8 minutes ago, micheldebruyn said: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.
Pretty much. He's basically equivalent to a five-year-old , if you look at the actual math. He's barely past Toddler, at most .
So, here's what I don't get about this whole discussion... I've never had any issues playing a Jedi paragon. You can cleave to the light and the ancient faith of the Jedi and yet have a nuanced and mystical view of the Force. You can even dissent from some of the contemporary dogmas and decisions of the Jedi Council. Case in point: Qui-Gon Jinn .
You might even, if you are open to Legends, be aware that the Jedi Code and doctrines have evolved over time. For instance, in some of the comics and novels Jedi marry. Playing a warrior mystic who cleaves to the light and seeks enlightenment and the greater good is kind of the point of playing a Jedi. Or, as my Jedi says "We Jedi do not destroy evil. We preserve good" and "A Jedi who is not at peace can only make war."
Is charming, leading, and negotiating in the hopes of not having to to kill anyone today so very objectionable? I mean, isn't that kind of basic morality? Trust me, they won't always cooperate with your good efforts and there will be Action! And lightsabers and dismemberment! Joy!
Edited by Vondy
1 hour ago, Vondy said:So, here's what I don't get about this whole discussion... I've never had any issues playing a Jedi paragon. You can cleave to the light and the ancient faith of the Jedi and yet have a nuanced and mystical view of the Force. You can even dissent from some of the contemporary dogmas and decisions of the Jedi Council. Case in point: Qui-Gon Jinn .
You might even, if you are open to Legends, be aware that the Jedi Code and doctrines have evolved over time. For instance, in some of the comics and novels Jedi marry. Playing a warrior mystic who cleaves to the light and seeks enlightenment and the greater good is kind of the point of playing a Jedi. Or, as my Jedi says "We Jedi do not destroy evil. We preserve good" and "A Jedi who is not at peace can only make war."
Is charming, leading, and negotiating in the hopes of not having to to kill anyone today so very objectionable? I mean, isn't that kind of basic morality? Trust me, they won't always cooperate with your good efforts and there will be Action! And lightsabers and dismemberment! Joy!
Personally, I think a big part of it is the Prequels. They made proper Jedi seem uncool to a subsection of fandom, what with most of them being emotionless, unreasonable authority figures, who seemed to be objectively wrong about a lot of things, and dress like desert hermits.
The non-munchkin definition of Grey Jedi is basically pre-Prequel Jedi, the guys Obi-Wan talked about in the original film.
Edited by micheldebruyn13 minutes ago, micheldebruyn said:The non-munchkin definition of Grey Jedi is basically pre-Prequel Jedi, the guys Obi-Wan talked about in the original film.
Who were, prior to the prequels, just plain old Jedi.
16 minutes ago, Vondy said:Who were, prior to the prequels, just plain old Jedi.
That's what I'm saying, I think.
The Prequels changed what a Jedi Knight is in the minds of some fans from "cool, heroic space wizard/warrior," to "kinda lame space priest", so the term "Grey Jedi" was invented, to signify old-school OT Jedi.
6 minutes ago, micheldebruyn said:The Prequels changed what a Jedi Knight is in the minds of some fans from "cool, heroic space wizard/warrior," to "kinda lame space priest", so the term "Grey Jedi" was invented, to signify old-school OT Jedi.
Could be. I was five years old when I saw Star Wars in the theater in 1977 and grew up wanting to be Luke [Expletive-Deleted] Skywalker! I was reared on the Jedi of the OT and early EU novels and games, so the notion that they were somehow "Gray Jedi" as opposed to The Real McCoy (TM) never seeped into my consciousness. I just interpreted the PT Jedi as having grown complacent, dogmatic, a touch fearful, and as having lost their focus. So, for me, the whole idea of Gray Jedi is a bizarre misnomer. The Jedi were a quasi-religious order of mystic warriors who fought for peace and justice. Full stop.
Oh, and PT Jedi are Wuxia heroes while OT Jedi are Chanbara heroes. I don't hate Wuxia, but I prefer Chanbara.
I don't think it's a phenomenon unique to fans who grew up with the prequels, as several of my similarly aged fans have, over the years, played morally grey characters. The concept of an anti-hero is far older than the prequels, so I don't think that's it.
I think it's just due to a more common trend over the last few decades, to frequently have very bad, gritty, rugged, surly (but still hot in that manly kind of way), protagonists, who, because it's Hollywood, look sexy as heck, and have a cool wardrobe. And people are like "yeah, I want to be that guy/gal." And so then when someone comes along, and says "yeah....so, violent outbursts and random murder are kind of a bad thing...good guys don't do that." they often are like "pssh, ok whatever!" I'm like Kratos! Or Neo! Or *insert whatever anti-hero you like*!
And I get the appeal in an academic sense. I personally don't ever care to indulge that kind of PC, as I just don't enjoy it. But I understand the appeal. I don't however, think it's a fitting character idea if you are trying to play a JEDI.
1 hour ago, KungFuFerret said:I don't think it's a phenomenon unique to fans who grew up with the prequels, as several of my similarly aged fans have, over the years, played morally grey characters. The concept of an anti-hero is far older than the prequels, so I don't think that's it.
That's the thing: most examples of canonical "Grey Jedi" (I agree there is no such thing) aren't morally ambiguous anti-heroes. They're the ones that are more moral than the other 'regular' Prequel Jedi. They're characters that don't have dark sides, that call out the rest of the Jedi Order on some of their hypocrisy, like Qui-Gon Jinn and Ahsoka Tano. They're called 'grey' because they went against the Jedi Order's dogma.
Up to a point, the regular Clone Wars era Jedi Order were morally ambiguous anti-heroes. FFG even gave the Jedi General a conflict talent that you can't skip if you want the Dedication. And they pretty much all were generals.
This is of course completely seperate from the munchkin variety who just want to play something between light side Sith Lords and dark side Jedi.
2 hours ago, KungFuFerret said:And I get the appeal in an academic sense. I personally don't ever care to indulge that kind of PC, as I just don't enjoy it. But I understand the appeal.
I've played a few anti-heroes over the years, but....
2 hours ago, KungFuFerret said:I don't however, think it's a fitting character idea if you are trying to play a JEDI.
This.
I'm not sure a Jedi character can't be an anti-hero. I could easily see a Jedi turning an anti-hero during the Clone War. It isn't possible to stay a good guy and to keep your hands clean when fighting a war. You see a lot of atrocities. Sometimes you commit some yourself, even if that wasn't what you meant to do. All of that could easily turns you cynical and disillusioned and to loose faith in the cause you fight for. Then you're an anti-hero.
There is no such thing as a Gr e y Jedi in my Star Wars, and it's no place for hono u r or armo u r either.
That out of the way, my usage of the terms Gray Jedi and Dark Jedi are very simple and based on the ideas of religious upbringing:
Note that, for my simple definitions, Force-users raised/educated outside of the Jedi tradition are not Jedi/Gray Jedi/Dark Jedi at all (e.g., Sith that did not originally train as Jedi, Bendu, Nightsisters, etc.).
26 minutes ago, WolfRider said:I'm not sure a Jedi character can't be an anti-hero. I could easily see a Jedi turning an anti-hero during the Clone War. It isn't possible to stay a good guy and to keep your hands clean when fighting a war. You see a lot of atrocities. Sometimes you commit some yourself, even if that wasn't what you meant to do. All of that could easily turns you cynical and disillusioned and to loose faith in the cause you fight for. Then you're an anti-hero.
Which sounds a lot like the prequel Jedi Order, which had lost its way. Those were Jedi, in the sense that they were member of the Jedi Order, but they weren't living up to the moral or spiritual standard of the Jedi we told about (and shown) in the original films. Namely, Luke, Obi-Wan, and Yoda. A Jedi who turns anti-hero will, without self-reflection and pentinence, eventually turn completely to the dark side. At that point, you've become something else. If anything, that grey area between dark and light is where the Jedi Order had landed in the prequel era. On a more narrative level, however, it was Luke's ultimate rejection of becoming an anti-hero in RotJ that led him to become a true Jedi as opposed to a Jedi in Name Only .
The only reason I use the term "gray Jedi" is because it is the fastest way to get the point across.
I have a player who wants to play a "gray Jedi" but what he means by that isn't "good-guy Sith" or "bad-guy Jedi" his character concept is actually on more of a straight-and-narrow than the Jedi. Basically, the character doesn't eschew emotion like the Jedi, but simply tempers their emotion with adequate control. The character tries to seek and follow the will of the force, and they are only able to hear the force when they are able to properly balance themselves. When they gain conflict, they can lose that balance or attunement. If they become too detached or they give into their rage, stepping too close to the Dark Side, they lose that attunement.
The reason he is not playing a Jedi is because the character does not follow the Jedi code.
1 hour ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:The only reason I use the term "gray Jedi" is because it is the fastest way to get the point across.
Which is 100% valid.
1 hour ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:I have a player who wants to play a "gray Jedi" but what he means by that isn't "good-guy Sith" or "bad-guy Jedi" his character concept is actually on more of a straight-and-narrow than the Jedi. Basically, the character doesn't eschew emotion like the Jedi, but simply tempers their emotion with adequate control. The character tries to seek and follow the will of the force, and they are only able to hear the force when they are able to properly balance themselves. When they gain conflict, they can lose that balance or attunement. If they become too detached or they give into their rage, stepping too close to the Dark Side, they lose that attunement.
You are describing the philosophy of The Living Force. In the movies and shows this was introduced to us through Qui-Gon Jinn. He was a respected master who openly dissented and flauted council decisions and the dogmas of his day. He even cited some implicit traditions to justify doing so. The council apparently had to suck it up because they never censured him or threw him out. All they could do was not invite him to join the High Council. Why? Because he wasn't a "yes man."
Its true that, as a Padawan, Obi-Wan says "If you would just follow the Code, you would be on the Council," but its clear that young Obi-Wan is defining the Code as the particular dogmas and doctrines expressed by the current Council. What he is really saying is "if you would only stop speaking truth to power you would be on the Council." To quote Han Solo, "That's not how the Force works!" And, later in life, what does Obi-Wan teach? Its most definitely not not "eschew emotion" or "there is no emotion." Rather, he tells Luke, "Stretch out with your feelings.. ."
I would argue that there is nothing "gray" about Qui-Gon Jinn. Indeed, in the final season of The Clone Wars when Yoda goes on his vision quest in the Force, its Qui-Gon and his philosophy of "the living force" that ultimately has the final word. It is Qui-Gon's ghost who teaches Yoda how to become a force ghost himself! Yoda even goes so far as to lament to himself that the Council and Jedi Order had lost its way . In other words, he realizes the Council's understanding of the Code was wrong!
And, look at who teaches young Luke! Yoda and Qui-Gon's former disciple, Obi-Wan Kenobi. The Jedi we meet in the original trilogy are devoted to the very approach your player is pursuing. Yoda doesn't tell Luke to eschew emotion. He tells him to eschew fear and to control his emotions. "Control! Control! You must learn control!" I propose what you are describing is the very essence of being a Jedi and following the Code.
This is the way!
QuoteThe reason he is not playing a Jedi is because the character does not follow the Jedi code.
What is this Jedi Code you speak of?
On-screen, the Jedi Code has been referenced, but has never been explicitly delineated. Many teachings and principles are expressed, but very few hard rules. From the movies and shows all we know is that a master may only take one pupil at a time and that Jedi may not form "attachments." Attachments is a term that demands greater explanation! This was interpreted by the prequel era Jedi as definitely remaining celibate and likely remaining chaste as well. It clearly means more than just that, but how much more? We don't know.
The well-worn Jedi Code most gamers and EU buffs have imprinted in their brains that eschews emotion was first published by WEG for the D6 game and then repeated in a swath of novels. It goes like this:
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
However, there is an alternate expression of the Code expressed by Master Billaba who taught Kanan Jarrus:
Emotion, yet peace.
Ignorance, yet knowledge.
Passion, yet serenity.
Chaos, yet harmony.
Death, yet the Force
Both appear in officially licensed Disney materials that constitute what many refer to as the "new canon." Namely, Dark Disciple and Kanan #7 . I would suggest that both read like matras rather than "codes" and that they express vital principles rather than inflexible rules. My own opinion is that "emotion, yet peace" more accurately reflects the teachings of Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, and Yoda .
-----
Marriage footnote: If you are open to expanded universe sources, Jedi did marry and have families in eras both before and after the preqeul era. The celibacy requirement was unique to the dogmas of latter era Old Republic.
Edited by Vondy9 minutes ago, Vondy said: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 ForceHowever, there is an alternate expression of the Code expressed by Master Billaba who taught Kanan Jarrus:
Emotion, yet peace.
Ignorance, yet knowledge.
Passion, yet serenity.
Chaos, yet harmony.
Death, yet the Force
The latter is definitely better and matches the character much more closely.
2 hours ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:The latter is definitely better and matches the character much more closely.
Then he is living up to the true standards of what it means to be a Jedi . That is the original version of the Jedi Code from thousands of years prior to the movies. He's not a "grey" anything. So follow the standard Morality rules and you're good.
19 hours ago, Vondy said:However, there is an alternate expression of the Code expressed by Master Billaba who taught Kanan Jarrus:
Emotion, yet peace.
Ignorance, yet knowledge.
Passion, yet serenity.
Chaos, yet harmony.
Death, yet the Force
It's the right Jedi Code. The one every Jedi should follow.
19 hours ago, Vondy said:Marriage footnote: If you are open to expanded universe sources, Jedi did marry and have families in eras both before and after the preqeul era. The celibacy requirement was unique to the dogmas of latter era Old Republic.
Other eras are mostly Legend so it's difficult to be certain about it. My understandings of the celibacy (and chastity too) requirements was that a Jedi could marry but must leave the Jedi Order to do so. And that was true for all eras. A married Jedi would have a double allegiance, the Jedi order and his / her spouse, that could be in conflict. So, it was required to choose between these allegiance.
The other things is I've always seen the Jedi Knight as Space Knight Templar. Amongst the vows a Templar had to take was celibacy and chastity. But Templar could leave the order and be relieved of their vows, becoming a secular knight (or sergeant since the majority wasn't knight).
That's why I understand the celibacy requirement for Jedi knights.
2 hours ago, WolfRider said:Other eras are mostly Legend so it's difficult to be certain about it. My understandings of the celibacy (and chastity too) requirements was that a Jedi could marry but must leave the Jedi Order to do so. And that was true for all eras. A married Jedi would have a double allegiance, the Jedi order and his / her spouse, that could be in conflict. So, it was required to choose between these allegiance.
The reason I said "if you are open to the expanded universe" is because its now strictly legends.
There are a few examples of married Jedi in the comics and novels. The first is Andur Sunrider, who married Nomi Da-Boda and became a father while training to become a Jedi Knight. He did take a sabbatical, but was invited to return (with his wife and child in tow!) and continue his training. He was was killed before becoming a full fledged Jedi Knight. His wife, Nomi Sunrider, went on to become a Jedi Master while being a mother. She was later romantically involved with another Jedi Master, Ulic Qel-Droma. The other more "famous" example is Luke Skywalker and Mara Jade. Several of his students from the New Jedi Academy were also big on romance and marriage. None of that is "canon" but I wouldn't fault people for referencing it and using it for their games.
Canon-wise, post-Empire, we know Leia married Han, had a child, and completed her training as a Jedi Knight. Luke made it clear that it was her decision not to be an active Jedi because of a vision, but it appears she was still a Jedi, and we see her training Rey and being referred to as "Master" decades later. Luke doesn't appear to have mentioned it to Rey, either. The theater I was in erupted in cheers when she and Ben started macking on screen before he died. "Oh look! Jedi in love!" 🥰
2 hours ago, WolfRider said:The other things is I've always seen the Jedi Knight as Space Knight Templar. Amongst the vows a Templar had to take was celibacy and chastity. But Templar could leave the order and be relieved of their vows, becoming a secular knight (or sergeant since the majority wasn't knight).
Its an interesting analogy and your are entitled to your personal headcanon! I would point out, however, that prior to 1074 married men could become Catholic priests, but bachelor or widowed priests could not marry. That actually matches the Ardur Sunrider story above. After 1074 the Catholics required all priests be unmarried. The Templars are definitely post 1074, but my point is that the rules of sacred traditions often evolve and what would be thought of a "strictly forbidden" was sometimes "perfectly permitted" in the days of yore. The Jedi Code could have been something quite different before their Grand Master carved BMF into his lightsaber hilt.
Edited by Vondy3 hours ago, WolfRider said:Other eras are mostly Legend so it's difficult to be certain about it. My understandings of the celibacy (and chastity too) requirements was that a Jedi could marry but must leave the Jedi Order to do so. And that was true for all eras. A married Jedi would have a double allegiance, the Jedi order and his / her spouse, that could be in conflict. So, it was required to choose between these allegiance.
In Legends, Ki-Adi-Mundi had 5 wives and 7 daughters all while sitting on the Jedi High Council during the prequel movies..
9 minutes ago, DarkHorse said:In Legends, Ki-Adi-Mundi had 5 wives and 7 daughters all while sitting on the Jedi High Council during the prequel movies..
They made an exception for him because of the low Cerean birthrate, if I remember correctly.
1 hour ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:They made an exception for him because of the low Cerean birthrate, if I remember correctly.
There also references in Legends to the Corellian Jedi simply never accepting the ban on marriage due to their culture's strong sense of marriage and family. This isn't actually unprecedented in real world religions, either. Orthodox Jewish ethnic groups over the past few millennia have evolved variant traditions on significant questions of practice (e.g., multiple wives, forbidden foods, etc). Yet, they all sit next to one another in the synagogue and break bread together. And the various ethnic divisions of the Orthodox Christian Church have some significant differences in practice as well. There haven't been married bishops in the Orthodox Church for over a thousand years... except in Ukraine. Ukraine has also re-instituted the female deacon-ate. So, its not too unreasonable to assume that there may be exceptions to what is otherwise a general rule.
Edited by Vondy6 hours ago, WolfRider said:It's the right Jedi Code. The one every Jedi should follow.
Other eras are mostly Legend so it's difficult to be certain about it. My understandings of the celibacy (and chastity too) requirements was that a Jedi could marry but must leave the Jedi Order to do so. And that was true for all eras. A married Jedi would have a double allegiance, the Jedi order and his / her spouse, that could be in conflict. So, it was required to choose between these allegiance.
The other things is I've always seen the Jedi Knight as Space Knight Templar. Amongst the vows a Templar had to take was celibacy and chastity. But Templar could leave the order and be relieved of their vows, becoming a secular knight (or sergeant since the majority wasn't knight).
That's why I understand the celibacy requirement for Jedi knights.
Nope. As @Vondy said, at least in Legends (before it was decanonized), there were numerous Jedi in the Old Republic era and New Republic era who were married, yet still part of the Jedi Order. It was really only during the time bwtween the Battle of Ruusan and the rise of the Empire, that Jedi couldn't marry without special dispensation from the Council.
3 hours ago, Vondy said:The reason I said "if you are open to the expanded universe" is because its now strictly legends.
There are a few examples of married Jedi in the comics and novels. The first is Andur Sunrider, who married Nomi Da-Boda and became a father while training to become a Jedi Knight. He did take a sabbatical, but was invited to return (with his wife and child in tow!) and continue his training. He was was killed before becoming a full fledged Jedi Knight. His wife, Nomi Sunrider, went on to become a Jedi Master while being a mother. She was later romantically involved with another Jedi Master, Ulic Qel-Droma. The other more "famous" example is Luke Skywalker and Mara Jade. Several of his students from the New Jedi Academy were also big on romance and marriage. None of that is "canon" but I wouldn't fault people for referencing it and using it for their games.
Canon-wise, post-Empire, we know Leia married Han, had a child, and completed her training as a Jedi Knight. Luke made it clear that it was her decision not to be an active Jedi because of a vision, but it appears she was still a Jedi, and we see her training Rey and being referred to as "Master" decades later. Luke doesn't appear to have mentioned it to Rey, either. The theater I was in erupted in cheers when she and Ben started macking on screen before he died. "Oh look! Jedi in love!" 🥰
Its an interesting analogy and your are entitled to your personal headcanon! I would point out, however, that prior to 1074 married men could become Catholic priests, but bachelor or widowed priests could not marry. That actually matches the Ardur Sunrider story above. After 1074 the Catholics required all priests be unmarried. The Templars are definitely post 1074, but my point is that the rules of sacred traditions often evolve and what would be thought of a "strictly forbidden" was sometimes "perfectly permitted" in the days of yore. The Jedi Code could have been something quite different before their Grand Master carved BMF into his lightsaber hilt.
Exactly.
3 hours ago, DarkHorse said:In Legends, Ki-Adi-Mundi had 5 wives and 7 daughters all while sitting on the Jedi High Council during the prequel movies..
2 hours ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:They made an exception for him because of the low Cerean birthrate, if I remember correctly.
Yep. It was because of this that he was granted special dispensation.
1 hour ago, Vondy said:There also references in Legends to the Corellian Jedi simply never accepting the ban on marriage due to their culture's strong sense of marriage and family. This isn't actually unprecedented in real world religions, either. Orthodox Jewish ethnic groups over the past few millennia have evolved variant traditions on significant questions of practice (e.g., multiple wives, forbidden foods, etc). Yet, they all sit next to one another in the synagogue and break bread together. And the various ethnic divisions of the Orthodox Christian Church have some significant differences in practice as well. There haven't been married bishops in the Orthodox Church for over a thousand years... except in Ukraine. Ukraine has also re-instituted the female deacon-ate. So, its not too unreasonable to assume that there may be exceptions to what is otherwise a general rule.
Exactly.
On 1/2/2020 at 6:26 PM, KungFuFerret said: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.
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.
I thought it meant reduce down to 10% because that's how people tend to use it plus the deci in the word.
Christianity is a religion, which unlike most other religions is supposed to be about principles more than rules. The most important commandment is to love the lord your God with all your heart mind soul and strength. The second is like it, to love your neighbor as yourself and these 2 commandment fulfill the entirety of the law. The problem with christianity (and any religion for that matter) is the flawed people trying to follow it who muck it up for everyone else. It's almost impossible for well intentioned people not to become hypocrites because quite simply we are human.
I promise I'm getting to the point... like Judaism, and most "big" denominations of christianity (Catholic, orthodox, and from cursory inspection it seems to apply to many protestant denominations too), is the jedi got very rule based "shortly" before the fall of the order. There could be a lightside "jedi" acting in good faith who didn't view following the letter of the law tenets of the jedi order as a high priority, and that actually sounds a lot like Quigon Jinn, so does that make him not a Jedi?
On the flip side the problem with good intentions is they pave the path to ****. There could also be a "jedi" raised in the doctrinal faith, who doesn't view following the letter of the law tenets of the faith to be a high priority who is willing to compromise themselves a little for the sake of the greater good.
Now conflict, is just that turmoil a lack of peace/tranquility. And calling on the force during a state of emotional turmoil is sufficient to earn conflict. mechanically this is using darkside pips to fuel lightsaber or neutral powers to accomplish something good, conceivably it includes using bind to force choke someone with the intentions of simply rendering them unconscious rather than kill. But that's a slippery slope, like I said the path to **** is paved with good intentions.
Now that said, I think there is room (and in fact precedent) in the lore for a character that is at least nominally jedi in universe to be a little edgy/grey... in fact that sounds a lot like mace windu. Heck he has a purple lightsaber with the new mood ring lightsaber crystal colors puts him halfway between the lightside blue and darkside red. Mace windu seems very much to me like he epitomizes the fan concept of a "grey jedi" and he was on the jedi council.
The point is, in my opinion grey jedi is a thing, although maybe "purple jedi" is the more appropriate term. I'd guess that jedi with yellow sabers might fall into the same half light, half dark category because with rgb additive color mixing red plus green equals yellow. So rather than grey jedi perhaps the appropriate terms are "purple jedi" and "yellow jedi". Given that sentinels are known for using yellow lightsabers, that actually makes a lot of sense in universe.
Heck if we subscribe to rgb color mixing "jedi" a grey jedi would be weakly red blue and green (they just don't care, whatever man) and a white jedi would be a strongly conflicted red green and blue. That would imply mace windu is strongly conflicted between blue and red (which checks with cannon) and then the dark sabers' wielder just didn't care about anything.
Edited by EliasWindrider11 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:Now that said, I think there is room (and in fact precedent) in the lore for a character that is at least nominally jedi in universe to be a little edgy/grey... in fact that sounds a lot like mace windu. Heck he has a purple lightsaber with the new mood ring lightsaber crystal colors puts him halfway between the lightside blue and darkside red. Mace windu seems very much to me like he epitomizes the fan concept of a "grey jedi" and he was on the jedi council.
BMF Jedi?
1 hour ago, Vondy said:BMF Jedi?
I believe the term is BAMF Jedi