Games Master was hoping to play his only two Force Sensitives at opposite ends of the spectrum. Because I don't want to be Dark Side unless I can be honourable and heroic, I'm out. Really. GM wants his Dark Sider and I'm just not going to cut it.

Sounds like your GM has control issues. Or he's going to try to instigate some "player vs player" action, which can easily get ugly unless everybody is on board and knows the score.

I think it's all a matter of a simple thing WILLPOWER

All this talk about Batman, Anakin.. there's a simple underlying theme WILLPOWER..

Batman has the willpower not to slip, not to go to far. Yeah he uses fear, he does this he does that but he refuses to go that step to far. He won't kill he doesn't use others. There are plenty of instances where he starts slipping but brings himself under control. He's always been the pinnacle of a dark hero. yeah he'd be pretty low on the morality table but he wouldn't be dark

Anakin started out the same but he did not have the will to not slip, he was tempted by the darkside and let himself fall.. He was treading the same waters as batman he wanted to do good, he wanted to save Padme he wanted the right things but his will to see that happen failed he gave into his anger and fear, blasted Mace Windu out a window than went and slaughtered a temple full of kids "Cuse"

Willpower folks and if you where using darkside powers to fight stormtroopers attacking settlements I'd find some way to throw willpower based checks at you to see if you have the resolve to not slip and fall. As others said it'd be a slow fall but if you kept it up your going to go down. The old chaos saying is great. Small steps corrupt.

edit edit: You actually gave me a great idea.. I'd as the GM RP the darkside with you. Using again your example of hitting stormtroopers with force lightning to stop them I'd give you something like "Lightning streaks from your fingers, blasting the first rank of stormtroopers drawing cries of agony as they collapse and writhe, these Imperials must be shown a lesson"

and if your response wasn't quickly something like "No Im doing this to defend the innocent people of this village" than I'd give you some conflict automatically..or let you make a check to resist the urges of the darkside if you try to stay good

Games Master was hoping to play his only two Force Sensitives at opposite ends of the spectrum. Because I don't want to be Dark Side unless I can be honourable and heroic, I'm out. Really. GM wants his Dark Sider and I'm just not going to cut it.

Sounds like your GM has control issues. Or he's going to try to instigate some "player vs player" action, which can easily get ugly unless everybody is on board and knows the score.

The headache is he wants light and dark to work together.

I'm pleased to be out of it.

Yes, I'd rather be a flawed, complicated, Average Joe archetype hero whose a good guy but doesn't always react the right way or do the right thing. But he means well. I've tried to accommodate the GM by going as far as even I dared, but nothing I came up with even helped get my character above the reals of "no, he's going to be evil".

I will take some of my background, toned down a lot (which I'm happy with) and perhaps still start at 29 morality. I like the idea of a "road to redemption", bearing in mind his morality starts at 29 not 0 so there is hope.

One other thing, or should that be two, is his look. I like the whole Black Knight with Red Lightsaber:

http://lovelace-media.imgix.net/uploads/273/e0296310-2337-0133-76e4-0aecee5a8273.gif?

No idea where I get my ideas

Or a green blade Shoto. Green lightsaber and red robes is a look I'm familiar with too.

Games Master was hoping to play his only two Force Sensitives at opposite ends of the spectrum. Because I don't want to be Dark Side unless I can be honourable and heroic, I'm out. Really. GM wants his Dark Sider and I'm just not going to cut it.

Sounds like your GM has control issues. Or he's going to try to instigate some "player vs player" action, which can easily get ugly unless everybody is on board and knows the score.

Yeah, there appears to be a way more serious issue here: the GM not properly framing and crafting a campaign that the actual group wants to play.

My advice to that GM would be to go write a novel.

Is the dark side evil?

By default the answer is "yes". However, this is an rpg so the answer becomes "yes... except when it isn't".

Some distilled observations from various posts: Not only can we not clearly define "the dark side" across the board (not a bad thing, mind you, an rpg should have some room to move in that regard) but many of us disagree as to what "evil" is (which is natural). Both of which are bound to create conversational dissonance.

A note from personal experience: In nearly three decades of rpg-playing everyone who has tried to access traditionally "bad guy" powers and abilities, but dodge (as opposed to accepting the risk and just running that drama) any attendant drawbacks, has been looking to cheat the system in some way. I don't think that is always the case for everyone, but that's how my POV is shaded, here.

At our table: There is no "light side", there is only the Force. The Force is the way of natural universal harmony*. An animal predator killing prey to live is not evil. A sentient killing an attacker in defense is not evil. The "dark side" is abuse of the Force. Abuse can only go on for so long before you have to deal with the consequences.

Regarding "darker" superheroes: In the cases of Batman, Wolverine and the Hulk... Part of their fundamental narrative existence is the exploration of the line between the moral compass points and the struggles therein (all three in different ways). Rob them of that (as many writers have, to be sure) and they all become the lowest immature (as in development, not age) "power fantasy with no responsibility" versions of themselves:

A Force-using PC that wants to access the dark side but not be evil should embrace that struggle and accept the risk of failure. The GM should not hand-wave away the consequences.
One is the path to a great... and potentially tragic... adventure story.
The other is "more power with no restrictions" so you can "win 'Star Wars'" which is a pretty spot-on (if very, very low stakes) definition of dark side philosophy.

EDIT TO ADD: As has been said, mowing down Storm Troopers doesn't come with the same moral quandaries. Treating these sorts of faceless goons as less deserving of moral consideration may be unrealistic, but it is part of the "black and white" type of morality that "Star Wars" (in its default setting) runs on.
Simply put, if characters are held to a not-entirely-realistic standard of good then there exist antagonists that are not-entirely-realisticly bad that can be fought and killed without much thought.

* In our games, this has been tied to why the Jedi couldn't see the darkness under their noses.
"Hard to see, the dark side is." - Yoda
We have decided to flip a classic Tolkein-ian concept, somewhat.
Since the Jedi draw power from the natural flow of the universe, they were not truly able to comprehend things outside of that flow. The dark side bends the Force to a personal will over that flow and the Jedi just weren't able to reliably comprehend anything "outside" of the flow.

I think it's all a matter of a simple thing WILLPOWER

All this talk about Batman, Anakin.. there's a simple underlying theme WILLPOWER..

Batman has the willpower not to slip, not to go to far. Yeah he uses fear, he does this he does that but he refuses to go that step to far. He won't kill he doesn't use others. There are plenty of instances where he starts slipping but brings himself under control. He's always been the pinnacle of a dark hero. yeah he'd be pretty low on the morality table but he wouldn't be dark

Anakin started out the same but he did not have the will to not slip, he was tempted by the darkside and let himself fall.. He was treading the same waters as batman he wanted to do good, he wanted to save Padme he wanted the right things but his will to see that happen failed he gave into his anger and fear, blasted Mace Windu out a window than went and slaughtered a temple full of kids "Cuse"

Willpower folks and if you where using darkside powers to fight stormtroopers attacking settlements I'd find some way to throw willpower based checks at you to see if you have the resolve to not slip and fall. As others said it'd be a slow fall but if you kept it up your going to go down. The old chaos saying is great. Small steps corrupt.

edit edit: You actually gave me a great idea.. I'd as the GM RP the darkside with you. Using again your example of hitting stormtroopers with force lightning to stop them I'd give you something like "Lightning streaks from your fingers, blasting the first rank of stormtroopers drawing cries of agony as they collapse and writhe, these Imperials must be shown a lesson"

and if your response wasn't quickly something like "No Im doing this to defend the innocent people of this village" than I'd give you some conflict automatically..or let you make a check to resist the urges of the darkside if you try to stay good

Willpower is not the real difference. Batman doesn't fall because Batman isn't playing by George Lucas higher rules on morality. A Batman playing by Lucas's rules is a darksider. Not because he lacks willpower, but because he is acting like one. Willpower, in the long run, doesn't have any bearing on if a person will fall.

it's true. Sidious is an excellent example of a guy with Willpower 6 and Discipline 5. So is Yoda.

How they use that willpower and discipline makes all the difference.

I think it's all a matter of a simple thing WILLPOWER

All this talk about Batman, Anakin.. there's a simple underlying theme WILLPOWER..

Batman has the willpower not to slip, not to go to far. Yeah he uses fear, he does this he does that but he refuses to go that step to far. He won't kill he doesn't use others. There are plenty of instances where he starts slipping but brings himself under control. He's always been the pinnacle of a dark hero. yeah he'd be pretty low on the morality table but he wouldn't be dark

Anakin started out the same but he did not have the will to not slip, he was tempted by the darkside and let himself fall.. He was treading the same waters as batman he wanted to do good, he wanted to save Padme he wanted the right things but his will to see that happen failed he gave into his anger and fear, blasted Mace Windu out a window than went and slaughtered a temple full of kids "Cuse"

Willpower folks and if you where using darkside powers to fight stormtroopers attacking settlements I'd find some way to throw willpower based checks at you to see if you have the resolve to not slip and fall. As others said it'd be a slow fall but if you kept it up your going to go down. The old chaos saying is great. Small steps corrupt.

edit edit: You actually gave me a great idea.. I'd as the GM RP the darkside with you. Using again your example of hitting stormtroopers with force lightning to stop them I'd give you something like "Lightning streaks from your fingers, blasting the first rank of stormtroopers drawing cries of agony as they collapse and writhe, these Imperials must be shown a lesson"

and if your response wasn't quickly something like "No Im doing this to defend the innocent people of this village" than I'd give you some conflict automatically..or let you make a check to resist the urges of the darkside if you try to stay good

Anakin's biggest failing was really that he actively sought power and recognition, primarily power. He always thought the solution to any problem was to be more powerful. Eventually he got to the point that he sought that power at any cost. You see it through the whole set of the prequels, when I am more powerful I'll rescue my mom. Obiwan is jealous of my power or doesn't see it and treats me like a kid, I will show him how powerful I am. Padme might die, if only I had more power I could save her.. etc.. etc.. He reaches a point where he is willing to gain that power at any cost and that causes his fall, even then he is sure he will just need to gain more power and he can overthrow the emperor and rule the galaxy and through his wisdom the people will be protected and safe, so long as they see things his way.

The force has a will of its own, if you use it you willingly open yourself to its suggestions (ie its a give and take) no amount of mortal willpower can do anything about it against basically a "god" over a longer amount of time.

But the force can only directly "influence" those that are sensitive to it. All other characters in the star wars universe are not bound by this strict moral code ie the force cant influence people directly who cant sense it easily (indirectly via a mortal mind as catalyst works however).

There are some exceptions for prolonged stay in a dark side place + having weak willpower though.

As for batman, since he is not force sensitive he would be fine in star wars.

As for the character described in the opening post, he would become evil over time, thats just how the force works.

I feel like the prequels and extended universe have made things weird. If you look at the OT for inspiration, Kenobi cut a guy down for attacking Luke. Luke assaulted Jabba's base and essentially killed his entire entourage, and had no qualms about helping his friends blow up a space station that was, at the time, just sitting in orbit. Yoda isn't even above telling Luke to let his friends die so that he can save the rest of the galaxy, because that's what they're all struggling for in the first place. You might be able to save everyone in a Bioware game, but Yoda knew that sacrifices might have to be made for the greater good.

The strict moral code of seeking all manner of non-violent solutions before just whipping out your lightsaber was built up later. In the OT, the difference between how the "good" force users and the "bad" force users act is in their purpose. Luke and Kenobi use their powers to defend, rescue, and help others.

By contrast, nearly every instance of Vader's use of the force is to choke people. He isn't just killing them, he's making them suffer, often for arbitrary reasons. The Emperor only uses the force once, and that's to torture Luke with exquisite lightning-based pain.

If someone points a blaster at a kid with the intention of shooting him, Kenobi would be right there beside you when you cut him down. If a bunch of Stormtroopers tried to massacre a defenseless village, Luke would gladly lend a hand - but he might be confused as to why you're using lightning instead of an actual weapon that kills people.

The dark side isn't just a different power set and color scheme. It's an entirely different way of thinking, based on fear, anger, pain, and power. When those Stormtroopers are about to kill innocents, are you more interested in making them suffer or in saving the town? Because if you just want to make a bunch of Stormtroopers writhe in agony, then you're probably evil. Force Lightning isn't just something that dark side users get because they wear eyeliner. It's designed to make people suffer as much as possible before killing them.

So, what are your primary motivations? If you're fighting for truth, justice, and the American Way, then you are by definition (at least the OT's definitions) a light side user. That doesn't, or didn't, mean celibacy and council meetings and a lot of existential crises. It means that you genuinely want to help people. If you don't care one way or the other, then you're probably somewhere in the middle (I imagine Han with the force).

But if you actually want to use dark side powers, then your ultimate goal isn't just to save people (though that might be part of it, at first), but to make other people hurt and suffer as much as you can. And that leads to darker and darker things.

Yeah, the OT embraced the honorable samurai trope pretty well - Jedi pretty freely use their weapons, but they do it in defense of others and when they kill, it's done quickly with as little suffering as possible. The PT sort of... muddled that, like you said.

I have some pretty extensive thoughts regarding this topic, but suffice to say - yes, if you use the dark side, you are evil.

That was one of the big issues of the PT Jedi IMO. Qui-Gon fit the image I had of the Jedi after seeing the OT best of all the PT Jedi by far yet he was an outcast within the order.

My answer is fairly simple, if your a dark sider, that character is evil. No two ways about it, Star Wars mystical setting relies heavily on that arrupt distrinction between good and evil. If your a dark sider, then everyone else is your prey. Otherwise that table isn't really playing Star Wars, but rather a futuristic version of DND with +5 vorpal swords. I mean no offence, but to do otherwise would take the teeth out of the bite of the fall. That being said, provided restraint is excercised, it's quite easy to exist in the grey indefinitely.

Can a dark sider not do good or work for good motives? Certainly! Just because your evil doesn't that every evil character is an absolute jackass, but rather most would do a cause that also benefits their own position. A rebel agent, a privateer that works for a rundown company or a Robin Hood type character. but rather their reasons for doing things will be different to that of a typical person as they see the people they work with as little more then that tools to tamper and alter with the force, taking pride in every successful trader they swindle with a touch of the mind,the swelling of their heart with every praise sung of their name, greedily enjoying every success in the latest daring raid as their position get stronger and stronger. The ultimate aim? To be on top of whatever food chain their pool has.

Would a dark sider work with Jedi? In this era, definitely! The empire is an Imdominable force that is way beyond what any lone man or woman could tackle alone, desperate alliances and services are offered to ensure that each manage to survive for the next day, if anything the dark sider would fight even harder then his compatriots as he has much, much more to lose including his personal freedom and power as to be made an inquisitor is to become a mere pawn in someone elses game. Sure that darksider might hate every minute initially, but eventually a benifit comes to this arrangement and, force willing, even redemption becomes possible.

In short; a darksider should always be evil in their very nature, but not necessarily above working with others for mitral survival.

Note: batman would not be force sensitive, but would be an outlaw tech, doctor and marauder. Thus batman, as a core concept, could exist in this universe. It should also be noticed, even if he was force sensitive, that batman never intentionally kills. Thus he could exist in the grey indefinitely.

That was one of the big issues of the PT Jedi IMO. Qui-Gon fit the image I had of the Jedi after seeing the OT best of all the PT Jedi by far yet he was an outcast within the order.

This might not be accidental. Remember that Qui-Gon, "outcast" as he was, was still the first Jedi who discovered how to "live on" after death; to retain his sense of individuality after becoming one with the Force. This sort of suggest he was very much attuned to the Force.

And the rest of the Jedi had arguably gotten so hidebound by tradition and so closely tied to the political aspects of the Republic that they had lost touch with their original purpose, which was to be servants of the Force rather than servants of the Republic, and ended up paying the ultimate price for their shortsightedness.

It might very well be that Qui-Gon was supposed to be the "ideal" Jedi in the prequel trilogy.

That was one of the big issues of the PT Jedi IMO. Qui-Gon fit the image I had of the Jedi after seeing the OT best of all the PT Jedi by far yet he was an outcast within the order.

This might not be accidental. Remember that Qui-Gon, "outcast" as he was, was still the first Jedi who discovered how to "live on" after death; to retain his sense of individuality after becoming one with the Force. This sort of suggest he was very much attuned to the Force.

And the rest of the Jedi had arguably gotten so hidebound by tradition and so closely tied to the political aspects of the Republic that they had lost touch with their original purpose, which was to be servants of the Force rather than servants of the Republic, and ended up paying the ultimate price for their shortsightedness.

It might very well be that Qui-Gon was supposed to be the "ideal" Jedi in the prequel trilogy.

Agreed, I think that was Lucas' point, and it was also intentionally subtle.

And that is why Qui-Gon Jinn is my favorite Jedi.

Saw something last night that reminded me of this thread. Was outside a bar and this drunk stumbles out, immediately staggers over to his car and gets in. Meanwhile theres a cop parked half a block away. The drunk starts to drive off and the cop pulls him over. No surprise there, but here is where it gets good. I couldn't actually hear what was being said but I'm fairly sure the drunk was denying he was toasted. Cop had him walk a line, touch his nose, then out came the breathalyzer. On went the cuffs and the cop hauled him off.

That right there is the Force in a nutshell. You can deny it all you want, but the more good or evil deeds a Force user commits, the more under the influence of a particular side he or she is.

If you're running a starting character and your first response to an Inquisitor is ATTACK!, then you're likely to find the typical outcome rather deprotagonizing.

"Your deprotagonizer, please, Mr. Kyle."

...

Games Master was hoping to play his only two Force Sensitives at opposite ends of the spectrum. Because I don't want to be Dark Side unless I can be honourable and heroic, I'm out. Really. GM wants his Dark Sider and I'm just not going to cut it.

...

He doesn't even want a starting Dark Sider to play a redemption story. I'd gladly start Dark, and perhaps have a Redemption motivation where I battle the beast within to attain inner peace. But that wasn't good enough.

Bah humbug

As a GM, I kind of like the idea of putting two opposing characters in the same story and seeing how it works out. But if your GM doesn't want, or worse, won't allow, your characters to change with the story, then we know what's going to happen.

Basically, it sounds like the GM wants one player running a light side Force guy to fight another player running a dark side Force guy. BEGIN!

What do the players want? Does that matter to him?

That was one of the big issues of the PT Jedi IMO. Qui-Gon fit the image I had of the Jedi after seeing the OT best of all the PT Jedi by far yet he was an outcast within the order.

This might not be accidental. Remember that Qui-Gon, "outcast" as he was, was still the first Jedi who discovered how to "live on" after death; to retain his sense of individuality after becoming one with the Force. This sort of suggest he was very much attuned to the Force.

And the rest of the Jedi had arguably gotten so hidebound by tradition and so closely tied to the political aspects of the Republic that they had lost touch with their original purpose, which was to be servants of the Force rather than servants of the Republic, and ended up paying the ultimate price for their shortsightedness.

It might very well be that Qui-Gon was supposed to be the "ideal" Jedi in the prequel trilogy.

This was my interpretation as well, especially after the final episodes of The Clone Wars . Despite being viewed as an outcast by the Jedi Council, it is Qui-Gon who found Anakin and taught Yoda the secrets of the Force. Yoda then teaches Obi-Wan, who mentors Luke, who helps Anakin bring balance to the Force. Despite all their grand talk and intentions, it's the oddball Jedi who questioned the Council's will during Episode I that eventually sets things into motion and saves everyone. It is for this reason that I think we start where we do in the PT. The story needed to establish that the Jedi Council wasn't actually right, and thus needed to introduce us to Qui-Gon.

That said, while I am of the opinion that both the Light and Dark side of the Force are needed to attain "Galactic" balance; The Dark side of the force is not the sort of thing that allows for "gray" area on a personal scale. A dark side user is evil, yet not beyond redemption. A force user who relies on both and the dark is possible, just as long as they know where to draw the line and not cross it. Ventress is a perfect example of this in canon. She knows how to draw on her anger for strength, but has given into the Dark side before and been burned; so she is careful not to let it guide her. Control is the big thing she teaches. If you give in at all, the Dark side will dominate you and consume you. Of course knowing when you have actual control and not the illusion of control is a whole other matter...