4 minutes ago, kmanweiss said:

The OP wanted reason as to why people dislike Jedi. I gave opinions from a group of players. I wasn't trying to start an argument, just state opinions.

But since we are going down this path...

The most interesting jedi are all aberrations. Hence the reason they are interesting. However this flies in the face of the class itself. To be an interesting Jedi you need to defy what the Jedi stand for. It's not a great starting point for an RPG character. To be a good JEDI, you need to be lawful good. To be an interesting JEDI, you need to be chaotic good. This works in the structure of Ep 4-6. But it doesn't work well in the structure of Ep 1-3. It makes for good movies, but bad RPGs. I mean, if you ignore every rule that applies to Jedi in Ep1-3, then you can do some fun stuff and make an interesting character, but every adventure is broken into several comments of "well that doesn't seem very jedi-like...oh yeah, we aren't following the majority of established lore"

Qui Gon never really gambles at all. He cheats with the dice roll. If Anakin fails to win the race, then he lacks the potential that he is looking for and he's not burdened with a worthless child. He knows he'll find another way off the planet if he needs to.

You're right in that Han wasn't special...and that is what makes him cool. He had no magic, no great skill or ability that set him apart. He was a thug, that made heroic choices. He didn't have the magic powers or special weapons, he had his grit and determination.

As for Jedi not fitting the scenario, that is a problem with Jedi in an RPG. They only fit in certain eras. It doesn't really make sense to play jedi in any time period after Ep3...that's rather restrictive. Especially for a rather large element of the IP.

The Jedi are all basically the same. Kidnapped, forced to join a cult, brainwashed into a certain, very restrictive train of thought. They don't have interesting origins, backgrounds, character development, and they don't do much until the clone wars. The other characters are just that, characters. They all had stories that explained who they were. They had varied lives, experiences, etc that make them individuals. Yes, Boba Fett goes out in a pretty lackluster way that undercuts who he is, but the fact remains that prior to that incident he is a formidable bounty hunter.

Now don't get me wrong, you are perfectly fine to prefer the jedi over the rest of the galaxy full of interesting characters, but "I like Jedi because I ignore all the rules that make Jedi Jedi" isn't really a defense of the Jedi. It's just personal preference. 😜 Mysticism and moral struggles are a dime a dozen in scifi. ****, it's the basis of most scifi. Star Wars just does it in the most black and white, easy to see and understand form. And they don't even restrict it to the Jedi. The non-Jedi are also dealing with a lot of moral struggle.

Honestly, in my opinion, the force, and even the Jedi can be great characters for RPGs. But it's not hard to understand why some people dislike them due to a variety of reasons. I personally find them weighed down by too much baggage from the Star Wars universe to be really great characters however. Their defining characteristics tend to be what they are, not who they are. They are the D&D 3.5 prestige classes of the Star Wars RPG world.

Look, Stormtroopers are pretty cool. Neat armor, neat gear, intimidating, but to be a good RPG character, they need to stop being a stormtrooper. Playing an RPG where you are a stormtrooper doing stormtroopery things day in and day out wouldn't make for a very interesting game. Playing as a group of stormtroopers that decided to defect and have to struggle with the moral implications of fighting against their own friends and family in a galactic war while also trying to balance the moral implications of the stability offered by the Imperial doctrine and the freedom offered by the Republic would make for a great RPG....but then you aren't really playing as stormtroopers are you. It's the same sort of fundamental flaw of the Jedi characters. To be an interesting Jedi RPG character you have to basically buck the rules of the Jedi, and of the character class. You have to not be a Jedi to be an interesting Jedi.

The topic is 'Why do people hate the Jedi', not 'We need to convert everyone to be Jedi fan-boys'. Just trying to help you understand those that have a different opinion than you do.

That's where you're wrong. A good Jedi does not need to be "Lawful" Good. They simply need to be good . Yoda was not necessarily "lawful". He was a trickster, a prankster, He doesn't have a rod shoved up his rectum, spouting dogma all day. Did they have rules? Yes, but that's not the same thing as being a "Lawful good" Paladin. None of the Jedi were "lawful good". They were simply good .

The main thing I feel people get wrong is what people think of hearing the word Jedi. They think of what we saw in the shows or movies but in the FFG rpg even a “knight level play” Jedi is a piss poor knock-off. So they think these Jedi characters are overpowered based on what they seen but not on how they are in the game. They think the player must be a power gamer not someone who wants to tell a story.

On 2/19/2019 at 6:34 AM, HappyDaze said:

Or, if you go with current canon, the armor-wearing thugs (like Jango Fett and Boba Fett) are no more Mandalorians than the lightsaber-wielding thugs are Jedi.

A corrupt politico said Jango was a bounty hunter, while trying to deflect potential criticism of his people. That doesn’t mean that Jango wasn’t a Mandolorian, just that the Prime Minister of Mandolor wasn’t willing to acknowledge him as such.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

As for Jedi not fitting the scenario, that is a problem with Jedi in an RPG. They only fit in certain eras. It doesn't really make sense to play jedi in any time period after Ep3...that's rather restrictive. Especially for a rather large element of the IP.

Well then the Rebels are flawed because they don't make since to be in any era other than the Rebellion Era, if you're going to use that logic. Which means you can't play a Rebel pre-Ep3, that's rather restrictive. Especially for a rather large element of the IP. Much larger than the Jedi actually, as the Jedi were only a few thousand at most, but the Rebellion was millions. But hey, they don't fit anywhere but Rebellion Era, so that's a problem on them, not the problem of someone erroneously trying to shoehorn them into a setting they don't fit in.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

I wasn't trying to start an argument

This isn't an argument, this is a discussion. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm arguing with you, unless you think any contrary opinions stated are all arguments.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

The most interesting jedi are all aberrations.

No, they really aren't. I mean, unless you consider people having opinions and different thoughts on how to proceed "aberrations". Apparently you think all Jedi are forced to be in lockstep and 100% agree all the time? I don't know why you would think that, as that's not established anywhere at all in the franchise. They have a belief system they try and adhere to, but they don't always interpret it the same way. Pretty much like any religion that exists. Just go ask a Catholic, Protestant, Methodist, and 7th Day Adventist the same questions about the fundamentals of their belief, and what they are "supposed to do" to stay right with their sky daddy, and I promise you , you will not get the same answer. You will in fact get many contradictory answers from them. That's not everyone following the same thing, and just a handful being "abberations".

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

To be an interesting Jedi you need to defy what the Jedi stand for. It's not a great starting point for an RPG character. To be a good JEDI, you need to be lawful good. To be an interesting JEDI, you need to be chaotic good. This works in the structure of Ep 4-6. But it doesn't work well in the structure of Ep 1-3. It makes for good movies, but bad RPGs. I mean, if you ignore every rule that applies to Jedi in Ep1-3, then you can do some fun stuff and make an interesting character, but every adventure is broken into several comments of "well that doesn't seem very jedi-like...oh yeah, we aren't following the majority of established lore"

....you don't have to be Lawful Good to be a Jedi, just because it's an RPG. That makes zero sense. "Well, all the canonical examples are all chaotic good, but for some reason we, the players have arbitrarily decided to fly in the face of precedent and example, and declare that Jedi are stuffy Paladin Buzz Kills....despite none of them actually acting that way. You know, because we have to stick to canon." The players are the ones going against established lore. The archetype isn't flawed just because everyone who plays one can't figure out how to play in any way other than a way that seems to annoy them.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

The Jedi are all basically the same. Kidnapped, forced to join a cult, brainwashed into a certain, very restrictive train of thought. They don't have interesting origins, backgrounds, character development, and they don't do much until the clone wars.

...they did plenty of stuff, it just wasn't covered in the movies because Lucas wasn't telling that story.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

Now don't get me wrong, you are perfectly fine to prefer the jedi over the rest of the galaxy full of interesting characters, but "I like Jedi because I ignore all the rules that make Jedi Jedi" isn't really a defense of the Jedi. It's just personal preference. 😜

I know it's not a defense of them, I even SAID I wasn't using it as a defense of them. It's even in the part you quoted. And I don't ignore the rules that make them Jedi, I just actually understand that they are not as rigid and unshakable as many people seem to think they are, because they auto-slap the "Paladin" label on them, and stop actually thinking about how they are represented in the material.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

Mysticism and moral struggles are a dime a dozen in scifi. ****, it's the basis of most scifi.

And "random criminals, smugglers and thugs" aren't? Actually most scifi doesn't bother with actual mysticism in their setups. They go the "so sciency it's magic" most of the time to explain away their weird stuff.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

Honestly, in my opinion, the force, and even the Jedi can be great characters for RPGs. But it's not hard to understand why some people dislike them due to a variety of reasons.

I agree, I even posted several of the most commonly posted reasons earlier in this thread. That doesn't mean that all reasons are actually good reasons, or stand up to scrutiny.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

Yes, Boba Fett goes out in a pretty lackluster way that undercuts who he is, but the fact remains that prior to that incident he is a formidable bounty hunter.

He has ONE scene, where he tails their ship, and lets the Empire actually catch them. The fanbase however, has blown him up into this epic man hunter of peerless repute, feared across the galaxy. Because he looked cool. In reality, he got lucky once, and couldn't even stop the guy he captured from stumbling into him and sending him to his death.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

To be an interesting Jedi RPG character you have to basically buck the rules of the Jedi, and of the character class. You have to not be a Jedi to be an interesting Jedi.

That's just simply not accurate.

2 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

The topic is 'Why do people hate the Jedi', not 'We need to convert everyone to be Jedi fan-boys'. Just trying to help you understand those that have a different opinion than you do.

I'm well aware of the topic, and that people have different opinions than me. I even stated as much previously. But again, if you state reasons for your opinion, and I find those reasons to be flawed or inaccurate, I'm going to say something. If you say "I just don't really find them very interesting, and I prefer the smugglers, space ships, and bounty hunter stuff." That's 100% fine, I have 0 issue with that reason. But when you say "Jedi bad because Paladins", when they clearly aren't, and even Paladins themselves aren't as bad as gamers have stated they are for decades. Or "Jedi bad because must not be Jedi to be fun", when there are plenty of ways to play a Jedi in a fun way, I'm going to comment.

I'm not trying to convert you, and I'm not a "fanboy" just because I enjoy them. I don't care if other people like other aspects of a thing I like. But at least dislike them for valid reasons, not ones based on flawed preconceptions of them, and a stereotype (the buzzkill Paladin) that is itself flawed as well.

I think a lot of Jedi hate come from something I brought up in the "Grey Jedi" thread. A lot of people like to play cool, dark, edgy characters, like Batman, and feel that having Big Blue Boyscout Superman tagging along hampers that character (nevermind that Batman and Superman are best friends in most continuites and have a deep mutual respect and admiration). Of course, part of this stems from a certain class of player who violently dislikes any restrictions on their behavior. Batman has just as inflexible a moral code as Superman, Batman just has fewer rules overall. But these kinds of players won't set any kind of inflexible moral code on their characters, whether it has so much as one single rule. Because then they aren't free to do whatever they want.

Another part it that, yes, the Jedi Order in the Prequels was very flawed. That was the point. The whole reason the OT exists is because Luke needed to be a new kind of Jedi to defeat this new breed of Sith, and did so not by dicing them up with his lightsaber but by reaching the good Anakin Skywalker at the core of Darth Vader, letting Anakin fulfill his destiny and finally destroy the Sith. This is all but spelled out in The Last Jedi, where as long as Luke is clinging to what remains of the old Jedi Order, he's mired by their failures. Once he embraces being his own kind of Jedi on his own terms, he succeeds again. Note what he's wearing on Atch-To versus how hew appears on Crait. The wardrobe tells a story itself. So a lot of people probably start to see Jedi as doomed failure heroes, unable to do anything right, and just don't think to (or aren't interested in) engaging in the narrative of learning from the failures of the past to build a better future.

Ironically, the next reason is rather the opposite. Jedi have long been considered invincible physical gods by Star Wars fans, unable to be challenged by anything short of another Jedi. The Prequels went out of their way to explode this myth, and even they weren't entirely successful. Especially considering the Bantam-era Legends books still exist, where the solution to every problem was for Luke to pull a brand new Force power out of his butt and pretty much literally handwave the problem away. Those familiar with these stories may be under the impression, whether the game rules support it or not, that any Jedi can solve any problem, from a squad of stormtroopers to a Death Star about to vaporize the planet, just by wiggling their fingers at it. So a Jedi makes every other character superfluous. Never mind that even the Prequels show several non-Jedi who can stand their ground with Jedi and even beat them. The main characters aren't awesome because they're Jedi, but because they're main characters.

The truth is, you don't need to be a Jedi to be special, and being a Jedi doesn't make you special. Remember all the dead Jedi on the floor of the Geonosis arena, mowed down by battle droids that Anakin an Obi-Wan eat for breakfast. And Padme lived.

As I said to the players before they started to create their character for the F&D campaign : "Your character are not Jedi, they're Force Sensitive people. They know nothing about Jedis. At best Jedis are a legend from the past that never existed for real. That means your character has not been educated in Jedi Temple on Corruscant and can not be a Jedi... Yet." So who don't like Jedis didn't feel compelled to play a Jedi and created the created the character they wanted to play. And quickly realised that being able to manipulate the Force in this universe doesn't make you a God who can resolve anything, but is rather being under a death sentence and better to not be noticed by Empire followers.

Seriously those saying that Jedi are too powerful in RPGs did you read the Force Powers and Force Talents ? Because before for Force Sensitive character to have godlike powers it needs an huge amount of XPs spent in buying Forces Powers with enough upgrades to reach mastery and buying many specialisation tress with enough talents to get +1FR, so it's possible to use the Force Powers.

How Jedi are portrayed in tabletop RPGs (and somewhat, video games) tends to reflect how the fans think of them.

Back in d6, when we only had the Original Trilogy, we knew Jedi could do some normally-impossible stuff, like Luke making the shot to destroy the Death Star, Vader Force-choking someone when he wasn't even in the same room, and Yoda lifting a submerged X-Wing. So d6 was fairly downplayed, with Force-Users being powerful but not obnoxiously so. . . and by the time they got obnoxious, the normal characters would be sporting 19d Blaster skills, so it evened out.

Then Legends happened, and Force Users could cast Light by vibrating air molecules, among other such ridiculousness. Star Wars Galaxies came out, making Jedi an "Alpha Class," simply more powerful than other professions, partly to balance the ridiculous difficulty in unlocking the Jedi profession (itself justified because the game was set between A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back, so there shouldn't have even been Jedi running around anyway).

Around now the Prequels happened, but it took awhile for it's "Jedi aren't physical gods" message to sink in. The d20 Star Wars RPGs at the time were all over the place, trying to remain balanced while allowing the insanity of Legends. Probably the last gasp of this view of Jedi was The Force Unleashed, which fully admitted it was going beyond what the Force was capable of in the films for the sake of being deliriously awesome.

Finally, we have FFG, which is embracing the idea that Force Users aren't better or more inherently powerful or worthy than anyone else. The Force can do impossible things, but not for free, and writing "Jedi" on your character sheet does not mean "I win."

7 minutes ago, ErikModi said:

How Jedi are portrayed in tabletop RPGs (and somewhat, video games) tends to reflect how the fans think of them.

Back in d6, when we only had the Original Trilogy, we knew Jedi could do some normally-impossible stuff, like Luke making the shot to destroy the Death Star, Vader Force-choking someone when he wasn't even in the same room, and Yoda lifting a submerged X-Wing. So d6 was fairly downplayed, with Force-Users being powerful but not obnoxiously so. . . and by the time they got obnoxious, the normal characters would be sporting 19d Blaster skills, so it evened out.

Around now the Prequels happened, but it took awhile for it's "Jedi aren't physical gods" message to sink in. The d20 Star Wars RPGs at the time were all over the place, trying to remain balanced while allowing the insanity of Legends. Probably the last gasp of this view of Jedi was The Force Unleashed, which fully admitted it was going beyond what the Force was capable of in the films for the sake of being deliriously awesome.

Some stuff here that I wish to comment about

the D6 had some really strong force stuff BUT if you even started being anything less then the perfect good guy your character became a NPC.

The D20 system seems to have suffered from “the Jedi are Just better “ at least from anyone I run into who played it and have made some to discount the F&D line at least in my area.

as for force unleashed I hate that some try to say it was canon or even legends level as it’s so over the top. (I like a lot of legends stuff for lore but any time I hear of stuff from those games or the MMO I just want to walk away

Well, yes Force in d6 could be powerful, but if you earned 6 Dark Side Points the GM got to take your character sheet away. But you still needed to learn the powers and develop the skills to use them well, and multiple actions (like deflecting a blaster bolt and then making it hit the person who fired it) were rather brutal. So on the whole, yes Force Users could be obnoxiously powerful, but usually by the time they got there, the other characters had hit "obnoxiously powerful" in their bailiwicks as well.

As for The Force Unleashed, the canon policy was always that the events of a game and it's light-side ending are canon, the game mechanics are not. So Kyle Katarn stole the Death Star plans then stopped the Dark Trooper project, but he didn't have a personal shield generator that let him take a blaster cannon shot to the face. Likewise, Starkiller being Vaders's secret apprentice could be canon, his ability to implode TIE Fighters with a wave of his hand less so. (The games are still pretty definitely "what-if" and the whole Legends universe ended not long after their release, so Starkiller could be canon. . . or not.)

1 hour ago, Oldmike1 said:

Some stuff here that I wish to comment about

the D6 had some really strong force stuff BUT if you even started being anything less then the perfect good guy your character became a NPC.

The D20 system seems to have suffered from “the Jedi are Just better “ at least from anyone I run into who played it and have made some to discount the F&D line at least in my area.

as for force unleashed I hate that some try to say it was canon or even legends level as it’s so over the top. (I like a lot of legends stuff for lore but any time I hear of stuff from those games or the MMO I just want to walk away

That is not entirely true, particularly regarding D6. Under D6, a character could only be taken by the game master if, and only if, the character fell to the Dark Side. The character could not be taken away simply for not being a “perfect good guy”.

On 3/28/2019 at 8:22 AM, ErikModi said:

How Jedi are portrayed in tabletop RPGs (and somewhat, video games) tends to reflect how the fans think of them.

Back in d6, when we only had the Original Trilogy, we knew Jedi could do some normally-impossible stuff, like Luke making the shot to destroy the Death Star, Vader Force-choking someone when he wasn't even in the same room, and Yoda lifting a submerged X-Wing. So d6 was fairly downplayed, with Force-Users being powerful but not obnoxiously so. . . and by the time they got obnoxious, the normal characters would be sporting 19d Blaster skills, so it evened out.

Then Legends happened, and Force Users could cast Light by vibrating air molecules, among other such ridiculousness. Star Wars Galaxies came out, making Jedi an "Alpha Class," simply more powerful than other professions, partly to balance the ridiculous difficulty in unlocking the Jedi profession (itself justified because the game was set between A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back, so there shouldn't have even been Jedi running around anyway).

Around now the Prequels happened, but it took awhile for it's "Jedi aren't physical gods" message to sink in. The d20 Star Wars RPGs at the time were all over the place, trying to remain balanced while allowing the insanity of Legends. Probably the last gasp of this view of Jedi was The Force Unleashed, which fully admitted it was going beyond what the Force was capable of in the films for the sake of being deliriously awesome.

Finally, we have FFG, which is embracing the idea that Force Users aren't better or more inherently powerful or worthy than anyone else. The Force can do impossible things, but not for free, and writing "Jedi" on your character sheet does not mean "I win."

I am grateful you wrote this. So good.

On 3/28/2019 at 11:55 AM, ErikModi said:

The Force Unleashed games are still pretty definitely "what-if" and the whole Legends universe ended not long after their release, so Starkiller could be canon. . . or not.

There was a Twitter comment by Pablo Hidalgo a while ago that cited those games were definitely no longer part of the canon, and that all events that occurred in both games being placed firmly in the Legends category.

Funnily enough, the AoR core rulebook does make mention of VSA's role in founding the Rebellion, but at the time those chapters were written the games were part of the overall canon due to Lucas having said, "this is how the Rebellion was formed" at that time.

I personally had always placed the games as a "what if?" deal for my own games, as while they were fun, I just didn't care for the Gary Stu/Forrest Gump nature of the protagonist, mostly as it dove headlong into the "Force as Overpowered Magic!" trope that I so loathed from the Expanded Universe. Again, fine for a video game, not so much for a coherent campaign where the Force isn't meant to be a superpowered sledgehammer that can solve every problem.

The biggest part about the FFG games, and really any game in general, is to create interesting characters. If you don't make an interesting character, it's going to negatively paint someone's view about your character. That's even regardless of whether your character is force sensitive or not. The main difference about FFG's system vs. others is that force-users in this system have to use those precious xp to spend on force powers as well as the feats and skills that any other character does, which spreads their capabilities out even further and make a player really have to think about where to invest their XP in more critically.

I think that FFG does a better job at portraying force-users in this setting because if made with being interesting in mind, the force powers should be something that may give a little bit of extra help, or may even force a character to lay low because of the fact that force powers aren't so common. The way a force-sensitive character starts in F&D even makes it so that they don't start with a lightsaber and likely would have to go on a quest to locate the materials they need to make one.

And, in a galaxy full of guns, bringing a sword to a gunfight is pretty difficult to deal with. Even the reflect talent has a limit to how much you can deflect attacks before you collapse from exhaustion if you're up against a large number of foes.

Your typical starting character is better off picking up a blaster of some kind and fighting using logic and strategy. The Sith and Jedi are both flawed and need to be stopped. Every major galaxy-spanning war has been caused because of the conflict between these two organizations. Other force-sensitive traditions are sages or mystics while the Jedi and Sith compete to see which one has a bigger lightsaber. Characters in F&D are encouraged to be good like the Jedi, yes, but that's because the Jedi were not soldiers, they were monks with martial arts training.

The best place to start is usually an Edge of the Empire or Age of Rebellion game first, then if anyone in your group still wants to be a force user, have them take the force-sensitive exile or force emergent universal specializations. That way the character has a background that gives a reason why they weren't hunted down for their force power or had perhaps been hiding it the whole time, or maybe hadn't even known... since the Jedi Acquisition Corps had parents of force-sensitive children either give up the children to their cult or made them promise to never let the child develop their force sensitivity.

A bit of research and personality goes a long way towards making a better character. Though some other people might just hate force users because of lightsabers, since they're able to pretty much give the finger to armor in many cases.

On 2/16/2019 at 3:10 PM, Sincereagape said:

I encounter it very often.

Players and friends who hate Jedi.

A friend back in VA mentions celebrating clone troopers because they shot Jedi in the back in Order 66.

A new perspective player for my new table top game. “Yea. I like playing man-T-arms Jedi killing super soldier.”

My old table from 2018, in the current game the two altruistic padwan force users are not revealing the location of the Warden holocron from Lure of the Lost to prevent the fallen Jedi Rav Naaran from locating it. The older players comprised of a sharpshooter, ace pilot, medic, and sabeotour are pissed at them. The sharpshooter player even before hand stated “I hate force users. I hate Jedi.”

I don’t get it. Why the hate for force users? Why the hate for Jedi?

is it the “Jon Cena” affect? Do they always win? Are they the focus of every story? Are they to powerful?

Personally, I play non force users ;except for a blaster Jedi idea) because I have always enjoyed playing ‘gimped characters’ and enjoy non force users overall in Star Wars.

Feel free to discuss. I’m curious as to why people and fans hate Jedi/force users.

Eh, it's a power balance and opposing force problem. Usually, Force Users can do things a mundane character can't do. Likewise, the enemies that could give a Force user a equal challenge might destroy the mundane characters.

To quote the iconic classic film {sarcasm intended} Spaceballs , ...."Good is dumb." Looking at it from the movies, the Jedi cannot see what is right before them, suspect something is wrong, enlist a fellow Jedi to spy on the Chancellor for them, let the galaxy fall apart right before them, and thousands of years of wisdom and experience doesn't seem to be worth anything. Yeah, yeah, yeah.... explain away how the Dark Side was "concealed" from them or their ability to use the force was weakened. Sure. They didn't just sit by and let the galaxy fall apart, they helped jump-start its demise! Rubes. Who wants to play THAT? Yes, sir, "Good is dumb."

Secrecy, concealment, deceit, lack of morals, lording it over people ("Jedi business!"), lying, arrogance, ....I thought those were all Darkside elements? Then, the chastity code? Really? What for? Yet, seems like story after story talks about Jedi romance. Then the "we're not generals" thing. Except, then, they are leading armies everywhere. Who decided that Jedi made great generals? Ugh..... Guys hate the duplicity. The hypocrisy. The weakness. I think that after IV, V, & VI, Jedi would have been cool to play. After all the other stuff? Ugh...

Make a Smuggler like Han solo? Yeah! Make a Gambler like Lando? Yeah! A Diplomat like Leia! Yeah! A Scout like Chewie? Yup!!! Make a Jedi like.......uh....... Nah......I want to play something I am proud to represent.

Jedi are like paladins, they can ruin the fun for the shady people in your group. They have their moral code which a lot of people don't like to have in there group since it can cause conflict between the characters and potentially between the players.

On 4/14/2019 at 2:34 PM, ZephyrTheDragon said:

The biggest part about the FFG games, and really any game in general, is to create interesting characters. If you don't make an interesting character, it's going to negatively paint someone's view about your character. That's even regardless of whether your character is force sensitive or not. The main difference about FFG's system vs. others is that force-users in this system have to use those precious xp to spend on force powers as well as the feats and skills that any other character does, which spreads their capabilities out even further and make a player really have to think about where to invest their XP in more critically.

I think that FFG does a better job at portraying force-users in this setting because if made with being interesting in mind, the force powers should be something that may give a little bit of extra help, or may even force a character to lay low because of the fact that force powers aren't so common. The way a force-sensitive character starts in F&D even makes it so that they don't start with a lightsaber and likely would have to go on a quest to locate the materials they need to make one.

I think that interesting character creation is hurt by how the movies went away from the Jedi Code. Tenants weren't explained and you were expected to know that they were good instead of seeing them be good. What exactly makes them "good"? I would think that is the moral code they uphold, but we barely see that. The RPG game spends a LOT of time telling us about the variety of Jedi and precious little about why you would want to play one. What sort of interesting things do they do?

4 hours ago, damnkid3 said:

Jedi are like paladins, they can ruin the fun for the shady people in your group. They have their moral code which a lot of people don't like to have in there group since it can cause conflict between the characters and potentially between the players.

Conflict like that is almost always because people aren't communicating and have their heads up their character's ***. I believe the group is as important as your character, so making an anti-group character of any kind is usually a mistake unless everyone is in on the idea.

Morality is basically a way to be reminded that a certain way of behaving leads to undesirable consequences.

People who play shady characters are often just looking to not have consequences. They will do things that endanger themselves and associates equally for really selfish reasons, and in my experience they tend to be the players who get crushed/angry when their deeds catch up with them. A moral character of any type would simply remind them of this, so they see it as a killjoy.

But most games with "Evil" characters are a farce anyway because truly anti-social people would eat themselves in power plays. What you really get more often than not is villains who are magically loyal and moral when it comes to the characters who have the player halo floating over their heads, but sociopaths to all NPCs.

On 3/27/2019 at 4:04 PM, kmanweiss said:

The reason? We pretty much hate the Jedi and the force. Part of this is Lucas, part of it is the movies, part of it is the restrictions put upon a player that doesn't make for good RPG play. A Jedi is like a Paladin.

Beyond that, playing a Jedi in the SW universe around the same time as Luke seems to fly in the face of common sense. The Jedi are basically dead and gone. If there was a squad of Jedi running around with the Rebels using force powers and lightsabering away at legions of storm troopers...well, don't you think that would have been notable. The rareness of Jedi in the original trilogy almost negates the existence of your character.

Ep 1-3 really killed it for us though. Ep4-6 left the Force as a mystical thing. The rules weren't established, the concept of the force was open ended and interesting. Ep 1-3 did some odd things to it. Nothing in 4-6 mandated that Jedi wear robes, 4-6 never called them midiclorians or had hand scanners to analyze your infection levels, 4-6 didn't include bad hair cuts, 4-6 didn't lay out child abduction or forced training at extremely young ages, 4-6 didn't outlaw love and relationships. 1-3 laid down a lot of rules that were ultimately pretty bad (in our opinion). This reduced the idea of Jedi from cool, super human warriors to coddled, whiny, catholic school boys.

Why would I want to pretend to be a cultist in a bathrobe with a rat tail hair cut when I could pretend to be a wicked cool smuggler with blaster pistols.

They tend to be the least interesting characters with the least interesting motivations.

More power to anyone that loves them and loves playing them in RPGs. But for our group, they are a bad fit, and trying to incorporate them leaves everyone with a bad taste in their mouth. Sadly, it has such a great effect that it even tends to make us shun the non-jedi elements of the force along with it.

BINGO!!! Nailed it, as far as I am concerned. I realize other have different opinions, but this is in-line with most all of my RPG experience and that of my friends. Having the movies, cartoons, novels, and comics all seemingly contradict each other does not help. People seem to endear themselves to the type of jedi (book or movie genre) that appeals to them.

On 2/16/2019 at 2:10 PM, Sincereagape said:

I encounter it very often.

Players and friends who hate Jedi.

A friend back in VA mentions celebrating clone troopers because they shot Jedi in the back in Order 66.

A new perspective player for my new table top game. “Yea. I like playing man-T-arms Jedi killing super soldier.”

My old table from 2018, in the current game the two altruistic padwan force users are not revealing the location of the Warden holocron from Lure of the Lost to prevent the fallen Jedi Rav Naaran from locating it. The older players comprised of a sharpshooter, ace pilot, medic, and sabeotour are pissed at them. The sharpshooter player even before hand stated “I hate force users. I hate Jedi.”

I don’t get it. Why the hate for force users? Why the hate for Jedi?

is it the “Jon Cena” affect? Do they always win? Are they the focus of every story? Are they to powerful?

Personally, I play non force users ;except for a blaster Jedi idea) because I have always enjoyed playing ‘gimped characters’ and enjoy non force users overall in Star Wars.

Feel free to discuss. I’m curious as to why people and fans hate Jedi/force users.

Your friend at the Va is a clone trooper in disguise getting treated. Ask him about order 66 how does he react?

Does he snape wanting to kill anyone that resembles a jedi?

lol jk Maybe its the force rebalancing things because we have all loved the Jedi since 1977 and its time for the hate have its hay day.

Me, personally, I've never encountered "Jedi hate" in any group I've actually played with.

1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Me, personally, I've never encountered "Jedi hate" in any group I've actually played with.

Neither have I. Some who don't find them interesting at all and won't play them but are fine if others do. Some occasional eye-rolling at Jedi doing Jedi things, sure, but that's part of the fun between friends at the table. Actual dislike or hate of Jedi characters even being at the table - no.

On 5/1/2019 at 12:21 PM, Tramp Graphics said:

Me, personally, I've never encountered "Jedi hate" in any group I've actually played with.

Same here. I find it's more something I encounter in discussions either on the internet or in person.

On ‎5‎/‎1‎/‎2019 at 4:42 PM, Jedi Ronin said:

Neither have I. Some who don't find them interesting at all and won't play them but are fine if others do. Some occasional eye-rolling at Jedi doing Jedi things, sure, but that's part of the fun between friends at the table. Actual dislike or hate of Jedi characters even being at the table - no.

When I have run into it, more often than not it's due to past experiences with garbage players who ruined the notion of "Jedi PCs" for those players that hate on the Jedi. That or were players of the old Star Wars Galaxies MMO before it became buried under a proliferation of lightsabers (as well as a patch that ruined a lot of the game for those older guard).

I've actually had one such person in a group I was in (this back during the WotC Saga Edition days) that cited he hated Jedi as player-characters due in large part to the shenanigans that a player in a different campaign (WEG d6) got up and the GM indulged, and was about half-ready to quit the table when he learned the GM was going to allow a Jedi PC (me). Through good role-playing and discussions both in and out of character, we were able to bring that one player around to the point that while he's leery of player-character Jedi, he doesn't hate them on general principle, and our characters ended up becoming pretty close friends (saving one another's life repeatedly has that effect on most folks).

I wonder if age has something to do with it?

I'd be curious of the pro-jedi vs the anti-jedi ages. There are a considerable amount of things that are hated or adored by star wars fans based on their age. People under the age of 45 like ewoks. People over 45 hate ewoks. People over the age of 35 hate the prequels, people under the age of 35 like the prequels. You can find some people that don't mind, or even like Jar Jar and gungans if they are under 25 years old. Clearly these are generalizations and don't apply to everyone.

Jedi from the OT was a nebulous concept. There were no rules, no formal concepts, no dress codes, no council, no official hair styles, no space pear etiquette, no rules about love, etc. Being a Jedi seemed awesome, awe inspiring, exotic, interesting, mysterious. The concept seemed like a chaotic good vs chaotic evil sort of thing.

The Jedi from the PT became something different. They were very cult like. Rules abound, dress codes and bad hair styles for everyone. Child abduction and strict rules about relationships. An ineffective, and easily manipulated, council that couldn't identify evil if it was sitting across the table from them. They couldn't be bothered to actually do anything useful (ending slavery, stopping drug trade, quelling civil unrest, investigating or questioning surprise armies, advocating for people that no longer felt like they were represented by the Republic), but had no problem becoming generals in an army and waging war against people that simply wanted fair government before being co-opted by corporations and the Sith. The concept seemed more like a lawful nuetral organization that claimed to be lawful good.

They idea of Jedi changed from mysterious, magical soldiers for good to cult like fanatics bogged down with ineffective internal bureaucracy. Sure, they both had cool laser swords and 'magic' powers, but that's about it for similarities.

In SWTOR, you could pretty much predict a player's pick of jedi vs non-jedi class based on age. Things were more nebulous on the dark side however.