Oh the random things I think of while half asleep driving into work. So lets say the Jedi and His Pals are sneaking into an imperial base of some kind. They're in the server room, downloading Top Secret Plans when a guy from the IT department and a stormtrooper come strolling in.

The PCs certainly shouldn't be here, and violence will almost certainly erupt in a moment. Also, letting the imperials get the word out that intruders are fiddling about in the server room will make their stealth mission that much harder. So lightsabering the pair is a very logical outcome, bring them down hard and fast and reasonably quietly so they can complete the mission.

But. . . instigating lethal violence as a first resort, without exploring other options, is clearly mentioned on the "This is Conflict Worthy" list. But on the other hand, talking to the pair is VERY unlikely to work and beating them senseless with fists and melee is less lethal, but more likely to let them raise the alarm.

So - would you hand out conflict for that? How much?

I'd assume that was conflict worthy.

Even Stormtroopers will surrender if circumstances demand it (Lando's people getting the drop on the Stormtrooper squad in Cloud City).

When you consider access to Coercion, Deception, Negotiate and Stealth skills (and some great Talents that buff them) as well as Powers like Influence and Misdirect... well, Jeedai have a lot of options available to them.

Once captured/bribed a cinematic punch can knock a fella out. Damage their communicators, tie 'em up and lock 'em in a broom closet and the bad guys shouldn't be able to raise the alarm (unless/until they're scripted to).

If there's a certain-but-lethal solution and a difficult/dangerous(to self)-but-life-preserving solution a good Jedi is obligated to attempt the latter (in our Clone Wars game I'm finding a lot of Jedi NPCs who are convincing themselves they need to be more "practical" and I try to show them that no, they do not).

Well if they managed to get into the control room without being seen how hard would it be to hack the storm trooper armour and trick their coms so they never stumble across you in the first place?

Looking at 9-2 I notice that the really bads that might apply also remove themselves from the equations.

Unprovoked violence states "no reason" which in this case there is plenty reason.

Murder states the target is no threat, which in this case they totally are a threat.

So that only leaves the violence as a first option one... which base recommendation is one whole whopping conflict point... whoop-dee-doo.

So were it me, I'd give em a conflict point... maybe two... and push the theme element that going on adventures and fighting the good fight also means having to make tough calls from time to time. After all, why do you think Jedi are so worried about the darkside so much? It's because (among other things) the Jedi, by inserting themselves into various conflict, won't be able to always take the moral high ground and sometimes, like it or not, the ends will have to justify the means.

Remember, gaining conflict is not necessarily something to avoid at all costs. Sometimes there is no perfect solution merely the least objectionable. If they were to attack straight off I would give them 1 conflict each, if lets say the mission had direct consequences of preventing innocent people getting killed so long as they dealt with those troopers, then mitigating circumstances might reduce the conflict down to nothing.

Well if they managed to get into the control room without being seen how hard would it be to hack the storm trooper armour and trick their coms so they never stumble across you in the first place?

Well, I hadn't thought out the specifics beyond idle "Oooh, I wonder if. . . . " - so lets say that it's not necessarily a patrol looking for intruders, but an IT guy and his Stormtrooper friend following up on a work order from earlier and accidently finding them.

So that only leaves the violence as a first option one... which base recommendation is one whole whopping conflict point... whoop-dee-doo.

Yeah, the more I think about it the more I think that a conflict of one (maaaaaaaybe two - but certainly no more than that) is a perfectly reasonable response.

Remember, gaining conflict is not necessarily something to avoid at all costs.

Oh believe me, I know that - one or two here and there wont turn a player into a slobbering Dark Side monster. I'm just getting back into the GM seat after a long spell of playing, and being the first time in a Jedi Heavy game, I was just thinking of random scenarios and how I would deal with them. If this (or something similar) ever comes up, I can point my players towards the thread and go "See, I'm not alone!"

Depending on the writer, the stromtrooper's helmet has an internal comm-link, so if they don't drop him IMMEDIATELY, he can radio in a problem, and I'd assume their comms are on a closed system, so "hacking" would be potentially tricky.

Having said that, it might not be too hard to incapacitate the two, depending on the groups' abilities, without resorting to lethal force, and, if they can't, such acts are what makes for good role-playing. Many Rebels would see the Empire as a faceless, oppressive regime, more than willing to destroy anything they can't control, and the Rebellion isn't like that. Thus, to have to kill these people might give your Rebels an opportunity to feel bad about having had to resort to it, to do it the "Imperial way", or, depending on how the duo act, maybe also see them as more human than the Rebellion usually attributes to the entity they fight, and feel bad for having to kill them. Mechanically, the conflict gain will be minor, at best, and something more people may still need to learn the system intends, but for the role-play opportunity, it could be huge. Think of Return of the Jedi, when the Executor loses control, and plunges into the Death Star II. Admiral Ackbar isn't excited that the huge threats to his fleet are now out of commission; he's mournful, maybe even a little bit horrified, at the number lives, many of which were just doing what was expected of them, and not trying to be evil, tyrannical monsters, that were being extinguished, that his efforts could triumph. Your group could do that, too, if on a blessedly smaller scale, thankfully.

Depending on the writer, the stromtrooper's helmet has an internal comm-link, so if they don't drop him IMMEDIATELY, he can radio in a problem, and I'd assume their comms are on a closed system, so "hacking" would be potentially tricky.

Jamming is always on option. It is just one action and iirc there are even automatic devices which will do it on a maneuver or even incidental.

Wave hand

"We are supposed to be here"

Misdirect

What people in the server room?

Hi we are doing a check on your security just give us a moment and we will be out of your hair.

"The boss sent us down to download these top secret plans so why don't you guys go on a break for a bit..."

Takes out a cred stick

"There is 5000 credits for you two if you ignore us..."

Bzzt! 2 Conflict...or the ST sounds the alarm.

Wave hand

"We are supposed to be here"

Misdirect

What people in the server room?

Hi we are doing a check on your security just give us a moment and we will be out of your hair.

"The boss sent us down to download these top secret plans so why don't you guys go on a break for a bit..."

Takes out a cred stick

"There is 5000 credits for you two if you ignore us..."

Sounds like a great time to use the "Learning as you go" rules from KtP if Misdirect or Influence is something your PC's cant already do.

Like I say in other threads, not earning Conflict should be the harder route. The obvious easy choice here is to take them out. But you did initiate violence so you gain a point or two. Want to avoid that point or two find another option. This seems like a simple and fair way to show how hard it is to avoid Conflict.

Its not hard to avoid conflict.

I just gave what for different ways to avoid it...

Also lying does not earn conflict when done for the right reasons especially when it prevents fighting.

Of course this could have been prevented just by locking the door.

Its not hard to avoid conflict.

I just gave what for different ways to avoid it...

Also lying does not earn conflict when done for the right reasons especially when it prevents fighting.

Of course this could have been prevented just by locking the door.

And if you don't have Misdirect or Influence? My statement assumes that the party doesn't have easy access to powers that nullify the point of presenting the players with a challenging choice. If the BBEG is threatening to toss an innocent child into a pit unless the group lets him get away and everyone in the party has Move or Bind so that they can catch the child and stop the villain then you've failed to properly challenge the party in a way that would generate real Conflict.

If the party has Misdirect or Influence then this thought experiment is fairly pointless in terms of whether or not it should generate Conflict as it wouldn't have sufficiently challenged the party. Conflict generating situations need to take into account the powers that the PC's have so that they can't rely on them to defeat the purpose of presenting players with a chance to earn or avoid Conflict and the though moral choices that come with it.

In any situation in which it isn't hard to avoid Conflict no Conflict should be awarded. The entire point is that to avoid Conflict you have to make the harder choice. If the non Conflict choice is actually easy, then you've not properly created a Conflict worthy situation.

sometimes forcing them to use their powers can force them to use Dark Side pips But i definitely get your point, perhaps more minions so the Magnitude is required.

Here's my credentials (shows them ISB Agent badge)

Don't interrupt we're tracking a rebel cell that appears to have a mole in your network.

Right after you've finished your duty here forward your reports to Lord Vader.

Yes he's due in the system so you understand why I'm forced to operate under such circumstances.

Note: In an old WEG game one player retained some stolen credentials and reused them even though by that point they should have been out of date and flagged to prevent such use.

But seriously if they can get into that control room without any comment on how they did so it wouldn't stretch things if they have the credentials to pass without question at least until someone asks the right question to the right person say for example the owner of those credentials...

Yeah, I'd assign a single point of conflict for using violence as the first resort, and that's about it. As others have noted, the Imperials did present a threat, not only in terms of direct physical danger but also in alerting the entire Imperial base to the presence of the PCs if allowed to get the word out that intruders were in a restricted area.

It's possible that one of the other PCs could have talked their way out of that mess (like Han claimed he does), or at least stalled them enough for something a bit less lethal than a lightsaber could be employed, so that the Jedi-type went right for the lightsaber is "resorting to directly to violence."

And since it's only a point of Conflict (two at most), for most PCs that's not going to be a big deal, and if anything shouldn't have any real impact on their Morality at the end of the session.

Oh the random things I think of while half asleep driving into work. So lets say the Jedi and His Pals are sneaking into an imperial base of some kind. They're in the server room, downloading Top Secret Plans when a guy from the IT department and a stormtrooper come strolling in.

The PCs certainly shouldn't be here, and violence will almost certainly erupt in a moment. Also, letting the imperials get the word out that intruders are fiddling about in the server room will make their stealth mission that much harder. So lightsabering the pair is a very logical outcome, bring them down hard and fast and reasonably quietly so they can complete the mission.

But. . . instigating lethal violence as a first resort, without exploring other options, is clearly mentioned on the "This is Conflict Worthy" list. But on the other hand, talking to the pair is VERY unlikely to work and beating them senseless with fists and melee is less lethal, but more likely to let them raise the alarm.

So - would you hand out conflict for that? How much?

Yes I would hand out conflict for that, assuming the Jedi didn't do something like "You don't see us, the server room is empty" Mind Trick. But yeah, if the Jedi went balls out with his saber out first thing, then yeah, Conflict. And I'd award whatever the amount listed is. Sure it might've been the most practical and expedient thing to do, but that doesn't insulate the player from earning Conflict. But again, Conflict is just Conflict, not Evil Cookies. It doesn't make him a bad person perse, it just means he might develop a "kill first, ask questions never" mentality, which could lead him to the dark side eventually.

You can actually use anything as fake credentials as long as you don't actually let the person you are showing them to see them closely. Its an appeal to authority and as long as the player can sell it then it works right up until he gets hit with a despair then well..