Looked it up, and now "Decimate" as "remove 10%" is now classified as "historical." Seriously. Well, guess that's what happens when no one pays attention to using words correctly.

3 minutes ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

Looked it up, and now "Decimate" as "remove 10%" is now classified as "historical." Seriously. Well, guess that's what happens when no one pays attention to using words correctly.

Wait, you mean languages evolve? Get outta' heeya!

10 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

Yes, that, and I am aware that I used literally in my line that you quoted, and I possibly used it incorrectly myself. (And I suspect it's why you posted this clip ) I try to avoid using that one incorrectly when I can, but I am human and prone to failure.

But yeah it's the same thing, and like I said, I don't really expect people to stop calling them that, because human language is a mess thing, and humans do what they want with it, and the rules and definitions be darned. Still bugs me though

Honestly? I didn’t even notice you use literally. I just like using any excuse I can to drag out that clip because I love it. 🤣

1 minute ago, Nytwyng said:

Honestly? I didn’t even notice you use literally. I just like using any excuse I can to drag out that clip because I love it. 🤣

People who misuse the word literally drive me figuratively insane.

3 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Honestly? I didn’t even notice you use literally. I just like using any excuse I can to drag out that clip because I love it. 🤣

Well, he used it correctly (emphasis mine):

Quote

when decimate literally means "to reduce by 10 percent"

Decimate literally means "to reduce by 10 percent" but now it has come to mean something more figurative. I say figurative because of the etymology of the word, not because of the original meaning of the word.

It comes from "Decimation" that is supposed to be a Roman custom. There isn't solid historical proofs that decimation was ever used in their Legion but only hints. But isn't the meaning and use of decimate out of topic ?

What I don't understand about getting upset by players wanting to play a grey Jedi to have their darkside cake and eat it, is it's very easy to stop. You just need to tell those players that if you use darkside pips and do things that earn conflict you will get conflict. And of course you must apply that strictly. And if your character is not from a time period when Jedi existed, then he / she can not be a Jedi, period !

For me and my wife who's GMing SW FFG alongside me, any Force user can use the darkside but if they do there's a price to pay with conflict. The intent could mitigate that price, for example using darkside pips to help others, but it would never totally negate it. It's up to players to manage their character's morality, we won't subvert the rule to help them not going darkside.

51 minutes ago, WolfRider said:

It comes from "Decimation" that is supposed to be a Roman custom. There isn't solid historical proofs that decimation was ever used in their Legion but only hints. But isn't the meaning and use of decimate out of topic ?

It's side related to the topic, in that it's about the difference in what a word actually means, and how people use it. Which was the entire point of my original post. That calling someone a Grey Jedi is just incorrect, because the way people want to be able to behave as a "grey" Jedi, which basically translates to "ignoring the Jedi code because I want to do dark stuff because it's cool", means you aren't a Jedi. Because being a Jedi, means you don't do the dark stuff at all if you can help it, and you should do everything you can to find another way to accomplish it.

Now that is separate from the idea of playing a grey force user. I have no problem with someone playing a character who is just a force user, and does whatever, because they aren't claiming to be part of a religious military order that had a very well defined set of behavior, that this person is summarily ignoring at every turn. It's like someone who completely ignores all the rules and tenants of christianity, but still tries to say they are a christian. Sorry but you really aren't.

Another thought about the decimate thing, is that maybe people thought it meant to reduce DOWN to 10% from 100%? Which would make a lot of sense, if they just reversed the percentages being described based on the word. Devastate, or Decimate (thinking it meant down to 10%) both seem like a logical, organic way for the word to change. Or, some idiot just thought the word sounded dramatic, without ever actually looking it up, and it just stuck, because language.

58 minutes ago, WolfRider said:

What I don't understand about getting upset by players wanting to play a grey Jedi to have their darkside cake and eat it, is it's very easy to stop. You just need to tell those players that if you use darkside pips and do things that earn conflict you will get conflict. And of course you must apply that strictly. And if your character is not from a time period when Jedi existed, then he / she can not be a Jedi, period !

Again, I don't care about someone playing a morally grey character who uses the force. That's fine, in reality that's the narrative hook for EVERY force character in Star Wars. The battle between Light and Dark. Will they give in to their emotions, and let them control their actions, or will they maintain control, and find a less violent and destructive solution? It's a classic element of storytelling, and it's perfectly at home in SW. But again, that doesn't make someone a Jedi. Remember, Yoda laughed at Luke in the beginning of Return, when he told him his training was done, and Luke said "Then I am a Jedi." That was enough to invigorate death-bed Yoda to start laughing his little froggy butt off. Because being a Jedi doesn't mean "I have force powers and a glowstick of death." There is a LOT more to it. And people who try and label themselves as grey jedi, while doing stuff directly in conflict with the Jedi philosophy and dogma, aren't Jedi.

I'm not upset about it as you put it, it's just an annoying bit of common behavior I see in the fan base, most often by people who want to be "edgy" and try to justify their actions as not being actually BAD actions by saying 'It's ok, I'm a Grey Jedi, so I'm not really doing anything wrong, because my philosophy...is greeeeeeey" *play emo music*. They generally want all the trappings of the dark side, the fashion sense, edgy attitude, moral freedom to Force Choke a Bi***, etc, but you know, not actually BE a bad guy. Or at least they don't want the label.

This is going beyond the actual humorous point of this thread, into my issues with the actual character concept of grey jedi, which shouldn't surprise me really. I should've known that SW fans couldn't just take a thread at face value as something funny, and instead would try and serious it up with constant debating and nitpicking. Even when expressly stating the thread is mostly in jest about silly word usage, but alas, that is the fanbase for you. Silly me for thinking otherwise. Ah well.

It is the difference between a Lexicon (what a word means) and a dictionary (how a word os used)

10 hours ago, Daeglan said:

It is the difference between a Lexicon (what a word means) and a dictionary (how a word os used)

I am aware yes, still annoys me.

45 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

I am aware yes, still annoys me.

Annoys me too. So many people think a dictionary tells you what a word means. It doesnt. It tells you how a word is used even if the usage is incorrect...

Language is a construct and is ever evolving. You might be happier finding another hill to die on. 😁

Most of the time, it just ends up being a murder hobo trying to justify bad role playing. Something something whataboutism, something something moral ambiguity.

On 1/3/2020 at 8:02 AM, Swordbreaker said:

Most of the time, it just ends up being a murder hobo trying to justify bad role playing. Something something whataboutism, something something moral ambiguity.

The plural of anecdote is not data.

Ya know, I never really thought of it that way. . . but yeah, "Grey Jedi" doesn't make sense as a term. You're either trying to live up to and uphold the Jedi Code, in which case you're just a Jedi, or you're not , in which case you're just a Force-User.

I could see it as a gradiation of meaning. . . like "Fallen Jedi" meaning someone who was a Jedi but now is not, and "Dark Jedi" meaning that they were a Jedi but went full-tilt Dark Side, while "Grey Jedi" means they just stopped adhering to the Jedi Code and listening to the Jedi Council (or whatever authority exists at the time).

But yeah. . . using "Grey Jedi" to mean "My Jedi has a red lightsaber with a curved blade three meters long and wears a black leather outfit that exposes half his chest with just this badass trenchcoat that looks smashing with his long, flowing white hair and his cold smirk that tells everyone 'you mess with me, you're gonna have a bad time' because he's a master lightsaber duelist and can throw Force Lightning at will but it ain't Dark Side lightning coz he GREY , you see". . . yeah, no. Just no.

It seems to me, this is more than just semantics. The dark side is a reskinned DEAL WITH THE DEVIL. There is no grey here. Summoning a demon - even just once - is a stain on your soul. You are flipping off God and all that is holy. These bargains are inherently evil, because Satan is made of pure evil. You can't worship Satan 'just a little bit.' It always turns out bad. Ever watch The Black Rider ? He accidentally kills his own girlfriend. Just like Darth Vadar.

wdg

On 1/1/2020 at 9:36 AM, KungFuFerret said:

I know I'm tilting at windmills here, as it's become such a commonly used term that my hopes are doomed to failure, but I will try anyway! But hey, as EVERY...SINGLE...STAR WARS thing tells us, Hope is everything! It will save the day with it's ability to.....hope at stuff! Because hope is just that powerful, and it has NOTHING at all to do with fanservice name dropping to New Hope in an effort to appease the fanbase!! So here's hoping it will work!

Seriously, don't call people who want to play with Dark side powers and actions but not be a bad guy Grey Jedi. They are not "grey" Jedi. This is someone wanting to gain the positive benefits of the term Jedi, in common usage and understanding, (someone who is powerful, but also a force for good in the universe), but also without having to actually adhere to their philosophies and doctrine of behavior. The Jedi Code is very clear on what someone has to do to be a Jedi, and doing things that contradict that, mean you are NOT a Jedi. Also, someone who is basically a Sith, but tries to not say they are a murderhobo, because of some token mention of the Jedi codes, and occasionally not killing and enslaving the people around them, equally doesn't make them a "Grey Jedi" from the other direction. They are simply a less homicidal psychopath, than the other homicidal psychopaths they are around.

It's like trying to say you are a carnivorous vegan. Or a murderous pacifist. They are terms that are by definition, contrary and mutually exclusive.

That is all, proceed to ignore me and continue calling them that anyway! Because I know you all will! *tilts at a windmill one last time*

They're munchkins. Used to be kids who played KOTOR and "I am a goodie Jedi but I want to use froce lightening but its goodie ligthening so i am not dark side".

Given they were weened on the prequels, we need to remind them of the Qui-Gon TV spot, in which being a Jedi was a "hard life".

Actually you can be a murderous pacifist. Pacifist simply means you don't believe in violence and you don't need to actually use violence to kill someone. Look up Angel of Death sometime.

7 hours ago, welldressedgent said:

It seems to me, this is more than just semantics. The dark side is a reskinned DEAL WITH THE DEVIL. There is no grey here. Summoning a demon - even just once - is a stain on your soul. You are flipping off God and all that is holy. These bargains are inherently evil, because Satan is made of pure evil. You can't worship Satan 'just a little bit.' It always turns out bad. Ever watch The Black Rider ? He accidentally kills his own girlfriend. Just like Darth Vadar.

wdg

Both Jedi Knight Luke and the innocent Child use Force Choke on screen. There is plenty of grey in Star Wars.

5 hours ago, Decorus said:

Actually you can be a murderous pacifist. Pacifist simply means you don't believe in violence and you don't need to actually use violence to kill someone. Look up Angel of Death sometime.

I'm pretty sure that killing someone always counts as violence, even if you never roll for initiative or make an attack roll.

33 minutes ago, micheldebruyn said:

I'm pretty sure that killing someone always counts as violence, even if you never roll for initiative or make an attack roll.

Violence is "the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy". There are many ways to kill a person without using violence, poisoning for example (such as in the case of the doctors and nurses dubbed Angel of Death mentioned before)

3 hours ago, DarkHorse said:

Violence is "the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy". There are many ways to kill a person without using violence, poisoning for example (such as in the case of the doctors and nurses dubbed Angel of Death mentioned before)

That's a very limited definition.

https://www.oed.com/oed2/00277885

violence, n.

1. a. The exercise of physical force so as to inflict injury on, or cause damage to, persons or property; action or conduct characterized by this; treatment or usage tending to cause bodily injury or forcibly interfering with personal freedom.

b. In the phr. to do violence to , unto (or with indirect object): To inflict harm or injury upon; to outrage or violate. †Also to make violence .

c. In weakened sense: Improper treatment or use of a word; wresting or perversion of meaning or application; unauthorized alteration of wording.

d. Undue constraint applied to some natural process, habit, etc., so as to prevent its free development or exercise. Now used in political contexts with varying degrees of appropriateness.

2. a. With a and pl. An instance or case of violent, injurious, or severe treatment; a violent act or proceeding.

3. Force or strength of physical action or natural agents; forcible, powerful, or violent action or motion (in early use freq. connoting destructive force or capacity).

b. Intensity or excess of contrast.

5. Vehemence of personal feeling or action; great, excessive, or extreme ardour or fervour; also, violent or passionate conduct or language; passion, fury.

† 6. Violation of some condition. Obs. —1

When Internet debates descend into dictionary based definitional wrangling they are rapidly water-skiing in a leather jacket towards a shark....

I believe if you were to as a pacifist, I'm pretty sure they'd classify poisoning as a no-no.

15 hours ago, DarkHorse said:

Both Jedi Knight Luke and the innocent Child use Force Choke on screen.

The Gamorreans? I've heard it debated they were pushed/mind-tricked. And maybe babies aren't responsible for their actions? There's non-force-using grey characters, obviously. And there's Jedi on the path toward evil. But I can't see The Force as grey. Not when the Jedi themselves are so emphatic on this point. Maybe they're unreliable?

wdg

19 hours ago, DarkHorse said:

Both Jedi Knight Luke and the innocent Child use Force Choke on screen. There is plenty of grey in Star Wars.

Baby Yoda is too young to have much of a morality, and the entire point of Luke Skywalker is that he's always a hair's breadt away from going full dark side, and then, at the last moment, doesn't.