I recently acquired Chronicles of the Gatekeeper and love the Moraband Force vergence, and how it offers players extra power of they use the Dark Side. I hear vergences are a big thing in Nexus of Power...

Can anyone elaborate on this a little before I buy? Is it just extra pips of light or dark, or are there other ways they play with the Force?

Each one has its own flavour, with slight variations on the mechanics, e.g.: Coruscant allows pips to add to Knowledge checks, Dagobah has a Fear element, etc.

It's a useful tome IMHO.

Yeah, they've all got their own spin on how they behave. If you are looking for different ideas on how to have Force vergences behave, definitely pick up the book.

Very much pick up Nexus of Power, as it has a whole chapter on Force vergences as well as a number of example ones. Many vergences not only affect your usage of the Force, but can also invoke a test/trial of sorts that forces the PC to examine aspects of themselves or overcome psychological hurdles on their way to mastery of the Force.

Be aware that some Vergences can be objects (like Vader's burnt helmet) rather than locations. Theoretically, beings could be Vergences (like Anakin).

Be aware that some Vergences can be objects (like Vader's burnt helmet) rather than locations. Theoretically, beings could be Vergences (like Anakin).

I'd say Vader's helmet would be less a vergence and more of a relic, one strongly tied to the dark side.

Be aware that some Vergences can be objects (like Vader's burnt helmet) rather than locations. Theoretically, beings could be Vergences (like Anakin).

I'd say Vader's helmet would be less a vergence and more of a relic, one strongly tied to the dark side.

But would it really be tied to the dark side? I mean in the end, he cast aside the dark side, and redeemed himself. Why would his helmet still have dark side to it when the person doesn't? To me, it would seem more like it would just become regular stuff, just literal equipment at that point. Now if he had died still a servant of the dark side, unrepentant and all that, then sure, I could see the visage of his terror still having that echo to it. But after a redemption angle, it doesn't make as much sense to me on a narrative level.

Be aware that some Vergences can be objects (like Vader's burnt helmet) rather than locations. Theoretically, beings could be Vergences (like Anakin).

I'd say Vader's helmet would be less a vergence and more of a relic, one strongly tied to the dark side.

But would it really be tied to the dark side? I mean in the end, he cast aside the dark side, and redeemed himself. Why would his helmet still have dark side to it when the person doesn't? To me, it would seem more like it would just become regular stuff, just literal equipment at that point. Now if he had died still a servant of the dark side, unrepentant and all that, then sure, I could see the visage of his terror still having that echo to it. But after a redemption angle, it doesn't make as much sense to me on a narrative level.

Because he didn't really redeem himself.

Look we're talking about a guy who not only helped bring upon the genocide of the Jedi order, but continued to hunt down and slaughter rogue force users and slaughter thousands upon thousands of rebel agents with his own hands and helped defend a giant planet killing genocide weapon.

While turning against the emperor at the last possible second (an act that saved precisely 1 person) when the second death star was about to meet it's demise anyways was nice and all I don't think it really made up for decades of being the equivalent of space Hitler... also Hayden Christensen's acting is impossible to make up for.

Be aware that some Vergences can be objects (like Vader's burnt helmet) rather than locations. Theoretically, beings could be Vergences (like Anakin).

I'd say Vader's helmet would be less a vergence and more of a relic, one strongly tied to the dark side.

But would it really be tied to the dark side? I mean in the end, he cast aside the dark side, and redeemed himself. Why would his helmet still have dark side to it when the person doesn't? To me, it would seem more like it would just become regular stuff, just literal equipment at that point. Now if he had died still a servant of the dark side, unrepentant and all that, then sure, I could see the visage of his terror still having that echo to it. But after a redemption angle, it doesn't make as much sense to me on a narrative level.

Because he didn't really redeem himself.

Look we're talking about a guy who not only helped bring upon the genocide of the Jedi order, but continued to hunt down and slaughter rogue force users and slaughter thousands upon thousands of rebel agents with his own hands and helped defend a giant planet killing genocide weapon.

While turning against the emperor at the last possible second (an act that saved precisely 1 person) when the second death star was about to meet it's demise anyways was nice and all I don't think it really made up for decades of being the equivalent of space Hitler... also Hayden Christensen's acting is impossible to make up for.

Actually he did redeem himself. That's a pretty classic trope of storytelling. The Heroic Sacrifice of Redemption. That you have a character who is Really Bad, but in the final moment, they make the right choice. He even got a Light Side Force Ghost and everything. So narratively, yeah he did get redeemed. Now you can debate the actual moral validity of such an action, but storywise, in the Star Wars universe, to not only reject the Dark Side, but to sacrifice yourself to save your own son, and single handedly kill the living embodiment of Mustache Twirling Evil, gets you a Get Out of Sith Jail Free card. And he didn't just save one person, because the Emperor would've escaped. The place took long enough to explode for an injured Luke to drag his dying father, who probably weighed hundreds of pounds with those augmentations, down to the hangar bay, from the throne room, and still escape. That's probably like 20 minutes of travel time. Palpatine could easily escape, and continue to Twirl his Mustache of Evil for years to come, Leading his fleet of Star Destroyers to continue to cause misery in the galaxy. He saved a lot more than just one life by killing Space Hitler.

In the real world, yeah I don't buy that at all. Doing one thing doesn't make up for a lifetime of sh*tty behavior. But in a galaxy far far away, with an actual mystical energy field that influences and compels people to do good/bad things, yeah it works just fine.

Each one has its own flavour, with slight variations on the mechanics, e.g.: Coruscant allows pips to add to Knowledge checks, Dagobah has a Fear element, etc.

It's a useful tome IMHO.

Does the Fear element trigger on Force use, or affect future use?

Be aware that some Vergences can be objects (like Vader's burnt helmet) rather than locations. Theoretically, beings could be Vergences (like Anakin).

I'd say Vader's helmet would be less a vergence and more of a relic, one strongly tied to the dark side.

But would it really be tied to the dark side? I mean in the end, he cast aside the dark side, and redeemed himself. Why would his helmet still have dark side to it when the person doesn't? To me, it would seem more like it would just become regular stuff, just literal equipment at that point. Now if he had died still a servant of the dark side, unrepentant and all that, then sure, I could see the visage of his terror still having that echo to it. But after a redemption angle, it doesn't make as much sense to me on a narrative level.

Because he didn't really redeem himself.

Look we're talking about a guy who not only helped bring upon the genocide of the Jedi order, but continued to hunt down and slaughter rogue force users and slaughter thousands upon thousands of rebel agents with his own hands and helped defend a giant planet killing genocide weapon.

While turning against the emperor at the last possible second (an act that saved precisely 1 person) when the second death star was about to meet it's demise anyways was nice and all I don't think it really made up for decades of being the equivalent of space Hitler... also Hayden Christensen's acting is impossible to make up for.

Actually he did redeem himself. That's a pretty classic trope of storytelling. The Heroic Sacrifice of Redemption. That you have a character who is Really Bad, but in the final moment, they make the right choice. He even got a Light Side Force Ghost and everything. So narratively, yeah he did get redeemed. Now you can debate the actual moral validity of such an action, but storywise, in the Star Wars universe, to not only reject the Dark Side, but to sacrifice yourself to save your own son, and single handedly kill the living embodiment of Mustache Twirling Evil, gets you a Get Out of Sith Jail Free card. And he didn't just save one person, because the Emperor would've escaped. The place took long enough to explode for an injured Luke to drag his dying father, who probably weighed hundreds of pounds with those augmentations, down to the hangar bay, from the throne room, and still escape. That's probably like 20 minutes of travel time. Palpatine could easily escape, and continue to Twirl his Mustache of Evil for years to come, Leading his fleet of Star Destroyers to continue to cause misery in the galaxy. He saved a lot more than just one life by killing Space Hitler.

In the real world, yeah I don't buy that at all. Doing one thing doesn't make up for a lifetime of sh*tty behavior. But in a galaxy far far away, with an actual mystical energy field that influences and compels people to do good/bad things, yeah it works just fine.

Like.... This

It worked before he slaughtered children (twice).

Again, you are using Real World morality for Star Wars, and it's not that simple. In the real world, we don't have a mystical energy field, that is half utter evil/darkness/bad thingies/cookies, that actively tries to corrupt and urge people to destruction and pain. We don't have agents of this evil force, whispering in our ears, urging us to embrace the Capital E Evil of the Dark Side. We just have assholes doing horrific things.

But even Obi-Wan said it, in New Hope. "Vader was seduced by the Dark Side of the Force." This implies an outside agent trying to coerce him into doing bad things. And while it doesn't absolve him fully of his evil actions, you can't discount the influence of a galaxy spanning, semi-sentient energy field, that actively tries to compel people to do bad things. Hell in the real world, we acknowledge that while someone might do bad things, and should account for them, if there is evidence that an outside force (or person in the real world), urged and compelled them, they too are held accountable for the actions of those they influenced. So it's not 100% on Anakin's head.

The Light Side of the Force, apparently, is totally cool with the idea of someone who was a complete ass, and a murderer, making what is essentially a "deathbed confession", and being redeemed. Hell, most real world religions allow for this crap. He genuinely turned from the Dark Side, even at the cost of his own life, and killed Space Hitler. To the Light Side of the Force, which is semi-sentient, this is a good enough trade, to warrant being redeemed, and allowed to go ....Force Heaven...or whatever it is that Light Side spirits do. Hang out in the ether and watch people I guess, I dunno.

Again, in the real world, I don't buy into this schlok at all. If you've lived a sh*tty life and done sh*tty things your entire life, doing one good thing, even a big good thing, doesn't wipe the slate clean in my eyes. But that's me, and this is a morality issue. And morality is murky waters to discuss on any given day. Plenty of people in the real world, would see that kind of act as "balancing the scales". "Yeah he was an *******, but he died saving another, so he's ok in my book." kind of thing. I don't agree with it, sounds like you don't either. But I don't attribute my real world morality to a fictional setting, where the rules of how Right and Wrong works, is totally different from how they work here.

Regarding Vader, there were plans early in the development of TFA to have Anakin's ghost show up, and that it would shift between his "redeemed" Anakin appearance and the more sinister Vader appearance, showing that he didn't quite get as much of a free pass for his final heroic act. It was ultimately cut, but it does lend some weight to the idea that Vader's sins continue to haunt him even after becoming a Force ghost.

Regarding Vader, there were plans early in the development of TFA to have Anakin's ghost show up, and that it would shift between his "redeemed" Anakin appearance and the more sinister Vader appearance, showing that he didn't quite get as much of a free pass for his final heroic act. It was ultimately cut, but it does lend some weight to the idea that Vader's sins continue to haunt him even after becoming a Force ghost.

That's neat, but since it didn't make it into the movie, I'm going to pass on it. We can't start using all the stuff that hit the editing floor to justify canon, or at least I can't. So much got changed from movie to movie, even with the originals, all we can go by is what actually made it up on screen. Or again, that's how I fell about it. Pulling up first draft scripts or deleted takes etc to try and justify a stance about the setting seems to stretch things a bit.

Now, at the table, if someone wants to run it that way, fine. I'm all for tossing canon out the window at the gaming table and running with what works for that game. So if having conflicted force ghosts improves a game, go for it. But to just say "he didn't get redeemed" as if it's a certified fact, when all the canon material suggests otherwise? Eh, I dunno. It lessens Luke's accomplishments from the original trilogy, and sort of retcons the entire ending. Besides, I'm not really sure how someone is "kind of" redeemed/damned, you know? He didn't seem conflicted at the end of RotJ.

Be aware that some Vergences can be objects (like Vader's burnt helmet) rather than locations. Theoretically, beings could be Vergences (like Anakin).

I'd say Vader's helmet would be less a vergence and more of a relic, one strongly tied to the dark side.

But would it really be tied to the dark side? I mean in the end, he cast aside the dark side, and redeemed himself. Why would his helmet still have dark side to it when the person doesn't? To me, it would seem more like it would just become regular stuff, just literal equipment at that point. Now if he had died still a servant of the dark side, unrepentant and all that, then sure, I could see the visage of his terror still having that echo to it. But after a redemption angle, it doesn't make as much sense to me on a narrative level.

Because he didn't really redeem himself.

Look we're talking about a guy who not only helped bring upon the genocide of the Jedi order, but continued to hunt down and slaughter rogue force users and slaughter thousands upon thousands of rebel agents with his own hands and helped defend a giant planet killing genocide weapon.

While turning against the emperor at the last possible second (an act that saved precisely 1 person) when the second death star was about to meet it's demise anyways was nice and all I don't think it really made up for decades of being the equivalent of space Hitler... also Hayden Christensen's acting is impossible to make up for.

Just my two credits.

Well while i also think Vader is redeemed within the force by his last action of good (and the trouble his mind had before, because he found out that he has a son, and starts to like him somehow even if he (at first) don´t want to allow his feelings)

His Helmet is a whole other story: This piece of metal was its whole existence covered in the dark side of vader. it got "hit" by any of his dark side uses. It´s shredded in darkness for decades and so it became eventually an relict of the dark side. Just because the wearer redeemed himself doesn´t mean the object did so too!

this 20 minutes before the death couldn´t wash away the darkside from it, especially not since nobody tried to purify it.

In my mind the best proof for this is that later on Kylo Ren/Ben seems to be at least obsessed with the helmet, who knows may be it whispers with a deep but all silent voice to the owner to give into his anger and fear to become powerfull...

in other words: A Relict of the darkside but not a strong one, hence it was never forged with sith alchemie (at least I don´t remeber anything in cannon or legends)

If I ever had to put it in play it would be something like this:

The user constantly hears the whispering of an echo of the darkside and a mechanical breath, if the user is a darkside user he may meditate for at least one hour in front of it he may increase his Lightsaberskill by one or may increase one of his forcepower STRENGH options by one for the rest of the day or session.

It could just be a mental placebo, too. It's indicative of Darth Vader and Ren uses it as a focus; a reminder of what he wants to be. The cool thing is you can get pretty creative with the Force and all it touches. Heck, there are freakin' dark side zombies, so not much isn't possible!

I still think there's more to Darth Vader's story than what we've read or seen so far.

Why kill those younglings when he could have "saved" them and recruited them as part of his new Inquisition.

Seriously clear evidence of the Jedi's attempted coup with nothing to incriminate Palpatine unless he openly uses his abilities which he wouldn't given the ANH premise that he was a recluse and Vader his enforcer.

Picked up the Gatekeeper book a few months ago looks like I need to add another to the list!

Why kill those younglings when he could have "saved" them and recruited them as part of his new Inquisition.

He was playing older editions and was farming for XP.

Or he was playing FFG Star Wars and was taking the quick route to Dark Side Force User for easy access to those black pips.

Why kill those younglings when he could have "saved" them and recruited them as part of his new Inquisition.

He was playing older editions and was farming for XP.

Or he was playing FFG Star Wars and was taking the quick route to Dark Side Force User for easy access to those black pips.

Or he was simply ordered by his Master to purge the universe of the "evil" Jedi. And the easiest way to do that is kill them I mean, it's not like it was Anakin's idea, it was a direct order from Palpatine to try and wipe out his rival Force using tradition.

So much, despite being Star Wars, of the prequels was terrible. If the Emperor had ordered Darth Vader to arrest and capture all the Jedi in the temple, killing anyone who resists, then fine. The way it was portrayed has always bothered me. The rest of Order 66 made sense to me, with beheading the snake and all.

So much, despite being Star Wars, of the prequels was terrible. If the Emperor had ordered Darth Vader to arrest and capture all the Jedi in the temple, killing anyone who resists, then fine. The way it was portrayed has always bothered me. The rest of Order 66 made sense to me, with beheading the snake and all.

Well, it was meant to show his genuine fall to the Dark Side. No ambiguity about it. Murdering children would convey that pretty effectively.

But why would the Emperor want to arrest/capture the Jedi? They were too big of a threat to him. He was way more of the "scorched earth" policy, plus, he could use them as a scapegoat, blaming them for a lot of the things he did. It makes more sense to try and wipe them out entirely.

Besides, he's wrinkly Space Hitler, he's not supposed to do things in a good way. He's a Mustache Twirling Bad Guy, of the first order (haha! jokes!). He's the Cackling With Laugther kind of BBEG, he doesn't do things by half measures.

So much, despite being Star Wars, of the prequels was terrible. If the Emperor had ordered Darth Vader to arrest and capture all the Jedi in the temple, killing anyone who resists, then fine. The way it was portrayed has always bothered me. The rest of Order 66 made sense to me, with beheading the snake and all.

Well, it was meant to show his genuine fall to the Dark Side. No ambiguity about it. Murdering children would convey that pretty effectively.

But why would the Emperor want to arrest/capture the Jedi? They were too big of a threat to him. He was way more of the "scorched earth" policy, plus, he could use them as a scapegoat, blaming them for a lot of the things he did. It makes more sense to try and wipe them out entirely.

Besides, he's wrinkly Space Hitler, he's not supposed to do things in a good way. He's a Mustache Twirling Bad Guy, of the first order (haha! jokes!). He's the Cackling With Laugther kind of BBEG, he doesn't do things by half measures.

As to why he'd spare the younglings (which is who I think would put up the least...if any...fight), well, he does have a use for Force-sensitive individuals. The older, more trained and therefore dangerous ones? Sure, they will probably need to be killed. Murdering children was just too cheap an example of falling as well as a waste of talent that could be moulded to the dark side.

Anakin's fall was too fast and too extreme, IMO. Put plainly, I found it silly, but I found most of Anakin's portrayal to be wanting (far too much of the PT was just terrible storytelling, but that's an entirely other topic).

Oh I agree. The question of "How well did George portray his fall from grace" is another issue all together. I'm simply referring to the broad strokes of what he intended to convey in the PT. We both agree at least to some degree that his execution (haha! more jokes!) of Anakin's fall wasn't well crafted, from a purely technical storytelling perspective. No argument there.

Given your reasoning, why did the Emperor fear Force-using toddlers more than Luke? Luke was arguably powerful and a potential weak spot for his father.

At what point are you referring to? Are you referring to Luke as an infant or as the fully grown adult in the OT? If it's the PT, then I think Palpatine didn't know the children survived? I don't remember, but given my memory of Revenge, I don't think there was any way for him to know the children survived Padme's death.

If you mean the OT, he did think that Luke was a threat. Remember in Empire, the first words we hear the Emperor say "There is a great disturbance in the Force. Young Skywalker, he could destroy us" He was only persuaded by Vader to try and convert him to the Dark Side. He was all ready to send Vader out to hack his head off, but Vader said "If, he could be turned?" And Palp's responded with a slightly surpised. "Yes....yes! Can it be done?" He clearly hadn't thought along those lines. But once he had the idea, he saw Luke more as an asset instead of a liability. A fresh new minion to replace Vader, who was getting old and squeaky, and past his 200k mile warranty.

Luke was arguably powerful and a potential weak spot for his father. Still, Palpatine wanted to tempt Luke and gain his power, not outright destroy him. Luke was a far bigger threat than wee Padawans, but the Emperor wanted a chance to corrupt Luke. His arrogance was his undoing. Calling on Vader to kill children smacked of a fall to evil by gratuitous shock value to me. It took him from Sauron to Snidely Whiplash.

Like I said above, he at first wanted to get rid of Luke, but was convinced by Vader to change tactics. And yes, his arrogance, and his overconfidence, was the Emperor's weakness. He was confident that he was invincible. He was confident that Vader was completely under his control. He was confident in his ability to either turn Luke, or destroy him. He didn't conceive that Vader might turn against him, due to the love of a father for his son. And there is a bit of Snidely Whiplash to him. He is a ridiculously Scenery Chewing Villain. While he does do the "subtle and menacing" very well, in several examples in the films. He's also the "Cackling Madman" who throws the Senate at Yoda, while jumping around waving a lightsaber, laughing the whole time. He's Unrepentedely Evil, and knows it. And not only knows it, fully embraces it. He is a bit comical in that regard yes, because that kind of villain isn't realistic. But it's Star Wars, it operates with broad archetypes. George took some of the most iconic tropes from classic storytelling, and gave them a scifi paint job.

Though I would say he's more menacing than Sauron, simply because Sauron didn't actually do anything. He was an eye on the top of a tower, looking around. As far as menace goes, he didn't really generate any for me personally.

As to why he'd spare the younglings (which is who I think would put up the least...if any...fight), well, he does have a use for Force-sensitive individuals. The older, more trained and therefore dangerous ones? Sure, they will probably need to be killed. Murdering children was just too cheap an example of falling as well as a waste of talent that could be moulded to the dark side.

Yes, he could use them, but you could also argue that they've been "tainted" by Jedi teachings, and thus no use to him. Granted I'm trying to theorize about the internal thought process of Space Wizard Hitler in a galaxy far far away, so take that with a grain of salt. But I'm not sure he really gave a **** about that. He probably knew that other force sensitives were out there, untainted by the Jedi teachings, and he could get them unspoiled, and mold them how he wanted from the start. Instead of having to spend over a decade, subtly nudging Anakin down the Dark Side. He could just indoctrinate them from being a toddler, since he is now in a position of power.

And I think I've officially derailed this Vergance discussion enough about why Emperor Palps is Evil and a ******, so I'm going to bow out at this point. We now return you to your regularly scheduled topic.

Edit: And upon seeing what words this site's profanity filter blocks, and which ones it doesn't, I can't help but laugh at the inconsistency of it