For what it's worth, we actually see Ezra "non-lethally" remove a trio of stormtroopers from combat in an episode of SW:Rebels (the one with the Interdictor), simply by destroying their blaster rifles and then going on to rather cheekily reply that he did promise the troopers he wouldn't hurt them. Mechanically, he pushed them over the wound threshold for the minion group, meaning they were defeated, and GM Filoni liked the description of Ezra bouncing around and slicing up their weapons instead of slicing up them.

As a GM, I'd certainly allow for the player that wanted to avoid killing their opponents to do something like that, especially if they rolled a Triumph as part of that roll.

A) one or two conflict isn't a big deal.. so I'm more likely to give em out for casual violence, especially if it's with the force.

B) the scene folks have referenced w Mace Windu: the conflict chart mentions unnecessary violence. I propose that Mace Windu is so powerful that killing them, even in self defense would have been unnecessary. A starting stats character facing a squad of stormtroopers is scary and I wouldn't begrudge the player using deadly force. If you've got 1000+ exp in your character and you're fighting teenage swoop gangs.. that's some conflict, you out class them so bad that killing is unnecessary, even if they're shooting at you.

Jedi actually get up to doing all sorts of stuff that fans and players later go back and quibble about the "necessity" of...

Jedi actually get up to doing all sorts of stuff that fans and players later go back and quibble about the "necessity" of...

Not entirely sure what you mean by that, but if it's that most of the Jedi were huge jerks.. then I'm totally on board with you.

I swear, more then any emotion, hate, fear, passion.. it's hubris that has been the downfall of the Jedi time and again. They get self righteousness and they get wiped out.

Anyone who watched the Clone Wars knows where I'm coming from. In my opinion Ahsoka Tano is the finest example of what a Jedi should be.

Jedi actually get up to doing all sorts of stuff that fans and players later go back and quibble about the "necessity" of...

Not entirely sure what you mean by that, but if it's that most of the Jedi were huge jerks.. then I'm totally on board with you.

I swear, more then any emotion, hate, fear, passion.. it's hubris that has been the downfall of the Jedi time and again. They get self righteousness and they get wiped out.

Anyone who watched the Clone Wars knows where I'm coming from. In my opinion Ahsoka Tano is the finest example of what a Jedi should be.

On one hand, I agree with that in general -- the Jedi are usually their own worst enemy, usually caused by being a parsec up their own arses. Ahsoka was absolutely right to leave when she did.

On the other hand, my point was that I think some fans, some EU writers, and older Star Wars RPGs have created a very strict and legalistic "moral standard" for Jedi and the Force itself that is not much based on what we see in canon material -- one that leads them to retroactively quibble over the "dark side implications" of every little action taken by Jedi and others in the movies.

Jedi actually get up to doing all sorts of stuff that fans and players later go back and quibble about the "necessity" of...

Not entirely sure what you mean by that, but if it's that most of the Jedi were huge jerks.. then I'm totally on board with you.

I swear, more then any emotion, hate, fear, passion.. it's hubris that has been the downfall of the Jedi time and again. They get self righteousness and they get wiped out.

Anyone who watched the Clone Wars knows where I'm coming from. In my opinion Ahsoka Tano is the finest example of what a Jedi should be.

On one hand, I agree with that in general -- the Jedi are usually their own worst enemy, usually caused by being a parsec up their own arses. Ahsoka was absolutely right to leave when she did.

On the other hand, my point was that I think some fans, some EU writers, and older Star Wars RPGs have created a very strict and legalistic "moral standard" for Jedi and the Force itself that is not much based on what we see in canon material -- one that leads them to retroactively quibble over the "dark side implications" of every little action taken by Jedi and others in the movies.

Ah, see. I agree folks do get really wound up about it. I tend to avoid such discussions.. cause for me I suit the "flavor" of the morality in my games to whatever my goal was. I love Star Wars, but I'm more interested in using it as a backdrop to tell various stories I have cooked up in my brain. There is no one answer to the question of morality in Star Wars (for me at least). Anytime someone yells THIS IS HOW MORALITY IS! My brain kinda shuts off.

In my first Star Wars game I was very young running d6. I had a bunch of friends who were having real life spats, so I secretly made the game about working together. As the party fractured I INCREASED the difficulty rather then scale it to the party size. Folks got captured a lot and then rescued by their former comrades. I tended not to worry as much about casually using the force to put down your foes, but betraying your friends would seem to generate more dark side points.

In my EotE game I had one force sensitive on morality and since the focus of the game was dealing drugs and guns.. I took a very relaxed view that I handing out conflict. Granted I only rolled when it was the obvious "force using Gand adventure" and even then, I believe the Gand practice a different version of the Force and somethings aren't necessarily going to give you conflict. Gand cull their young (whom are born in clusters) if they aren't genetically predisposed to be survivors. If a human force user allowed (even encouraged) such practices he'd sink in conflict.

For my F&D game I'm going to take a much stricter view on things..there are some serious potential issues w the Morality system, so I'm going to adapt as I go.. but I'm going to use the chart as my base, and sprinkle more conflict on top depending on intent, current emotional state, and "necessity".

I guess my point is, I agree some folks have tried to make a "morality bible" in Star Wars. GMs should just use conflict to further their goals in the game, not get caught up in making commandments. That being said my advice to the OP is to figure out what works for you and try to stay consistent.. tweaking as needed, what works for one table won't necessarily work for yours and vice versa. We'll give what advice we can tho

On the other hand, my point was that I think some fans, some EU writers, and older Star Wars RPGs have created a very strict and legalistic "moral standard" for Jedi and the Force itself that is not much based on what we see in canon material -- one that leads them to retroactively quibble over the "dark side implications" of every little action taken by Jedi and others in the movies.

I definitely found that until I went back and watched all the movies and Clone Wars again, I had in my mind this image of what the Jedi allowed/disallowed that simply wasn't supported by the material.

The big problem with all these arguments is that even Lucas seems unsure about how the Jedi are suppose to be portrayed.

He has never really given us a Moral Code for Jedi. all we have are statements from Obi-wan and Yoda that are cryptic to say the least.

And falling to the Darkside is all over the place.

We have Anakin with the oww I chopped off his hand out of anger Im a bad guy.

then we have Luke going full out rage mode then just walking away.

emperor: now take your fathers place by my side

Luke: no im good

emperor: but you acted out of anger so your bad now

Luke: nope.

emperor: thats not how it works you need to bow down and join me

Luke: I'll pass.

emperor:

And all this is why I like the morality system in F&D.

But then again, they ARE cutting people down with their lightsabers already. Well, most likely. Anyhows: killing people.

So, if you wouldn't award them with the darkside point when they cut someone in half, I don't see why smashing someone against the wall with the Force should be any different. Is it because he's using the Force to do it? I don't know, that seems a bit hypocritical. Because then it would be like: "Oh, you are not using force to break this guy's legs, that's ok then and not a darksider thing to do at all!". But I'm hyperpoling a bit about it, still the point stands.

Imo, it's the actions how you behave that counts, not the power itself. I wouldn't punish someone when they are using force to defend themselves from the attack by smashing the foe into the wall.

The big problem with all these arguments is that even Lucas seems unsure about how the Jedi are suppose to be portrayed.

He has never really given us a Moral Code for Jedi. all we have are statements from Obi-wan and Yoda that are cryptic to say the least.

And falling to the Darkside is all over the place.

We have Anakin with the oww I chopped off his hand out of anger Im a bad guy.

then we have Luke going full out rage mode then just walking away.

emperor: now take your fathers place by my side

Luke: no im good

emperor: but you acted out of anger so your bad now

Luke: nope.

emperor: thats not how it works you need to bow down and join me

Luke: I'll pass.

emperor:

And all this is why I like the morality system in F&D.

Not to digress too far with this... but I believe that is a gross over simplification of Anakin's fall. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the prequels did a poor job of portraying the somewhat subtleties of the fall of Anakin. But it started significantly earlier on. He was head strong, stubborn, whiny and as full of himself as most teenagers but now he had the force to contend with. As much as he was close to Obi-wan there was some resentment there because he felt he was being held back and his pride was hurt, this was even more so when it came to other Jedi masters. Palpatine exploited this and fed his ego, and his negative feelings towards the Jedi. And then, ultimately, he fell because he decided that following Palpatine meant he could gani the power needed to save Padme. From there he continued to choose to be evil... to slaughter younglings, the leaders of the separtists, other Jedi. It wasn't simply one act of evil, it was a period of turmoil that lead to him making the choice to follow a dark path.

Luke, by contrast, lashes out and partially in an attempt to defend himself and his friends and millions of other people. But he brings himself under control again and makes the clear choice to turn away from the dark side. He cuts Vader's hand off, realizes what is happening, shuts down his saber and says no to the dark side.

Jedi actually get up to doing all sorts of stuff that fans and players later go back and quibble about the "necessity" of...

I swear, more then any emotion, hate, fear, passion.. it's hubris that has been the downfall of the Jedi time and again. They get self righteousness and they get wiped out.

100%

They became dogmatic and assured of their own infallibility.

The blinders of self-righteousness led to their fall.

Another word for that is... arrogance.