You should be consistent within the campaign, both should have morality since its probably going to at least be a side story of your game.

I would only ever (read almost never) drop morality if it was not at all part of the story of those characters.

The issue I anticipate running into is GM'ing a combined game where F&D Force Users are going to adventure with AoR and EotE characters, who may select the Universal Careers of Force Emergent and Force Exile. In this instance, would it be fair to have a Soresu Defender and Force Exile, both with a Force Rating of 1, in the same party but only the Soresu Defender player needs to mind his Morality? I'm concerned my players may, at worst, feel that isn't fair or, at best, meta-game to the point of having the Force Exile do the 'bad' stuff since the Exile doesn't need to worry about Morality. Thoughts?

Morality isn't an absolute requirement for F&D careers just like Obligation isn't an absolute requirement for Edge careers and Duty isn't an absolute requirement for AoR careers. It's about the type of game you're running, so if it's essentially an Edge game, it's perfectly okay to use Obligation for everyone, especially if the player also feels that Morality and/or Duty would be an awkward fit.

The issue I anticipate running into is GM'ing a combined game where F&D Force Users are going to adventure with AoR and EotE characters, who may select the Universal Careers of Force Emergent and Force Exile. In this instance, would it be fair to have a Soresu Defender and Force Exile, both with a Force Rating of 1, in the same party but only the Soresu Defender player needs to mind his Morality? I'm concerned my players may, at worst, feel that isn't fair or, at best, meta-game to the point of having the Force Exile do the 'bad' stuff since the Exile doesn't need to worry about Morality. Thoughts?

If you are using FaD, then every Force-sensitive should have Morality, not just characters from the FaD book.

Or you could ignore Morality for all characters and give FaD characters Obligation (but, IMHO, this is boring; Morality is a great tool to know where each Force-sensitive stands).

I'm my current game I have 4 EotE + 1 FaD character. I gave everyone Obligation, including the FaD character. In addition, the FaD tracks Morality.

I run an EotE game. Players in my game may borrow specializations and Force powers from AoE and FaD, but every character has Obligation, and no characters have Duty or Morality. I feel it would be unbalancing to some extent to use the different rules with different players.

I also made a house rule called Temptation (to represent the temptation of the dark side). Any Force User in my campaign who has used a Dark Side Force Point in the past, must make a Discipline skill check if they wish to resist using the dark side when they roll dark side Force points. The difficulty starts easy the first time, and becomes more difficult each time they use the dark side. Successful rolls for temptation can reduce the difficulty of subsequent checks (allowing the character to atone over time).

The Force user in my group doesn't seem to care. He always chooses to spend a destiny point and use the dark side anyway.

I also made a house rule called Temptation (to represent the temptation of the dark side). Any Force User in my campaign who has used a Dark Side Force Point in the past, must make a Discipline skill check if they wish to resist using the dark side when they roll dark side Force points. The difficulty starts easy the first time, and becomes more difficult each time they use the dark side. Successful rolls for temptation can reduce the difficulty of subsequent checks (allowing the character to atone over time).

I like it. I wouldn't use it for every roll in my games, but I like it as an alternative to Fear checks in certain climatic scenes.

I also made a house rule called Temptation (to represent the temptation of the dark side). Any Force User in my campaign who has used a Dark Side Force Point in the past, must make a Discipline skill check if they wish to resist using the dark side when they roll dark side Force points. The difficulty starts easy the first time, and becomes more difficult each time they use the dark side. Successful rolls for temptation can reduce the difficulty of subsequent checks (allowing the character to atone over time).

I like it. I wouldn't use it for every roll in my games, but I like it as an alternative to Fear checks in certain climatic scenes.

I only use the Temptation roll when the character's Force roll generates ONLY dark points and they decide to back down from using the Force power. If they fail the check, then they give into the temptation of the Dark side and use the power.

I only use the Temptation roll when the character's Force roll generates ONLY dark points and they decide to back down from using the Force power. If they fail the check, then they give into the temptation of the Dark side and use the power.

Personally, I think that takes away player agency. They should always (well, almost always) be the one to choose what their character does. Do they give in to the temptation or not?

If they fail the check, but they still choose not to use the dark side points, then they get a setback die (or two) for every action they take until such time as the encounter is over, or they give in to the temptation, or they succeed in making another temptation check that is one rank harder.

This way, there is a hard and fast in-game mechanic that will affect them, but the choice is ultimately still theirs as to whether or not they choose to convert those dark side pips.

Of course, maybe that’s just me. YMMV, etc….

Yeah, the option to use the dark side pips should always be a player's choice, especially since they have to burn a valuable resource (destiny point) to do so.

The "temptation" part is already baked into the system by virtue of at lower Force Ratings (1 and 2), the PC is going to have to make use of those dark side pips if they want to make successful use their powers.

I also made a house rule called Temptation (to represent the temptation of the dark side). Any Force User in my campaign who has used a Dark Side Force Point in the past, must make a Discipline skill check if they wish to resist using the dark side when they roll dark side Force points. The difficulty starts easy the first time, and becomes more difficult each time they use the dark side. Successful rolls for temptation can reduce the difficulty of subsequent checks (allowing the character to atone over time).

I like it. I wouldn't use it for every roll in my games, but I like it as an alternative to Fear checks in certain climatic scenes.

I only use the Temptation roll when the character's Force roll generates ONLY dark points and they decide to back down from using the Force power. If they fail the check, then they give into the temptation of the Dark side and use the power.

I don't think I'd use rolls, but if the PC needs to use the Force in order to save someone, or some other heroic deed, and chooses not to because they don't want to use dark side pips because of the game mechanics, I'd give them conflict for cowardice. Doin the right thing doesn't mean doin the safe,easy or smart thing.

I only use the Temptation roll when the character's Force roll generates ONLY dark points and they decide to back down from using the Force power. If they fail the check, then they give into the temptation of the Dark side and use the power.

I don't think I'd use rolls, but if the PC needs to use the Force in order to save someone, or some other heroic deed, and chooses not to because they don't want to use dark side pips because of the game mechanics, I'd give them conflict for cowardice. Doin the right thing doesn't mean doin the safe,easy or smart thing.

According to some, a Force-user allowing a "dark" emotion to drive or empower an act that we would otherwise see as absolutely heroic and have no objection to, is the wrong choice... while refraining from that act is the correct choice. The irony here is that fear of falling to the dark side would be driving the Force-user to make a self-centered and selfish decision, instead of acting to the benefit of others.

This is where we get into the blue-and-orange morality that some fans (and some writers of previous RPG editions and EU material) champion, with self less acts "leading to the dark side" and self ish acts being "true to the light".

I only use the Temptation roll when the character's Force roll generates ONLY dark points and they decide to back down from using the Force power. If they fail the check, then they give into the temptation of the Dark side and use the power.

Personally, I think that takes away player agency. They should always (well, almost always) be the one to choose what their character does. Do they give in to the temptation or not?

If they fail the check, but they still choose not to use the dark side points, then they get a setback die (or two) for every action they take until such time as the encounter is over, or they give in to the temptation, or they succeed in making another temptation check that is one rank harder.

This way, there is a hard and fast in-game mechanic that will affect them, but the choice is ultimately still theirs as to whether or not they choose to convert those dark side pips.

Of course, maybe that’s just me. YMMV, etc….

Good point. The setback dice may be more appropriate than removing choice. The situation hasn't really come up in game yet anyway, because so far the one player using the Force doesn't care. For him, it's worth the destiny point to use his power. I can't say I disagree with him.

I don't think I'd use rolls, but if the PC needs to use the Force in order to save someone, or some other heroic deed, and chooses not to because they don't want to use dark side pips because of the game mechanics, I'd give them conflict for cowardice. Doin the right thing doesn't mean doin the safe,easy or smart thing.

Do Edge characters experience conflict, or is that just for FaD characters? I haven't used any of the rules out of FaD so far. My group is still learning Edge before we start incorporating the other books.

It's a judgement call for the GM.

I don't think I'd use rolls, but if the PC needs to use the Force in order to save someone, or some other heroic deed, and chooses not to because they don't want to use dark side pips because of the game mechanics, I'd give them conflict for cowardice. Doin the right thing doesn't mean doin the safe,easy or smart thing.

Do Edge characters experience conflict, or is that just for FaD characters? I haven't used any of the rules out of FaD so far. My group is still learning Edge before we start incorporating the other books.

It's not hard-coded that an EotE or AoR character with Exile and/or Emergent has to use Morality, but it is strongly suggested on FFG's part in the FaD book where they discuss mixing and matching the three product lines.