Which is exactly the point. The Force is not supposed to be a first resort. If someone is using it at will and willy-nilly then he is at risk of falling to the dark side.

How does that make sense with regards to the movies? Yoda picks up his walking stick with the Force. Obi-Wan retrieves a space USB stick from the galaxy map projector that Yoda and the Jedi kids use to find Kamino, and he's standing right next to it. Jedi absolutely use the Force willy-nilly in the movies. The light side isn't puritanism.

The Jedi aren't infallible, though I think the idea with the morality rules is that sticking entirely to the light side goes even further than the Jedi of the republic. Remember, what we see with the Jedi in the prequels and clone wars is representative of an order filled with corruption & hubris. Also remember, Anakin used the force to move a pear and told Padme that Obi-Wan would be displeased with him if he caught him doing that. So it seems that on some level the Jedi frown upon using the force for things you can do normally, though as the order was full of hypocrisy and egotism, those that frowned on it did similar things.

Double post.

Plus, if that pear were to have accidentally smacked Padme in the eye, Anakin risked receiving even more conflict

If Jedi powers were real I'd totally fall to the Dark side as I'd be using them for everything

The Jedi aren't infallible, though I think the idea with the morality rules is that sticking entirely to the light side goes even further than the Jedi of the republic. Remember, what we see with the Jedi in the prequels and clone wars is representative of an order filled with corruption & hubris. Also remember, Anakin used the force to move a pear and told Padme that Obi-Wan would be displeased with him if he caught him doing that. So it seems that on some level the Jedi frown upon using the force for things you can do normally, though as the order was full of hypocrisy and egotism, those that frowned on it did similar things.

Obi-Wan and Yoda both have moments of hubris, sure. But corruption? I don't see it. They absolutely have their faults and weaknesses, but they're not dark side-y at all. And their asceticism is explicitly one of their failings, so holding it up as the correct way to be a good guy Force-user doesn't make sense. That's always been one of my issues with much of the EU material.

Also remember that gaining one or two Corruption points per session doesn't matter that much as, once you roll the d10 and subtract them, you may still turn out positive.

Also remember that gaining one or two Corruption points per session doesn't matter that much as, once you roll the d10 and subtract them, you may still turn out positive.

Indeed. Per the FFG rules, if you regularly do little things to cause conflict, but stay clear of the big ones, you'll be a paragon in no time.

Which is exactly the point. The Force is not supposed to be a first resort. If someone is using it at will and willy-nilly then he is at risk of falling to the dark side.

The rule doesn't say you're using the force to destroy things, so you'd be taking the same conflict if you use mechanics to open a sealed door, unless you want to spend the time to re-assemble the mechanism afterward.

One you don't destroy the door most time when you use mechanics, it can be repaired at worst. Unless your mechanic is opening doors with high explosive the obstacle will never be destroyed. Mind you explosions are generally not a part of the mechanics skill. But yes the rule applies when you cause destruction for no reason whether or not you used the force.

Which is exactly the point. The Force is not supposed to be a first resort. If someone is using it at will and willy-nilly then he is at risk of falling to the dark side.

The rule doesn't say you're using the force to destroy things, so you'd be taking the same conflict if you use mechanics to open a sealed door, unless you want to spend the time to re-assemble the mechanism afterward.

You've obviously never had to pick a lock.

Using Mechanics to unseal a blast door (or Computers to override the lock command) typically doesn't cause any property damage, especially not anywhere close to the property damage that would be caused by using Move to rip the doors apart or out of their moorings, as that has a habit of leaving said doors unusable afterwards.

Mind you explosions are generally not a part of the mechanics skill.

According to Dangerous Covenants, using explosives is generally a part of the Mechanics skill.

The Jedi aren't infallible, though I think the idea with the morality rules is that sticking entirely to the light side goes even further than the Jedi of the republic. Remember, what we see with the Jedi in the prequels and clone wars is representative of an order filled with corruption & hubris. Also remember, Anakin used the force to move a pear and told Padme that Obi-Wan would be displeased with him if he caught him doing that. So it seems that on some level the Jedi frown upon using the force for things you can do normally, though as the order was full of hypocrisy and egotism, those that frowned on it did similar things.

Obi-Wan and Yoda both have moments of hubris, sure. But corruption? I don't see it. They absolutely have their faults and weaknesses, but they're not dark side-y at all. And their asceticism is explicitly one of their failings, so holding it up as the correct way to be a good guy Force-user doesn't make sense. That's always been one of my issues with much of the EU material.

Corruption among the Jedi examples: Knowing full well that Anakin Skywalker & Mace Windu are extremely emotional people and continuing to allow things to go on as they are, even with Mace being on the Jedi High Council. Mace trying to assassinate Palpatine (the correct choice in that scene according to the Jedi and Republic law would have been to arrest him for trial, as Anakin brought out). We also have Pong Krell, a master who turned pretty corrupt & presumably wasn't the only one that did so. Bariss Offee is a Padawan, who saw that the Jedi were on a bad path and weren't doing things the way they preach about doing things. Unfortunately for both those two, they did the wrong things to try and bring out that corruption. Allowing Anakin to form a decades-long friendship with Palpatine, which is an attachment, which is forbidden by the Jedi. The entire Jedi High Council asking Quinlan Vos & Asajj Ventress with the assassination of Count Dooku in an attempt to end the Clone Wars.

It was a war, they did messed up things, as is what happens in war. However, they basically ignored their own principles & regulations constantly. They allowed the Senate to dictate their actions which often conflicted with their code & their beliefs.

Later on, Obi-Wan lied to Luke, presumably so that Luke would hear what Obi-Wan needed him to. Unfortunately, Obi-Wan didn't think through that course of action (hey kid, this supremely bad dude killed your father, now here's a death sword and I'm gonna teach you to learn space magic but I don't want you to seek revenge, mkay?) Luke was extremely shocked later on when he learned the truth of his parentage, constantly asking why Ben lied to him.

Then there was the whole "you're our only hope" crap that Yoda & Obi-Wan said, which might just be another lie depending on if there are any other force users out there in the galaxy around that time. It's likely what Luke needed to hear to get motivated to actually confront Vader. Speaking of that, they constantly said you must confront Vader and Luke goes "I can't kill my father" and they never correct him on that, (all they say is "then Vader & the Emperor have already won") which could mean that is their intent. Plotting an assassination.

Add to this that Tarkin establishes in the canon that Palpatine had a Sith Shrine underneath the Jedi Temple, which was constantly poisoning the minds of the Jedi while increasing his strength, making it impossible for them to see in the future & it could very well be something that turned people like Pong Krell & Bariss Offee over to the dark side. I'd say a lot of their actions weren't light side-y and some were very much definitely dark side-y.

In summary, the examples we have of the Jedi are of an old order that became complacent, allowed politics to interfere with their beliefs, were being poisoned without even knowing it but chose to take some actions that are extremely questionable at best, evil at the worst. Not all the actions taken were representative of the entire order but some of the worst ones were taken by the High Council itself. Even Obi-Wan & Yoda in the OT isn't a perfect example of what Jedi should be, as they are both from that old complacent order and are still trying to teach things in almost the exact same way.

*EDIT* Got another one. Willfully allowing Shmi Skywalker to stay a slave, when slavery is one of the worst things. Qui-Gon surely could have figured out some way of freeing Shmi.

I was talking specifically about Obi-Wan and Yoda, not other Jedi. And you can't condemn Jedi for breaking the law with palpatine - though the Force doesn't give a crap about laws - and also for not taking the law into their own hands with Shmi.

Well I gave evidence of both of them being corrupt. They signed off on the assassination of Dooku plot, Obi-Wan formed attachments of his own and didn't discourage the friendship that Anakin formed with Palpatine, he berated Anakin in public & lied when it suited his needs. The final arc of the Clone Wars shows that Yoda himself was full of fear, which is the first step on the path to the Dark Side.

Considering Mace was going to kill Palpatine at that point (he was begging for mercy, unarmed) and Mace still took the swing, yeah I'd say that's pretty definitively attempted murder. Jedi are supposed to respect all life if possible & at that point, he was not doing so. He came there to arrest Palpatine & then decided he was going to just end Palpatine right then and there, after ending the conflict.

With Shmi, Qui-Gon saw fit to finesse a situation into taking her child away, he got involved in the situation already & took the law into his own hands. It would not have taken much effort to figure out how to free her as well, however I believe that's a point where the plot was a big failure due to Lucas needing a reason to separate Anakin from Shmi. If they were both free, Anakin might not have left her to join the Jedi.

EU stuff doesn't matter, it's all rendered invalid by this point.

I don't see your points as corruption or evidence of the dark side. Having friends isn't corruption, and neither is having attachments. That's Jedi doctrine that was proven wrong by Luke. Or berating someone in public. Really, that's your standard for someone being corrupt? Come on.

And a targeted strike against an enemy leader during wartime isn't immoral. It saves lives of civilians and soldiers. Hell, killing Palpatine wouldn't have been immoral either. He's responsible for the deaths of millions, and a traitor to his nation, and has illegal control of the courts and the Senate. Summary execution is the correct path there.

There is in fact Order 65 which is either Kill the chancellor or remove him from power whichever is easier, it's safe to say Palpatine had most of the senators on his side so no one would enact it, but it was law. So the Jedi did go above the law in the assassination attempt.

Maybe, but what's the law to the Force? I don't think the Force cares even a little about statutes and procedures and laws.

"Also, if you read the base use of the Bind power it say the use may spend FPs to immobilize the target. Therefore, the user is not required to immobilize the target."

Actually, no. Because the term may is before the entire clause of the base power, it means you may spend a force point to activate the power as described. You also may choose not to use force points to activate the power, in which case, you do not activate the power at all. You can not pick and choose how the power works, the only choice there is to activate it or not. The reason it is written with the word may is so that the user is not forced into using the power with dark side points if they are a light side user, or vice versa.

I disagree. While, obviously, you need to spend the FPs (at least LSP) for the base power to get to the upgrades, that does not mean you necessarily have to immobilize the "target" of the power if that isn't your intent . This is the same as with Influence . If the purpose of using that power is to activate either the "social checks" upgrade or the "emotion" upgrade, you're not using it to cause strain on the target. Thus the same logically holds true for the Bind movement upgrade. You're activating the power to push or pull the target, not necessarily immobilize him. Thus, you do not have to immobilize the target to use Bind to push him or pull him one range band.

EU stuff doesn't matter, it's all rendered invalid by this point.

I don't see your points as corruption or evidence of the dark side. Having friends isn't corruption, and neither is having attachments. That's Jedi doctrine that was proven wrong by Luke. Or berating someone in public. Really, that's your standard for someone being corrupt? Come on.

And a targeted strike against an enemy leader during wartime isn't immoral. It saves lives of civilians and soldiers. Hell, killing Palpatine wouldn't have been immoral either. He's responsible for the deaths of millions, and a traitor to his nation, and has illegal control of the courts and the Senate. Summary execution is the correct path there.

Everything I mentioned is 100% canon since the Disney buyout. Tarkin was written after the Disney buyout. Clone Wars is and always has been declared canon.

Having friends isn't corruption but allowing bad people to influence you can corrupt you. Anakin was cautioned about his connection to Palpatine, something he ignored because of his perceived friendship. Attachments 100% corrupted Anakin. His fear of losing Padme & his anger of being powerless to stop his mother's death is what drove him to seek power and fall to the dark side.

Berating someone in public was specifically calling out Obi-Wan as a terrible teacher and not such a smart "Master Jedi". Berating others is a quick way to make others spite you. Lying to suit his needs & forming his own attachments that proved near fatal to him in the Clone Wars are the things I pointed out to show he isn't such a great Jedi and combined with the stuff I mentioned about Yoda, it is evidence they are not some infallible, completely morally upright order of monks that can do no wrong.

As far as the assassination attempt on Palpatine, it is not a morally right decision to make. War is not morally right. The Original Trilogy of Star Wars films were created around wartime and were heavily influenced by the creator's thoughts regarding war. Heck, just think of some of the lines from the series "Wars make not one great" for instance. Also, Yoda in Star Wars Rebels specifically talks about how the decision to go to war was a terrible mistake for the Jedi.

The remaining jedi tried to pull that assassination plot off again with Luke and he was the one that decided to appeal to his father's goodness instead. Then he went off on his own to train a new generation of Jedi away from the Republic (to specifically distance the order from politics & outside influences). Now he's off on some island planet (Ireland) all alone. I don't think he really has much in the way of attachments, so it seems he's following the Jedi code as in the prequels.

"Also, if you read the base use of the Bind power it say the use may spend FPs to immobilize the target. Therefore, the user is not required to immobilize the target."

Actually, no. Because the term may is before the entire clause of the base power, it means you may spend a force point to activate the power as described. You also may choose not to use force points to activate the power, in which case, you do not activate the power at all. You can not pick and choose how the power works, the only choice there is to activate it or not. The reason it is written with the word may is so that the user is not forced into using the power with dark side points if they are a light side user, or vice versa.

I disagree. While, obviously, you need to spend the FPs (at least LSP) for the base power to get to the upgrades, that does not mean you necessarily have to immobilize the "target" of the power if that isn't your intent . This is the same as with Influence . If the purpose of using that power is to activate either the "social checks" upgrade or the "emotion" upgrade, you're not using it to cause strain on the target. Thus the same logically holds true for the Bind movement upgrade. You're activating the power to push or pull the target, not necessarily immobilize him. Thus, you do not have to immobilize the target to use Bind to push him or pull him one range band.

Wrong again. The Influence base power specifically has 2 different ways to spend the Force Points you generate. It's Spend Force Points to activate this way of using the power or spend Force Points to activate this other way. There is no such 2nd choice in Bind. It's either pay the cost to use the power as written or don't pay the cost and don't use the power at all. Intent has nothing to do with it.

EU stuff doesn't matter, it's all rendered invalid by this point.

I don't see your points as corruption or evidence of the dark side. Having friends isn't corruption, and neither is having attachments. That's Jedi doctrine that was proven wrong by Luke. Or berating someone in public. Really, that's your standard for someone being corrupt? Come on.

And a targeted strike against an enemy leader during wartime isn't immoral. It saves lives of civilians and soldiers. Hell, killing Palpatine wouldn't have been immoral either. He's responsible for the deaths of millions, and a traitor to his nation, and has illegal control of the courts and the Senate. Summary execution is the correct path there.

Everything I mentioned is 100% canon since the Disney buyout. Tarkin was written after the Disney buyout. Clone Wars is and always has been declared canon.

Having friends isn't corruption but allowing bad people to influence you can corrupt you. Anakin was cautioned about his connection to Palpatine, something he ignored because of his perceived friendship. Attachments 100% corrupted Anakin. His fear of losing Padme & his anger of being powerless to stop his mother's death is what drove him to seek power and fall to the dark side.

Berating someone in public was specifically calling out Obi-Wan as a terrible teacher and not such a smart "Master Jedi". Berating others is a quick way to make others spite you. Lying to suit his needs & forming his own attachments that proved near fatal to him in the Clone Wars are the things I pointed out to show he isn't such a great Jedi and combined with the stuff I mentioned about Yoda, it is evidence they are not some infallible, completely morally upright order of monks that can do no wrong.

As far as the assassination attempt on Palpatine, it is not a morally right decision to make. War is not morally right. The Original Trilogy of Star Wars films were created around wartime and were heavily influenced by the creator's thoughts regarding war. Heck, just think of some of the lines from the series "Wars make not one great" for instance. Also, Yoda in Star Wars Rebels specifically talks about how the decision to go to war was a terrible mistake for the Jedi.

The remaining jedi tried to pull that assassination plot off again with Luke and he was the one that decided to appeal to his father's goodness instead. Then he went off on his own to train a new generation of Jedi away from the Republic (to specifically distance the order from politics & outside influences). Now he's off on some island planet (Ireland) all alone. I don't think he really has much in the way of attachments, so it seems he's following the Jedi code as in the prequels.

"Also, if you read the base use of the Bind power it say the use may spend FPs to immobilize the target. Therefore, the user is not required to immobilize the target."

Actually, no. Because the term may is before the entire clause of the base power, it means you may spend a force point to activate the power as described. You also may choose not to use force points to activate the power, in which case, you do not activate the power at all. You can not pick and choose how the power works, the only choice there is to activate it or not. The reason it is written with the word may is so that the user is not forced into using the power with dark side points if they are a light side user, or vice versa.

I disagree. While, obviously, you need to spend the FPs (at least LSP) for the base power to get to the upgrades, that does not mean you necessarily have to immobilize the "target" of the power if that isn't your intent . This is the same as with Influence . If the purpose of using that power is to activate either the "social checks" upgrade or the "emotion" upgrade, you're not using it to cause strain on the target. Thus the same logically holds true for the Bind movement upgrade. You're activating the power to push or pull the target, not necessarily immobilize him. Thus, you do not have to immobilize the target to use Bind to push him or pull him one range band.

Wrong again. The Influence base power specifically has 2 different ways to spend the Force Points you generate. It's Spend Force Points to activate this way of using the power or spend Force Points to activate this other way. There is no such 2nd choice in Bind. It's either pay the cost to use the power as written or don't pay the cost and don't use the power at all. Intent has nothing to do with it.

Wrong. The base power of Influence simply inflicts Strain to the target. It is the two upgrades which give you a choice of changing the target's emotional state or social checks. If you're activating Influence specifically to use either of the two upgrades, you are not necessarily inflicting Strain on the target as well. The same can thus be applied to Bind and it's movement upgrade. If you're activating Bind to push or pull the target (particularly an ally) you're not necessarily going to want to immobilize him, and therefore would not be required to engage that part of the power, even though you have to pay the base FP cost.

Looks like there's 2 choices there to me.

Looks like there's 2 choices there to me.

Nope. The opening text and Special rule in the block gives an overall description of the power as a whole. The actual use of the Base power is that last sentence at the bottom:

"The character may spend FP to stress the mind of one living target he is engaged with, inflicting one strain."

The most basic and arguably crudest ability allows the user to inflic strain on a living target, stressing his mind until he passes out. However, upgrades allow the force user who specializes in Influence to perform much more subtle and impressive feats.

* The user spends FP to stress the mind of one living target he is engaged with, inflicting one strain. The user may activate this multiple times, increasing the strain inflicted by one each time.

The Special Rule specifically refers to the Emotional State upgrade. This is why it states," when guiding and shaping thoughts ..." The basic power only inflicts strain.

Anakin wasn't corrupted by having attachments. His problem was that he tried to cling too tightly to the few relationships he had, and made selfish decisions about preserving them, even when the cost was the mass murder of children. Simply having attachments wasn't the issue.

Note how you switched from Palpatine to Vader with regards to the killing. Are you proposing that the Jedi should have appealed to Palpatine's goodness? He had changed the laws to ensure he controlled the courts. How should the Jedi have acted in that situation? There is no way to remove him from power without lethal force. And since his removal is evidently a good thing, lethal force was warranted.

"Also, if you read the base use of the Bind power it say the use may spend FPs to immobilize the target. Therefore, the user is not required to immobilize the target."

Actually, no. Because the term may is before the entire clause of the base power, it means you may spend a force point to activate the power as described. You also may choose not to use force points to activate the power, in which case, you do not activate the power at all. You can not pick and choose how the power works, the only choice there is to activate it or not. The reason it is written with the word may is so that the user is not forced into using the power with dark side points if they are a light side user, or vice versa.

I disagree. While, obviously, you need to spend the FPs (at least LSP) for the base power to get to the upgrades, that does not mean you necessarily have to immobilize the "target" of the power if that isn't your intent . This is the same as with Influence . If the purpose of using that power is to activate either the "social checks" upgrade or the "emotion" upgrade, you're not using it to cause strain on the target. Thus the same logically holds true for the Bind movement upgrade. You're activating the power to push or pull the target, not necessarily immobilize him. Thus, you do not have to immobilize the target to use Bind to push him or pull him one range band.

The "move" Control upgrade looks to be special. As is the case with many Control upgrades, it provides a different way to use the power. It looks to me that you can use it to move your target further from, or closer to, you (whether or not you activate the Basic power). But the other Control upgrade, the one that makes your target suffere strain when he performs an action, that one requires a target currently affected by Bind...so he needs to be immobilized by the Basic power for that Control upgrade to work.

I actually play a character with a 4 force rating now 4 discipline 4 Willpower and move.

I do not regularly make other players feel helpless in the face of my power.

This. This right here. As I pointed out about 12 pages ago, it doesn't really matter how ridiculous a power appears in the book. What matters is how it plays at the table. And of course, I asked Aetrion if this was a problem he was actually experiencing, or if he was just anticipating these crazy shenanigans, with no real response. Also noted was that we have a whole mess of folks here, using Move against people as the power is clearly intended , with not a lot of balance issues, over the last several years. I have yet to see a single GM saying, "Guys, the Move power has gotten way out of hand in my game!"

Just remember, my 600 point engineer is about 75 points away from being utterly overshadowed by the three jedi of my group and turned into a useless sidekick.

EDIT - Actually we've played since he helpfully crunched the numbers, now I'm only 50 points away from obsolescence.