2 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

The dark side whispers that she hears are her own fears and weaknesses. Again, it's metaphor.

You can't use metaphor with Tramp, it goes right over his head.

1 minute ago, HappyDaze said:

The dark side whispers that she hears are her own fears and weaknesses. Again, it's metaphor.

No. It actually was whispering to her audibly . The whispers were not coming from inside her head. They were coming from the lake. Lake Nath was a Dark Side nexus.

Told you.

35 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

And yet we do get instances where the Force (and the Dark Side) actually whisper to a Jedi, guiding (or tempting) them, quite literally. A good example of this is in Tales of the Jedi. Yes, it is"old canon" but still, it's definitely relevant. When Nomi Sunrider is passing by Lake Nath on her way to Master Thon's hut on Ambria, she actually hears the Dark Side whispering to her, trying to convince her to turn back.

It's not "old canon" - it's NOT CANON.

Just now, StarkJunior said:

It's not "old canon" - it's NOT CANON.

It doesn't matter whether it is "old" canon or current canon. It is still evidence of the Force (in this case the Dark Side) speaking to a character. If you want to get more into current Canon, look at TFA, when the Force literally calls to Rey through Luke's lightsaber. That was no metaphor because even Maz Kanata heard it.

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

It doesn't matter whether it is "old" canon or current canon. It is still evidence of the Force (in this case the Dark Side) speaking to a character. If you want to get more into current Canon, look at TFA, when the Force literally calls to Rey through Luke's lightsaber. That was no metaphor because even Maz Kanata heard it.

Yes, it does.

Why in the hell would it be an issue for a Jedi to counter a rigged game? Not going along with someone else's cheating in a game of chance over the freedom of a child slave is morally problematic now? That's bonkers.

Just now, StarkJunior said:

Yes, it does.

No, it doesn't. Especially since this game is built upon both the old and new canon, and specifically references Nomi Sunrider in Nexus of Power .

Just now, Stan Fresh said:

Why in the hell would it be an issue for a Jedi to counter a rigged game? Not going along with someone else's cheating in a game of chance over the freedom of a child slave is morally problematic now? That's bonkers.

Exactly. It's not a problem. However, some people simply seem to want to smear the Jedi, for some reason to somehow "prove" something. Sounds more like they've fallen for too much Imperial propaganda to me.

Erik, is that you?

8 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Erik, is that you?

No. My name is not Erik, and I don't think I even know any Eriks.

30 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Erik, is that you?

Not Erik but a good heir. Hopefully he can find a game and play. Although if his dogmatic views carry over into actual play I don't know how successful it will be. Being a theorist is all good and fine but nothing beats practical experience.

1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:

And yet we do get instances where the Force (and the Dark Side) actually whisper to a Jedi, guiding (or tempting) them, quite literally. A good example of this is in Tales of the Jedi. Yes, it is"old canon" but still, it's definitely relevant. When Nomi Sunrider is passing by Lake Nath on her way to Master Thon's hut on Ambria, she actually hears the Dark Side whispering to her, trying to convince her to turn back.

Again all you're offering is speculative anecdotes.

Not saying you have to reply to what I post, but if you're quoting me, then it would be appropriate of you to address what I'm saying.

Also I would love to hear your thoughts on my point I was trying to get across regarding players taking responsibility for the dice they roll.

IF you're referring to someone rolling all Dark Side pips, what's to be responsible for? You are not required to use Dark Side pips to fuel your Force use. In fact, by default, you typically don't. Using them is purely optional, and is only there as a temptation to lure a character to the Dark Side. The responsible thing is to not use them.

4 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

IF you're referring to someone rolling all Dark Side pips, what's to be responsible for? You are not required to use Dark Side pips to fuel your Force use. In fact, by default, you typically don't. Using them is purely optional, and is only there as a temptation to lure a character to the Dark Side. The responsible thing is to not use them.

The responsible thing is to not be dogmatic about using them. Consider it carefully. Consider would your character do it. The irresponsible thing is to dogmatically refuse to use them no matter what the consequences. I would be pissed at you if you let my character die because you are too prissy to use the darkside pips required to save my character. And you can bet you would get more conflict from most GMs for knowing inaction.

1 minute ago, Daeglan said:

The responsible thing is to not be dogmatic about using them. Consider it carefully. Consider would your character do it. The irresponsible thing is to dogmatically refuse to use them no matter what the consequences. I would be pissed at you if you let my character die because you are too prissy to use the darkside pips required to save my character. And you can bet you would get more conflict from most GMs for knowing inaction.

I disagree. The Dark Side pips are giving in to fear, rage, and hate. Using only Light Side pips means your character is s erene, calm and at peace. IF a character's "natural state" is serenity, it is highly unlikely that he or she would so easily give in to those emotions. Therefore, it would be completely uncharacteristic for them to use DSPs to power their Force use. In fact, it would take some very extreme and deliberate effort on any villain to push such a character that far where they would even consider giving in to those emotions.

Secondly, Knowing inaction, by RAW, only deals with allowing evil to be committed. And, besides that, by even trying to use the Force to save someone, you are taking action, but without the LSPs to power it, you failed to do so. So, even by RAW, or RAI, that is not knowing inaction.

Uh huh and Even Yoda would not leave someone to die because he was such a priss he would not use dark pips. You are the poster child for ass hole paladin who is so dogmatic they are not fun to play with. Which makes me go gee I can't imagine why no one wants to play with you. This behavior is exactly why you can't find a game.

If you want to be so dogmatic play a droid. Real people do not behave this dogmatically.

26 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

IF you're referring to someone rolling all Dark Side pips, what's to be responsible for? You are not required to use Dark Side pips to fuel your Force use. In fact, by default, you typically don't. Using them is purely optional, and is only there as a temptation to lure a character to the Dark Side. The responsible thing is to not use them.

I'll link the post, because no that's not at all what I was talking about. I was certainly not looking for more pontification about dark side pips you have your opinion there, and it is well known to us all.

Again, your call if you want to answer. I just couldn't see how the hypothetical situation we were positing could have possibly constituted GM railroading.

1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Secondly, Knowing inaction, by RAW, only deals with allowing evil to be committed. And, besides that, by even trying to use the Force to save someone, you are taking action, but without the LSPs to power it, you failed to do so. So, even by RAW, or RAI, that is not knowing inaction.

You make two points here, and with the second you make the first a moot point.

The first point you make is, essentially, that not saving a life—when you can do so—is not "knowing inaction." I am inferring that this is because it's not specifically evil when someone dies...?

I dunno man. A character like that, with rationalizations like that, would be on the slippery slope to the dark side in my games.

Your second point is that dark side pips should constitute failure on a Force check. You seem to be calling this "RAI." I'm not sure why this falls under Rules As Intended. But failure on a Force check only happens if you're rolling a combined skill check; without this, there is no possibility for actual failure on a Force check. I'm failing to see what you mean by "intended" here.

3 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:

Why in the hell would it be an issue for a Jedi to counter a rigged game? Not going along with someone else's cheating in a game of chance over the freedom of a child slave is morally problematic now? That's bonkers.

The weighting of Watto's die only happens in the novelization of TPM, which makes it legend. So not such a great argument in Qui-Gon's defense and anyway, Qui-Gon could only have guessed that Watto's chance cube was weighted—his vindication in that sense would be purely coincidental, unless he somehow had knowledge of Watto's loaded cube in the first place.

My big issue, though, is that Qui-Gon lied to Anakin about it. He concealed the truth of his dealings with Watto (this is after lying to Watto about the pod belong to him). Again, he had reasons, and you can hardly fault him for much of what he did, but he was never up front with Anakin about it.

1 hour ago, awayputurwpn said:

You make two points here, and with the second you make the first a moot point.

The first point you make is, essentially, that not saving a life—when you can do so—is not "knowing inaction." I am inferring that this is because it's not specifically evil when someone dies...?

I dunno man. A character like that, with rationalizations like that, would be on the slippery slope to the dark side in my games.

Your second point is that dark side pips should constitute failure on a Force check. You seem to be calling this "RAI." I'm not sure why this falls under Rules As Intended. But failure on a Force check only happens if you're rolling a combined skill check; without this, there is no possibility for actual failure on a Force check. I'm failing to see what you mean by "intended" here.

Well having heard the devs talk about it Rules as intended is that darkside pips are not failure and that using a couple dark side pips in a session is Rules As Intended. Not what you claim. in fact what you claim is absolutely not rules as intended as the DEVs say other wise. You are still way stuck in the D20 mind set.

1 minute ago, Daeglan said:

Well having heard the devs talk about it Rules as intended is that darkside pips are not failure and that using a couple dark side pips in a session is Rules As Intended. Not what you claim. in fact what you claim is absolutely not rules as intended as the DEVs say other wise. You are still way stuck in the D20 mind set.

Think you quoted the wrong post

Also, link him to the podcast so he can ignore that too, I guess.

I already steered him to the podcast and he quite clearly has never listened... in the bad way.

Talking to Tramp is like smoking...each post takes 6 seconds off your life that you can never get back.

Addendum: I do admire his fighting spirit though!