2 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Not canon. But does explain why his views on this game are SOOOOO warped. Tramp you must unlearn everything you think you know about Star Wars gaming. D20 Star Wars is a completely different animal from FFG Star Wars. You are using D20 thinking for the dark side. Which is completely irrelevant in regards to FFG Star Wars. Your entire thought process for how conflict works in FFG Star Wars is completely wrong. You need to go reread it the rules in both the GM section and the Morallity chapter. You keep equating conflict to the darkside. That absolutely is not true. It would probably be more accurate to think of it as more emotional turmoil. You should also look at the charge of conflict inducing actions. Episode 61 of the order 66 podcast should be listened to. also listen to episode 18 where they actually discuss the darkside.. episode 36 would also be worth listening to.

Not true. I'm looking at the Dark Side as detailed in Star Wars Lore, not simply through any given game mechanics. My thought proecesses on how the Conflict and Morality system works is based purely on what the F&D rule book spells out.

1 minute ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Not true. I'm looking at the Dark Side as detailed in Star Wars Lore, not simply through any given game mechanics. My thought proecesses on how the Conflict and Morality system works is based purely on what the F&D rule book spells out.

Except you are not. You quite literally either misread or did not understand. Because everything you say about Morality is literally wrong. And the Lore you keep refering to is no longer canon. IE it no longer is valid for anything really. Much of the Lore on the force from old lore has been countermanded by recent canon sources as well.

13 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Except you are not. You quite literally either misread or did not understand. Because everything you say about Morality is literally wrong. And the Lore you keep refering to is no longer canon. IE it no longer is valid for anything really. Much of the Lore on the force from old lore has been countermanded by recent canon sources as well.

Not true Daeglan. I have given specific quotes from the book which specifically validate my understanding of the rules. And as far as the lore goes. That is also not true. Most of what we understand about Jedi philosophy and the Force is still canon and hasn't changed in one iota. Heck, even Nexus of Power references this lore.

Guys, the FFG books pull plenty of their material from Legends, so why knock the guy for pulling from other Legends sources?

I find plenty of faults in his arguments without going down the canon hole.

The FFG books aren't even canon, either. The movies aren't going to reference **** Teemo the Hutt. Come on.

And really, pretending someone said slavery is good so you can feign outrage when he clearly didn't just undermines anything else you might say. Let's stick to what people actually say instead of pretending shock by willfully misinterpreting posts.

2 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Not true Daeglan. I have given specific quotes from the book which specifically validate my understanding of the rules. And as far as the lore goes. That is also not true. Most of what we understand about Jedi philosophy and the Force is still canon and hasn't changed in one iota. Heck, even Nexus of Power references this lore.

Yeah except it is an extremely flawed understanding. You really should listen to What the devs actually say. They say things like a player should expect to get 2 or 3 conflict in a session from things like hard choices where there is not a perfect solution. That conflict is not the Dark side. I think you really should listen to those podcast episodes I recomended as you will get a far far better understanding of the dev design intent and goals. Because everything I have seen you post seems more like you are trying to cram the rules into a D20 mindset and that is going to go very very poorly.

I keep seeing people claim the Devs said this or that, but that's just commentary. it's not the rules. If they need to explain the rules for people to arrive at a particular play style, then they've failed in writing them the way they should be written. people following the actual rules aren't playing the game wrong, they're playing it as it's written.

This thread is pure gold. Love how you guys keep it going.This now reminds me of the old conversations on playing (or not playing) alignment and GMs that make paladin traps. Awesome stuff!

53 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

I keep seeing people claim the Devs said this or that, but that's just commentary. it's not the rules. If they need to explain the rules for people to arrive at a particular play style, then they've failed in writing them the way they should be written. people following the actual rules aren't playing the game wrong, they're playing it as it's written.

There are a lot of sections of the core rules that needed further explanation or clarification initially, that was done over time with the errata. & in things such as the Order 66 podcast. Just because it isn't written down in the book doesn't invalidate its usefulness when trying to understand the game rules, especially since this information is coming from the people who created it & continue to work on it. So I'm very curious, do you ignore the EotE core rulebook errata because it's not the written rules? What about any of the developer answered questions that has helped many of us to better understand the intricacies of the system?

I didn't say I don't consider it.

I said you can't accuse someone of playing the game wrong when they go by what's in the books.

Both approaches are equally valid.

I consider errata to be official. Dev answered questions less so, especially lately as answers have been less consistent. I also figure that the truly relevant ones that have passed review should be in the errata. If they haven't bothered to update the errata, then it doesn't matter to them and likely shouldn't matter to me.

1 hour ago, HappyDaze said:

I consider errata to be official. Dev answered questions less so, especially lately as answers have been less consistent. I also figure that the truly relevant ones that have passed review should be in the errata. If they haven't bothered to update the errata, then it doesn't matter to them and likely shouldn't matter to me.

That's pretty much my view, too.

I assume the devs fire off a quick answer in between doing their day job and private stuff. I'm not going to hold them up as the voice of god when I'm pretty sure they're doing this between making dinner and cleaning the house.

I care a lot about developer answers in that I like knowing the intent behind the rules.

In the end, it makes my game easier to rule (and house rule) when I know what was going in in the dev's heads.

23 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

I care a lot about developer answers in that I like knowing the intent behind the rules.

In the end, it makes my game easier to rule (and house rule) when I know what was going in in the dev's heads.

Knowing their intent also makes it easy to see whether the ruling is well thought out or a total asspull like the switching skills on using the Corellian bow.

That's something I think would be more useful than planet write-ups or whatever. Commentary directly in the book about why the rules were designed the way they are, and how sessions are assumed to run, how much conflict or strain or whatever the system assumes you're going to get, etc. Make the implicit explicit.

8 hours ago, mouthymerc said:

This thread is pure gold. Love how you guys keep it going.This now reminds me of the old conversations on playing (or not playing) alignment and GMs that make paladin traps. Awesome stuff!

It's almost like watching a riot in a day care center.

OK, I have my PotJSB with me and am going to quote some passages from it. The first one specifically deals with why Qui Gon couldn't free Shmi. From page 33:

Quote

Defend the Weak: Likewise, a Jedi should strive to defend the weak against those who seek to oppress them, from one person suffering at the hands of another to an entire race held in thrall. A Jedi should always remember, though, that not all might be as it seems. The customs of other cultures should always be respected, even if they offend the Jedi's moral or ethical code. In every case, though, the Jedi should carefully consider the ramifications of her actions.

Master Marspa once visited Nal Hutta with his student, Imina, on a diplomatic mission. While there, they observed numerous acts of brutality directed at thr slaves of the Hutts, though Master Marspa said nothing. Later, Marsp[a and his apprentice visited Ord mantell, where they witnessed a shopkeeper beating a servant. This time, without hesitation, Master Marspa stepped in and restrained the shopkeeper.

Afterward, Imina expressed confusion. "Master, you stopped that shopkeeper from beating his servant, but on Nal Hutta, we saw many, many acts far more heinous. Yet there, you did nothing. I do not understand."

Master Marspa sighed, "were it within my authority on Nal Hutta, I would have set every last slave free and personally return them to their loved ones far from Hutt space. But to interfere with the culture of the Hutts on their home world would have been to pass judgement on them on behalf of the Republic. The Republic Senate knows thar slavery goes on in Hutt space. When they decide to do something about that, I will support them wholeheartedly.

"On the other hand, slavery is not legal on Ord Mantell. For that shopkeeper to beat his employee was simply an unnecessary display of dominance. Were the Republic aware of his actions, they would have acted immediately. I am sad that there is a difference between the two, but it is not our place to correct the discrepancy."

This is the same reason why Qui Gon could not free Shmi. To do so would be to be passing judgement upon the culture of Tatooine, a world under the rule of the Hutts, not the Republic.

This second passage specifically details what the term "a Jedi is not a creature of morals" actually means. from page 50:

Quote

A Jedi Lawgiver campaign, involves much more than merely making pronouncements about who is responsible for a crime and to what degree. A Jedi is supposed to investigate matters for herself and be willing to challenge long-held assumptions to uncover the reality. In making the statement, "A Jedi is not a creature of morals,", the Jedi casts off preconceived notions to view matters in the harsh light of truth.

Thus, the point is that a Jedi must be willing to set aside his or her own personal biases and mores to look at things objectively to see the truth of any given situation.

4 minutes ago, mouthymerc said:

From the point of view of the Force, rather than your own personal PoV. That's the point. Look beyond your own view, and see things as they really are.

1 minute ago, Tramp Graphics said:

From the point of view of the Force, rather than your own personal PoV. That's the point. Look beyond your own view, and see things as they really are.

Maybe heed your own advice. Yours is not the one true path. And being so dogmatic makes you seem nothing more than a Zealot. Might be okay for other games like D20, but won't serve you well here. But it is entertaining.

The "will of the Force" is literally the reason there are multiple religions who worship it - if one was objectively "right" there would be no point to have anything but the Jedi. And deciphering the "will of the Force" is half the mystery of the universe.

Again, as Obi-Wan said "From a certain point of view." From one point of view on how the Force feels.

7 minutes ago, mouthymerc said:

Maybe heed your own advice. Yours is not the one true path. And being so dogmatic makes you seem nothing more than a Zealot. Might be okay for other games like D20, but won't serve you well here. But it is entertaining.

7 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

The "will of the Force" is literally the reason there are multiple religions who worship it - if one was objectively "right" there would be no point to have anything but the Jedi. And deciphering the "will of the Force" is half the mystery of the universe.

Again, as Obi-Wan said "From a certain point of view." From one point of view on how the Force feels.

You're both still missing the point. The entire Jedi philosophy, and their whole training regiment is intended specifically to get them to look beyond themselves and follow the Will of the Force, and not their own wills. To see things as they really are, not as their own preconceptions tell them it "should be". That is ultimately the whole point of the most famous lines from the Jedi Code:

There is no emotion, there is peace.

There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.

There is no passion, there is serenity.

There is no chaos, there is harmony.

There is no Death, there is the Force.

To quote master Odan Ur:

Quote

"A Jedi master always said this to teach his students: 'Cross an unfamiliar river without first discerning its depths and shallows, and you will drown in its currents without reaching your goal.' Being a Jedi is no different. Identify thew pitfalls and learn the proper path, or you fail the Order and sacrifice yourself to no good purpose."

Now, does that mean a Jedi will always succeed in that task? No. Of course not. However, that is the ultimate goal.

Yes, and they could have been wrong . They could be wrong about what the Force wants.

Also, default characters in Force and Destiny are not Jedi - they don't have a code to follow, or a plethora of teachers. All they have, is their personal ethos.

Further, we also don't know how Luke was rebuilding the Order, or how the beliefs/philosophy have shifted under Luke.

15 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Yes, and they could have been wrong . They could be wrong about what the Force wants.

Also, default characters in Force and Destiny are not Jedi - they don't have a code to follow, or a plethora of teachers. All they have, is their personal ethos.

Further, we also don't know how Luke was rebuilding the Order, or how the beliefs/philosophy have shifted under Luke.

I agree. However, F&D characters can be actual Jedi. Remember, while the game's "Default" setting may be the rebellion era, that is not the only era that players can play in. You can play in any era and can play actual Jedi . My character, Korath, is an actual fully trained Jedi Master, not simply a self-trained Force user. He's a card-carrying Jedi from the time following the fall of the Emperor. He was trained by a Jedi Master (actually more than one over the course of his life), and has trained a number of students himself to be actual Jedi .

I am aware of that fact, but in the context of this discussion, we can't really talk about every single individual game or character - we have to discuss the 'default', which is budding, non-Jedi Force users. Korath is not the typical character for a Force and Destiny game.

Also, not going to address this? -

28 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Yes, and they could have been wrong . They could be wrong about what the Force wants.