Oh, definitely. That's why it's important that the OP talks about outright murder of innocents (later specified as silencing witnesses to the original violence). "We killed thirteen stormtroopers in the line of duty" wouldn't even raise an eyebrow here, I imagine.)

As the title indicates, Star Wars tends to be set in wartime, and military actions tend to be treated as justified even if many, many people die. (A very pure-minded Force-sensitive might earn some Conflict, but the eternal example of Luke blowing up the Death Star indicates that it's not the sort of thing that seriously threatens Morality.) Conversely, an atrocity committed against just one person would be worth a lot more Conflict. (Luke's immediate jump to violence during his testing in the Dark Side tree-cave-thing may have netted him more Conflict than the Death Star; certainly in terms of the tone of the films it was played as more of a moral failing that needed to be overcome.)

To the OP: Yes, the path to the Dark Side can be a slow one of gradually increasing temptations. And most folks here seem to agree that lots of murdering in a short span shouldn't be purely additive in terms of Conflict gain.

But if you and your Dark-aiming players want the slow, gradual path to evil, then the acts they commit should follow that pattern. Use a little more violence than necessary, and justify it as serving the greater good. That kind of thing. Mass murder should be fairly far down the line, or at least done in a rush of passion (like Anakin with the Tusken Raiders) and regretted after, if it's going to happen fairly early in a character's downward slide. Disabling your allies who disagree with the action and being sure to run down and kill the witnesses sounds to me as though it's pretty far down the slope already.

It's more about why I think. Least, that's how my GM does it and I like that.

A few missions ago, our team was tasked by a Jedi Master and Felucia High Command to infiltrate and destroy a separatist battleship that was in the final stages of activating a super weapon. My character was separated from the other Jedi who went aboard and it was my character who found the engine room where we had to plant the charges. I ended up in a fight with 8 Neimoidian engineers who I could easily have chopped apart with my saber. Instead, I activated the satchel charge, and then fought them hand to hand. Thankfully I have decent brawn and some brawl skill so I was eventually able to beat them down and then scare them off with my saber. I then planted the bomb and went to leave, only to find those same guys back at the entrance. I avoided combat, putting myself at risk of being caught in the blast to avoid killing them, and doubled back to find another way out. Which I did in the form of an escape pod.

My fellow Jedi ended up being captured and escaped, how isn't important. But he decided to save some Neimoidians on his way out. When he got them to the escape pod however he discovered there was only four seats and he had five guys. He killed one of them, then force pursued (I forget the actual name of the power) the others to forget it.

In the grand scheme of things, I killed hundreds of crew and thousands of droids when the battleship blew up. He killed one guy.

My character RPed feeling terrible afterwards. Seeking guidance from the Jedi Master about how his actions could be justified with the cost of so many lives. Her response was that it was an act of war against a military target, that the destruction of that ship had saved many others.

I actually gained (only 2) morality that game. My friend dropped from 58 to 42.

I dunno. Maybe not all of you GMs would have done the same in this situation. But the group liked how it played out.

Last game, with my foresee power, with the destruction of the battleship still fresh in my guys mind, I was granted an vision of Clone Troopers massacring engineers and mechanics as we retook a captured shipyards. The mechanics had been indoctrinated into working with the separatists, though at the time we just thought they'd defected for whatever reason and would have fought the clones and the Jedi leading them to the death.

But with my guys intervention I was able to persuade High Command to use stun weapons and the Jedi used training sabers.

I really like how that played out. Based solely on my guy feeling terrible about his earlier actions in the war.

It's almost like you're playing a priest. This is what I don't like about this morality yoke : it's based on a movie/cartoon that is children friendly *sigh*

To the OP: Yes, the path to the Dark Side can be a slow one of gradually increasing temptations. And most folks here seem to agree that lots of murdering in a short span shouldn't be purely additive in terms of Conflict gain.

But if you and your Dark-aiming players want the slow, gradual path to evil, then the acts they commit should follow that pattern. Use a little more violence than necessary, and justify it as serving the greater good. That kind of thing. Mass murder should be fairly far down the line, or at least done in a rush of passion (like Anakin with the Tusken Raiders) and regretted after, if it's going to happen fairly early in a character's downward slide. Disabling your allies who disagree with the action and being sure to run down and kill the witnesses sounds to me as though it's pretty far down the slope already.

I'm afraid it boils down to how my PC's want to fall. If they want the really quick way I'm not going to slow them down - what's the point. I had prepared loads of small and bigger conflict encounters but...I think they have chosen their path. Now that I'm armed with your advice I look forward to our next game ;-)

On the Death Star issue there's some argument to be had that Luke didn't fully process what destroying it meant (who can say what that means for conflict purposes).

There a comic where a friend of Luke and Biggs from Tatooine who joined the Empire fakes defection and at one point he's talking with Luke and his internal monolouge goes something like "How many man died when you blew up the Death Star Luke? Have you wondered if any of them were good men? No, I don't think you have."

It still seems to make the most sense to cap morality shift at ten per session. This will still get someone from neutral to dark in no time while discouraging abuse of the conflict system.

In this situation I can think of a few reasons to put a cap on how much they can shift morality in one session.

-Giving a reason to even take morality over credits and/or exp.

-Light side can't keep up. There is no way for some one seeking light side paragon to get there as fast as dark side can even with a 10pt cap on morality shift.

-Discouraging 'lol random' mass murder sprees. This can really mess with the tone of a game.

As far a justifying that cap ten points is still a big jump with only 5 sessions needed to go from neutral to 0 morality dark side. After all something like five different Murders over time with malevolent intent caries more weight than killing all 11 people in the room because “I want to use the dark side”

Other ways to discourage this behavior is for it to have other consequences, like getting imperials or crime families attention. After getting a serious bounty hunter or inquisitor/agent on their tail for killing a cantina full of innocents they should think twice about doing it again. Or even getting the kind of reputation that makes shops close up and valuable contacts avoid you.

I think the system is designed with the intention that PC's don't want to be Murder Hobos, but instead are battling their internal emotions trying to stay in control, trying hard not to fall to the dark side.

These PC's from the OP really should have started at Morality 30 if these actions are "Normal" for them. The impact of being dark side, with the conflict of dSP vs strain cost of LSP should have been a part of the scene described. Once your PC play again as a DS user the full dilemma they have found themselves in May become apparent.

The Force Dice is specifically designed so that on a single dice your more likely to get a DSP, but only 1. While when you get a LSP your more likely to get 2. This represents the "Dark Side Easier, Light Side Stronger" in a way that is so deep and in my mind incredible. When the PC's get to have FR 2 or 3 it becomes even more apparent. Your LS Jedi will be capable of some big things with no strain/conflict cost (or only minor) while the Dark Siders will be taking strain and conflict every time they use the force

I think the system is designed with the intention that PC's don't want to be Murder Hobos, but instead are battling their internal emotions trying to stay in control, trying hard not to fall to the dark side.

There are sidebars in the Force chapters of EotE and AoR in the sidebar discussing dark side Force users that notes the default expectation is that the PCs are generally heroic individuals, and as you said "not a bunch of Murder Hobos." And I agree with other posters that the OP's group, based on what info we've been given, do fall into the "murder hobo" bucket.

Even in EotE where the PCs are typically "rough around the edges" (to put it nicely), the expectation is that they're not going to result to wanton slaughter and mass murder to achieve their objectives; this is bourn out by the fact that combat is dangerous and if the PCs aren't careful they could wind up with a host of critical injuries.

I actually like Sam Stewart's scenario of where if the PCs used those grenades as the "quick and easy" solution, they'd earn a whole mess of Conflict.

Star Wars at it's core is a very much a black and white morality tale, with the few shades of grey tending towards very light grey (Han Solo and Lando at first) or very dark (Jango and Boba Fett). Which fits since it's space opera and thus more prone to the dramatic.