 XP or +1,500 Credits, so you can take both and be at 30, or take one and be at 40.

This gives players a few more options akin to Duty and Obligation, starting players in a worse position on the Morality scale (for most characters at least - I'm sure there will be some that want to be Darkside anyways) for more starting boosts, but also gives the players less boosts the better they want to be on the Morality scale.

While I think there are more dark archetypes than that Rakaydos, I agree that that option should probably be changed. Perhaps the starting morality should be between 30-50 (or less) player's choice, with the other options, and a different option to start at 70 with no bonus cash or xps.

Maybe starting at 50 gives you +5 XP and +1,000 credits. For each +10 Morality, you can choose to lose the bonus XP or the credits, so you can give up both and start up at 70, or give up one and start at 60. For each -10 Morality, you can get an extra +5 XP or +1,500 Credits, so you can take both and be at 30, or take one and be at 40.

This gives players a few more options akin to Duty and Obligation, starting players in a worse position on the Morality scale (for most characters at least - I'm sure there will be some that want to be Darkside anyways) for more starting boosts, but also gives the players less boosts the better they want to be on the Morality scale.

While I think there are more dark archetypes than that Rakaydos, I agree that that option should probably be changed. Perhaps the starting morality should be between 30-50 (or less) player's choice, with the other options, and a different option to start at 70 with no bonus cash or xps.

I dont think either of you actually read what I'm actually asking for.

I dont want additional "grey" options for money or experience- I want a dark option that is actually DARK, not a waste of money/experience.

that's what I'm saying though. let the PC's start anywhere they want from -6 billion to 50 morality. they can choose the cash, cahs + xp, or xp options.

The only morality adjustment that should count as a starting option should be the morality 70 option.

Unless I'm still misunderstanding...

that's what I'm saying though. let the PC's start anywhere they want from -6 billion to 50 morality. they can choose the cash, cahs + xp, or xp options.

The only morality adjustment that should count as a starting option should be the morality 70 option.

Unless I'm still misunderstanding...

Starting sith isnt something you should do to get more toys (money and experience), starting sith is something you should do because you want to start sith. Being a darksider SHOULD be it's own reward.

The current system tries to support this idea with the -20 morality option... and fails, because while you are starting on the brink of evil, you arnt there yet.

Starting sith isnt something you should do to get more toys (money and experience), starting sith is something you should do because you want to start sith. Being a darksider SHOULD be it's own reward.

The current system tries to support this idea with the -20 morality option... and fails, because while you are starting on the brink of evil, you arnt there yet.

Oh, see, this I disagree with. You're not rewarded for being "gray" you're punished for being "dark". Bonus XP is the default, morality shift is the exception. The thing is,going higher on the morality track gets you a host of mechanical benefits. Going lower incurs at least as many as it grants, so I don't see the point. I can see wanting to start as Dark Side but it is not "It's own reward".

The reward is black force pips, darkside Bind, Harm, and Unleash. In exchange you lose 1 strain,(2, if you go all the way) and the party gets a little less luck.

It's not a choice for everyone... but right now, you dont have it.

As I point out over in this thread , those are not actually small bonuses or penalties. In addition you aren't prevented from accessing Bind, Harm, or Unleash as a Light Side character. The only actual benefit you get from going Dark Side without going Why-are-you-even-playing, murder-troll is a slight higher likelyhood of getting at least one pip pip on the Force Die without taking stress. However as your power level goes up, the likelyhood of getting enough pips (a number >1) to use your enhanced abilities levels out between Light and Dark side.

As I point out over in this thread , those are not actually small bonuses or penalties. In addition you aren't prevented from accessing Bind, Harm, or Unleash as a Light Side character. The only actual benefit you get from going Dark Side without going Why-are-you-even-playing, murder-troll is a slight higher likelyhood of getting at least one pip pip on the Force Die without taking stress. However as your power level goes up, the likelyhood of getting enough pips (a number >1) to use your enhanced abilities levels out between Light and Dark side.

We're arguing different things. You want more stuff for putting up with the dark side. I think the dark side is fine, but noone should ever choose the -20 morality option as written. And I want to change that so that the -20 option actually does something a darksider would want.

-MY- issue is, If you DO think dark side adept is worth it on it's own merits.... the minus -20 morality option STILL isnt worth taking. Because you can fall in a single session, whatever your morality was to start with.

Just changing it to -30 does virtually nothing though. Most darkside players are probably still going to want to start with their extra XP/gear at 50 morality, and then, much like you pointed out, just take like 4 random people into a back alley, then torture and kill them so that they can start the next session as Dark Side (or alternatively you could just slap the label on them as soon as they hit a point where even a good roll on the d10 wouldn't prevent them from hitting dark side).

The only real difference it'd be making is allowing them to use darkside points and have to flip for lightside points 1 session sooner for when they roll their, probably no more than 2 force die (for Knight Level), to activate 1-2 half-bought-into force powers, in exchange for being able to grab another force power upgrade, a talent, a skill rank, or any number of gear including a lightsaber attachment or spare parts for modding.

Just changing it to -30 does virtually nothing though. Most darkside players are probably still going to want to start with their extra XP/gear at 50 morality, and then, much like you pointed out, just take like 4 random people into a back alley, then torture and kill them so that they can start the next session as Dark Side (or alternatively you could just slap the label on them as soon as they hit a point where even a good roll on the d10 wouldn't prevent them from hitting dark side).

The only real difference it'd be making is allowing them to use darkside points and have to flip for lightside points 1 session sooner for when they roll their, probably no more than 2 force die (for Knight Level), to activate 1-2 half-bought-into force powers, in exchange for being able to grab another force power upgrade, a talent, a skill rank, or any number of gear including a lightsaber attachment or spare parts for modding.

I feel your "only real difference" is enough. Killing people isnt the drawback for the extra gear... the drawback is waiting a session to get what you really came for.

I was thinking your character can start as a darksider with Starting Morality of 30 with the ability to add an extra darkside destiny at the start of the game session suffering a setback instead of strain to any check not involving violence or intimidation.

Then gray jedi with starting morality of being able to restore or lower morality by d10 to whatever is closer to 50.

Lightsiders have a starting morality of 70 can add 1 extra lightside destiny point at the start of the game but suffer x2 and x4 conflict instead of bonus strain to checks whilst using darksider force powers.

The penalty occurs at 10, 20, 80 and 90 Morality because neither should have advantages because of this.

Problem is a darksider can raise morality by 5 or 10 for either extra xp or extra starting money, a lightsider drops their starting morality for the same bonus but a gray jedi must choose either increase or decrease NEVER BOTH to gain that bonus.

Does that help or is that a bad idea?

Would it be that difficult if all 3 were present in your game?

Copperbell,

It's a possibility, but I think it might simply just be simpler to keep the "everyone starts at 50 Moraltiy" and then have the player choose to either gain or lose Morality to gain the corresponding XP or credit bonus, perhaps with a breakdown of:

+/- 5 Morality: Gain +5 XP

+/- 5 Morality: Gain +1000 credits

+/- 10 Morality: Gain +10 XP

+/- 10 Morality: Gain +2500 credits

+/- 10 Morality: Gain +5 XP and +1000 credits*

This way, those players that want to be dark siders can push themselves closer to being dark, while those wanting to be light side paragons can do the same.

That said, Lathrop's point about PCs that want to be dark siders still stands, since such a player can take a hit to their Morality, and then just commit a number of atrocities in the first couple sessions and still have the benefit of the extra XP and/or credits.

*I really do like this option, and will probably offer it for PCs in any EotE or AoR games I run in the future as a house rule.

This way, those players that want to be dark siders can push themselves closer to being dark, while those wanting to be light side paragons can do the same.

That said, Lathrop's point about PCs that want to be dark siders still stands, since such a player can take a hit to their Morality, and then just commit a number of atrocities in the first couple sessions and still have the benefit of the extra XP and/or credits.

There's no need to mess with the morality mechanic for lightsiders. As I pointed out, +20 morality is 4 sessions closer to Light Side Paragon, a significant improvement over the gear/XP option if that's what you're going for. The problem is Dark Side paragon. -20 morality doesnt give you anything that a pair of murders wont- if your trying to reach darkside paragon, you''ll get there in 1 session whether you get free stuff or not.

Which is why I want to keep the starting morality mechanic the same, but offer the Darksider something he cant get by murdering his way through the first adventure. That being already a darksider for the first adventure.

If someone's concept calls for being a darksider, and they're willing to go without the extra stuff for 50 moralty, I want them to not have to waste a session before they can play their character the way they want.

This way, those players that want to be dark siders can push themselves closer to being dark, while those wanting to be light side paragons can do the same.

That said, Lathrop's point about PCs that want to be dark siders still stands, since such a player can take a hit to their Morality, and then just commit a number of atrocities in the first couple sessions and still have the benefit of the extra XP and/or credits.

There's no need to mess with the morality mechanic for lightsiders. As I pointed out, +20 morality is 4 sessions closer to Light Side Paragon, a significant improvement over the gear/XP option if that's what you're going for. The problem is Dark Side paragon. -20 morality doesnt give you anything that a pair of murders wont- if your trying to reach darkside paragon, you''ll get there in 1 session whether you get free stuff or not.

Which is why I want to keep the starting morality mechanic the same, but offer the Darksider something he cant get by murdering his way through the first adventure. That being already a darksider for the first adventure.

If someone's concept calls for being a darksider, and they're willing to go without the extra stuff for 50 moralty, I want them to not have to waste a session before they can play their character the way they want.

Then just use GM fiat and put their starting Morality at 25 or even 0 and say "congrats, you're an evil SOB!"

Not all GMs really want to reward those type of players, and some (like me) will probably kick them out of the group, as those type of GMs prefer that the group be comprised of heroes, or at least anti-heroes of the lighter shades of grey such as Han and post-ESB Lando rather than a near-psychotic murder-hobo. So I'm fine with the current system, since if a PC wants to start right on the cusp of being a Light Side or Dark Side Paragon, they can give up the choice for bonus XP and/or credits to do so.

Plus, as T3CHNOSHAMAN noted, being a dark side in the early stages of the game, particularly right at the start of the campaign, provides a notable advantage when it comes to using Force-based effects, particularly those talents that only require a single Force point to trigger, given the increased likelihood of rolling a dark side pip on their one Force die, thus getting to use the power and not have to suffer strain or flip a Destiny point to do so.

With the way the Morality mechanics are biased, there's no reason to start with -20 morality. He can start with extra stuff, then just kill 2 extra people and fall in the same amount of time it took the person who went for the "head start" option.

You make a good case. In fact, one can argue that either ±Morality option is just a . . . oh, what's the word for that?

Oh, yes! Thank you, Admiral Ackbar. I was going to say "sub-optimal", but your frank candor does get right to the point -- neither option really gives the player anything, but just encourages bypassing perhaps quite a bit of story. The GM and the players would both be better-off if these options were simply taken off the table.

Plus, as T3CHNOSHAMAN noted, being a dark side in the early stages of the game, particularly right at the start of the campaign, provides a notable advantage when it comes to using Force-based effects, particularly those talents that only require a single Force point to trigger, given the increased likelihood of rolling a dark side pip on their one Force die, thus getting to use the power and not have to suffer strain or flip a Destiny point to do so.

Which is exactly what the player is sacrificing 2500 credits/10XP to get.

Except right now he isnt.

Right now, the options are "1 session from getting an extra destiny point per session", "Extra Stuff" and "I'm evil, but not evil enough."

What I want the options to be are "1 session from getting an extra destiny point per session", "Extra Stuff" and "lose a destiny point, but have more reliable powers"

Like I said, I'd suggest just changing it so that when you take the 30 hit you *are* Dark Side. Per the RAW, you can be up to 69 and still be Dark Side, once you've become Dark Side, so I don't see a significant issue.

Raykados, you are proposing a "solution" to a problem that does not exist. The game is designed around heroic tales of good characters struggling to do good. The -20 Morality is there for those who wish to play a character riding that razor's edge of falling and, presumably, struggling to their redemption. The game is not designed *for* playing dark-siders at all. If you are choosing to do so, you are already well outside of the intent of the rules, so do whatever you wish with them.

What you proposed are great house rules for those wishing to play dark-siders outside of the intent of the rules, and should be re-posted in the forums for the game after it is published. However, these suggestions have no place in the published rules and thus no place in a beta test forum.

If they do use darkside points so does that mean the gm uses the lightside destiny points against them?

Could get confusing especially if the darksider player is trying to hide their true nature from the other players at the start of the game.

Sith like jedi is a name associated with that side of the force it doesn't mean a Darksider is a Sith just wields the darkside of the force and should have as much problems as those in the lightside given the need for balance... how would you handle someone wielding the lightside that should be as deranged or at least have similar problem to someone wielding the darkside and losing control?

Was being ignorant that everything was tumbling down a sign that the Jedi Council was similarly effected as Anakin was when he lost control and fell?

Raykados, you are proposing a "solution" to a problem that does not exist. The game is designed around heroic tales of good characters struggling to do good. The -20 Morality is there for those who wish to play a character riding that razor's edge of falling and, presumably, struggling to their redemption. The game is not designed *for* playing dark-siders at all. If you are choosing to do so, you are already well outside of the intent of the rules, so do whatever you wish with them.

What you proposed are great house rules for those wishing to play dark-siders outside of the intent of the rules, and should be re-posted in the forums for the game after it is published. However, these suggestions have no place in the published rules and thus no place in a beta test forum.