I know this has come up before but as I stopped to re-read the rules upon Darkside play I found myself underwhelmed and dissapointed.

Does anyone have rules for Darkside campaigns? A corruption system maybe?

You can choose the starting morality 29 option and be a Dark Side character from the start. You would be able to fuel your powers with Dark Side pips and not take the strain damage (still get the conflict though).

You might want to be more specific.

Exactly what more/other rules do you see being darkside needing?

Like, I was working on a Genesys conversion, which since it lacks Force die/Conflict and Morality, I needed to figure out a negative consequence of Darkside. And what I arrived at was a potential consequence of using the Darkside was physical changes (pale skin, aging, scars, red eyes, etc.) and eventual loss of the PC.

So, not sure if that's what you're thinking but...

Basically it was a variation on the Critical Wounds rules, where using the darkside built up this "morality Attack pool" that you rolled at the end of each session and if it resulted in a Crit (by Advantage or Triumph) it resulted in a physical manifestation, and accumulated just like normal crits, and ultimately a 150+ result was the PC becoming an NPC...

Basically the pool started out as GGPP. Each use of the dark side or evil action upgraded the pool, extremely selfless acts could upgrade the difficulty of the pool. Crit = physical "corruption"and eventually conversion to NPC.

2 hours ago, emsquared said:

You might want to be more specific.

Exactly what more/other rules do you see being darkside needing?

Like, I was working on a Genesys conversion, which since it lacks Force die/Conflict and Morality, I needed to figure out a negative consequence of Darkside. And what I arrived at was a potential consequence of using the Darkside was physical changes (pale skin, aging, scars, red eyes, etc.) and eventual loss of the PC.

So, not sure if that's what you're thinking but...

Basically it was a variation on the Critical Wounds rules, where using the darkside built up this "morality Attack pool" that you rolled at the end of each session and if it resulted in a Crit (by Advantage or Triumph) it resulted in a physical manifestation, and accumulated just like normal crits, and ultimately a 150+ result was the PC becoming an NPC...

Basically the pool started out as GGPP. Each use of the dark side or evil action upgraded the pool, extremely selfless acts could upgrade the difficulty of the pool. Crit = physical "corruption"and eventually conversion to NPC.

The game seems to take the same attitude towards it of the whole 'becoming an NPC' but I just feel thats a cop out.

If you're running a darkside campaign set in the Sith Empire as Darkside wielding force users.....how can that work?

I say corruption in the sense that Yuuthura ban and Adjunta pall -clearly- loose themselves to the darkside completly losing sight of their original goals and aims and becoming something else. Bane, sort of, does the same where he becomes singularly focused.

If you're playing Jedi (Which I think the game intends for you) then there is a clear consequence for using the DS pips and I think the whole morality system serves its purpose perfectly there. Once you flip it and you're the 'baddies' I feel it's not sufficent.

I suppose...I want rules to make it FEEL sufficent *shrug* sorry if i'm not making sense.

You're not making sense.

Because out of one side of your mouth you're saying you want to force an agency change on the PCs (with your assumption that Yuthura and Adjunta didn't choose their paths and that in ability to choose your path would thereby be what you want to replicate), and out of the other side in the same breath you're saying you don't want that.

So, if you're feeling that being Darkside doesn't have any consequence, what I'm hearing now is that your players might be a little lazy in the rp department, and you might be a little lazy in the GMing department.

That you maybe need to talk to your players, and ask them to rp their Darksided-ness a bit more faithfully? To play more true to their Morality Weakness.

That maybe as GM you need to have more appropriate in-world, story consequences for doing evil stuff? Have them develope notorious identities, and be recognized and shunned by "polite society". Law enforcement (and other authorities or heroic figures) pursuing them. Bounties. Jedi and/or Inquisition after them, depending on your era. Sith in-fighting. etc. etc.

14 hours ago, Luahk said:

The game seems to take the same attitude towards it of the whole 'becoming an NPC' but I just feel thats a cop out.

If you're running a darkside campaign set in the Sith Empire as Darkside wielding force users.....how can that work?

I say corruption in the sense that Yuuthura ban and Adjunta pall -clearly- loose themselves to the darkside completly losing sight of their original goals and aims and becoming something else. Bane, sort of, does the same where he becomes singularly focused.

If you're playing Jedi (Which I think the game intends for you) then there is a clear consequence for using the DS pips and I think the whole morality system serves its purpose perfectly there. Once you flip it and you're the 'baddies' I feel it's not sufficent.

I suppose...I want rules to make it FEEL sufficent *shrug* sorry if i'm not making sense.

Are you wanting to make a campaign during the Old Republic?

1 hour ago, oh_grapes said:

Are you wanting to make a campaign during the Old Republic?

Yup. I've played several in it and been DM in a few. THis reccurs.

3 hours ago, emsquared said:

You're not making sense.

Because out of one side of your mouth you're saying you want to force an agency change on the PCs (with your assumption that Yuthura and Adjunta didn't choose their paths and that in ability to choose your path would thereby be what you want to replicate), and out of the other side in the same breath you're saying you don't want that.

So, if you're feeling that being Darkside doesn't have any consequence, what I'm hearing now is that your players might be a little lazy in the rp department, and you might be a little lazy in the GMing department.

That you maybe need to talk to your players, and ask them to rp their Darksided-ness a bit more faithfully? To play more true to their Morality Weakness.

That maybe as GM you need to have more appropriate in-world, story consequences for doing evil stuff? Have them develope notorious identities, and be recognized and shunned by "polite society". Law enforcement (and other authorities or heroic figures) pursuing them. Bounties. Jedi and/or Inquisition after them, depending on your era. Sith in-fighting. etc. etc.

An agency change...is different to -becoming an NPC- like...Obviously.

I can encourage character change and am blessed with tables of players who try to push this themselves. THe point is the base game (for a lightside/regular campaign) has a neat mechanic to help measure..prompt..and track this change/difference that fits the narrative.

Once you're playing a Sith...as in someone RAISED to follow the darkside...the 'consequences' for doing evil stuff are minimal. The Sith Empire lauds its darksiders as demi-gods they're not at all shunned. Why would Law enforcement pursue them? In fighting sure...but that's not at all what i'm asking for.

I'm asking for, in a setting in which the above listed factors are not relevant, how do you add consequence? Does anyone use a system or have some sort of table..or guide to consequences of using lightside pips.

28 minutes ago, Luahk said:

I'm asking for, in a setting in which the above listed factors are not relevant, how do you add consequence? Does anyone use a system or have some sort of table..or guide to consequences of using lightside pips.

I mean, you're aware the rulebook has the consequences for using Lightside pips, right? 1 Strain and flip a Destiny.

Beyond that, if you're choosing to play a Darkside campaign, all you're doing is making a meta level, thematic choice in tone for the campaign.

How much more, and why do you want to punish the characters and penalize the players' gameplay for, presumably, the whole table having made a thematic choice in tone for the campaign at a meta level?

It seems to me like you're maybe missing the point of why anyone would want to play a darkside campaign.

It also seems to me like you're imagining there are negative consequences to using the Darkside that have no basis in canon, and what you've observed and what you want to do can already be accounted for by this systems mechanics and just with simple good storytelling.

Take Palps. Darkside for decades, didn't lose himself. Indeed, he carried out one of the most elaborate plots in the history of the universe while maintaining a very public persona as a good guy. Moral weakness for Greed (and or Cruelty, and our Arrogance). And so what we arrive at is that all you're seeing in Yuthura and Adjunta, when translated into this systems mechanics, is their players rping out there Recklessness or Obsession or whatever moral weaknesses well.

Again, given there is already a cost to using the Lightside when you're a darksider, what exactly more is there that you think the system needs?

Palp is, in canon, the culmination of generations of sith working to invest in a single plan.

His workings and result as the investiture of a gigantic plan result in the pay off unlike anything else in history.

He is not the average sith.

The darkside consumes, in setting, and corrupts and costs its users extensively. Many and more outright go mad in the pursuit of its greater use or become servants to sites where it is strong.

If you play a darkside campaign, aside from the strain cost, using the force and the darkside has little threat of consequence to you in that regard. You can extensively use it absent real concern. A jedi markedly avoids that due to the conflict youre acquiring and the fear of the morality drop. That is both narrative and mechanical.

In the setting that I'm using there are scores of high level sith who have been crippled in one way or another by a lifetime or less of using the force via the darkside.

I wondered if people had come up with something that mechanically represents that. To give people who are rping as darksiders more to consider when plunging their hand back into the pool.

46 minutes ago, Luahk said:

The darkside consumes, in setting, and corrupts and costs its users extensively. Many and more outright go mad in the pursuit of its greater use or become servants to sites where it is strong.

Again. In rpg terms, this is called good rp and storytelling.

47 minutes ago, Luahk said:

I wondered if people had come up with something that mechanically represents that.

And again, I gave your mechanics for that.

If you don't like the loss of the PC completely, then it only takes a modicum of imagination to substitute that for whatever deprivation of player agency you find palatable.

41 minutes ago, emsquared said:

Again. In rpg terms, this is called good rp and storytelling.

And again, I gave your mechanics for that.

If you don't like the loss of the PC completely, then it only takes a modicum of imagination to substitute that for whatever deprivation of player agency you find palatable.

Yet we have a morality system in place that most folks use alongside storytelling and rp.

I thank you for your input @emsquared but it's not what i'm looking for at all.

You can't even describe what you're looking for.

At times you're describing a mechanic to replace/provide a crutch or substitute for good rp and competent storytelling - something that will make the player "lose themselves/the character".

But then you turn around and say that's not what you want (when you realize the optics?).

At times it's a consequence for using the Lightside, which is of course already in there. So that went away.

Seriously, it's back to the original question, if you want help, you'll need to put words to specifically what you think needs a mechanic here that can't be handled by existing mechanics and/or good rp and competent storytelling?

I'm really just trying to understand.

I think one way or another you're just making achieving what you want harder than it needs to be...

Do you have the Genesys core rulebook? Have you seen like, their Sanity/Trauma mechanics?

3 minutes ago, emsquared said:

You can't even describe what you're looking for.

At times you're describing a mechanic to replace/provide a crutch or substitute for good rp and competent storytelling - something that will make the player "lose themselves/the character".

But then you turn around and say that's not what you want (when you realize the optics?).

At times it's a consequence for using the Lightside, which is of course already in there. So that went away.

Seriously, it's back to the original question, if you want help, you'll need to put words to specifically what you think needs a mechanic here that can't be handled by existing mechanics and/or good rp and competent storytelling?

I'm really just trying to understand.

I think one way or another you're just making achieving what you want harder than it needs to be...

Do you have the Genesys core rulebook? Have you seen like, their Sanity/Trauma mechanics?

I have. A corruption mechanic is not the morality mechanic. I spoke about people losing their minds and becoming slaves to the darkside rather than bending it to their will.

Something that works alongside the storytelling losing their characters Sanity...is not in any way becoming an NPC.

I'm not ...at all...asking for lightside. Notice the heading of the whole thread?

The morality mechanic, on its own, is sufficent for lightside playthroughs. It is not -needed- for competent RPers/storytelling but is a good measurement and cost to using the darkside pips for a jedi character.
In some campaigns i've seen it used as a way for players to litterally sense something is different in someone rather than just recognising their action someone -feels- wrong.
I am not...at all...asking for a jedi but for a sith and a sith in the Old Republic's Sith Empire and thus, I feel, it alone is not sufficient.

I feel that..narratively..there should be more cost for using the darkside especially when you're just chugging the juice. You can, should, still play a character who has lost their mind. You could RP now as the person who is enslaved to the item etc without becoming an NPC. You can accomplish this -without- a system. But I would like one..anyway. Much like we have the morality one.

A sanity/Trauma mechanic is a potential answer that i'd eluded to!
No I do not have the Gen core rulebook. But I can look it up.

14 minutes ago, Luahk said:

A sanity/Trauma mechanic is a potential answer that i'd eluded to!

My dude. You're being so obtuse.

If the skin isn't what you want, no problem! These mechanics, both the one I first described and now the aforementioned Sanity mechanic, are still mechanical models for how to mechanically incorporate these things you say you want.

Holy crap.

Like talking to a fish.

Just now, emsquared said:

My dude. You're being so obtuse.

If the skin isn't what you want, no problem! These mechanics, both the one I first described and now the aforementioned Sanity mechanic, are still mechanical models for how to mechanically incorporate these things you say you want.

Holy crap.

Like talking to a fish.

I'm unsure how you think this is helping?
shrug

You're right.

You can't teach a fish to fish. And if the fish won't take the fish you tried to give it, well, the fish is just out of luck.

Well, the idea that the Dark Side "extracts a terrible price from those consumed by it" is because Star Wars is fundamentally idealistic, and as such the bad guys lose , and the good guys win . So, yeah, at the end of the day, no matter how awesome any given Darksider is, they are going to lose, because that's the nature of the story being told.

There have been attempts to codify this in other games, with "Dark Side Corruption" or somesuch that applies attribute penalties to characters of sufficient Darkness. That's never sat well with me, because especially for a Dark Side campaign, it feels like punishing the characters for playing the setting they've all agreed to, and just doesn't quite match what we see on the screen. Yes, Vader and Palpatine suffered greatly for their ultimate Dark Siderness, but Palpatine's was delayed for QUITE some time, and Vader in some respects got a lot MORE powerful in the suit (a lot less powerful in others, but hey). I even remember, I think it was WotC's d20 Star Wars, a whole huge convoluted explanation that Palpatine actually had visible Dark Side corruption for the entirety of the Prequels, but used a Sith illusion to hide it, which was permanently burned away (and never able to be reapplied?!?) when he took a zillion jolts of his own lightning to the face. OR, you could say he faced down one of the most skilled Jedi Masters of the age, one with the absolutely perfect skillset to use against Palpatine, and Palpatine walked away from the battle with permanent disfiguring injuries, but alive. Yeah, the second one makes a lot more sense.

Anyway. . . part of all that is the idea that Dark Siders become "enslaved" to the Dark Side in some way, but that depends a lot on your interpretation and what, really, being "enslaved to the Dark Side" even means. Are they bereft of the ability to make choices? Are they incapable of doing things for reasons unrelated to sadistic glee? I think not.

Consider this. Anakin and Palpatine's long discussion about the Jedi and Sith, their similarities and difference, in Revenge of the Sith . In the novelization, Palpatine has a line stating, if I recall correctly, "Jedi seek wisdom and gain power, Sith seek power and gain wisdom." Now, you can certainly say that Palpatine's at least bending the truth to turn Anakin to his way of thinking, but it's consistent with how the Force is portrayed. Knowledge and wisdom equal power within the Force. The ultimate knowledge is knowledge of oneself. So, to attain ultimate power in the Dark Side, a Dark Sider must, at some point, look at themselves in the mirror, admit that by any civilized metric they are evil , and be okay with that. Now, that's a pretty rare level of understanding within the Dark Side, but its one that Palpatine almost certainly achieved, along with likely other exceptional Sith like Darth Bane. Sure, a lot of Dark Siders (Vader included) mostly thought of themselves as "evil for the greater good" or something like that, but that puts a bit of a limit on how ultimately powerful they can become. . . and, perhaps, leads into that "obsession" that has been talked about. Focusing on a few small things that they can use their power for, still believing it will ultimate be for the best, instead of facing and embracing the ultimate wisdom that they are now evil .

But what does this mean mechanically? Ultimately, I think, not much. Any mechanics you could really inject into this would feel arbitrarily limiting or empowering for characters who state they agree with the GMs interpretations. It's kinda the same argument that "well, I don't think that action was wrong, so I shouldn't get a Dark Side Point/Conflict for it." "My character agrees that he is evil, so he should get all the best Dark Side goodies." "Wait, my character agrees he's evil too, he just thinks being evil is beneficial on the whole, so he gets the goodies too, right?"

What it really boils down to, especially in terms of the Sith of The Old Republic, is being unfettered . There is nothing that can check my behavior, I can take any action and do anything I feel is necessary to achieve my goals. What those actions will be (and how evil they are) will depend on the character's goals and the situations and opportunities they have to advance them.

I mean to call someone obtuse...when it took you 5 posts to land at an answer..only to immediately make another two posts after I said you'd landed at it...
Mindblown
Irony is like.....in this thread well demonstrated.

I looked up the mechanic. I am satisfied it will help and will make an additional one to accompany it to satisfy what I intended.
Thanks again.

1 minute ago, ErikModi said:

What it really boils down to, especially in terms of the Sith of The Old Republic, is being unfettered . There is nothing that can check my behavior, I can take any action and do anything I feel is necessary to achieve my goals. What those actions will be (and how evil they are) will depend on the character's goals and the situations and opportunities they have to advance them.

Long short yes you're right. Which is part and parcel the problem. In an unfettered society, which even encourages that attitude, the only consequence should be your ability to pursue that.

It's my belief that some people should be able to better endure that pursuit than others (Sidious or more narratively appropriate a Dark COuncil member would be examples). That some people will have minds and bodies simply capable of better enduring that journey and I think there should be some mechanical aspect to help better demonstrate that.

I also get the Punishing aspect of what you said and am wary/cautious of it. However ultimately in a 'lightside' campaign there is a strong reason not to take from the pool. I want something that would replicate that.
The trauma mechanic that Genesys uses is a good start for that IMO but i'm unsure it's enough on it's own. I'd have to actually test it before I could comment for sure.

The debate on the whole Sidious Corruption thing is...difficult for me...i've changed my mind on it several times in the past and I think it's a debate that I haven't settled with myself as various different things I read have interpreted that struggle (as it relates to him) differently.

1 minute ago, Luahk said:

Long short yes you're right. Which is part and parcel the problem. In an unfettered society, which even encourages that attitude, the only consequence should be your ability to pursue that.

It's my belief that some people should be able to better endure that pursuit than others (Sidious or more narratively appropriate a Dark COuncil member would be examples). That some people will have minds and bodies simply capable of better enduring that journey and I think there should be some mechanical aspect to help better demonstrate that.

I'd say that's the difference between "heroic characters" (the PCs and important NPCs) and "everyone else," but maybe that's just me.

I mean, the characters the story is about, the PCs and their important allies and enemies, are the ones shaping the story with every action they take. It's their galaxy, everyone else is just living in it. Part of what makes PCs special is that drive, the special spark to attain and persevere to get what they want, whether that's peace and harmony or unity through threat of planet killers and being Force Lightninged into oblivion.

I would imagine that, even in the Sith Empire, the ability to really look at yourself and say "Yes, I am evil, I serve an evil regime, and I want to RUN THAT EVIL REGIME EVILLY" is rare. Most would simply believe its the best of bad options, or that it's the way of the society they were raised in and don't even really think about it, or that it might be evil but it provides some benefit to them and it's not like they're out doing the really evil stuff.

That combination of ambition, wisdom, and power should be peculiar to PCs and select NPCs.

And yes, I know "wisdom" and "Player Characters" are not traits that are often included in the same sentence. My point stands.

As for a mechanical. . . hmm, "disincentive," perhaps? . . . to not make use of Light Side pips. . . I think that's already covered by the rules. Just like Light Siders have to take a Strain and flip a Destiny Point from Light to Dark, a Dark Sider has to take a Strain and flip a Destiny Point from Dark to Light. Incentive not use the points. . . unless you really, really need those Force Points to accomplish your goal. Pretty equitable for both sides.

Which isn't to say I don't have a problem with it. For Light Siders, it's a good representation of the temptation of the Dark Side. Using that little bit of Dark power to do something really important, something good. . . well, that can't be bad, right? So maybe using Dark power in and of itself isn't bad, if you do it for the right reasons. . . a good cause. A good enough cause. Because it would create problems if you didn't. Because you wanted to. Because it felt good. Because shut up, I HATE YOU! There's a road that's paved with good intentions. . .

But for Dark Siders, they aren't really "tempted" by the Light (Kylo Ren being the exception). Rather, I feel the "difficulty" in being a Darksider is not having a realistic grasp on your power. Drunk on the Dark Side is a trope for a reason, and many Darksiders seem to have a very, very overinflated sense of just what it is they can accomplish with all the Dark Power at their command (one of my favorites, again from the RotS novel, is Dooku internally sneering at Obi-Wan and Anakin, because Jedi allow the Force to control them, but a master of the Dark Side controls the Force. Pause to appreciate that blindingly stupid level of arrogance). Palpatine and Vader both succumbed to overconfidence, and it ended badly for both of them: Vader missing three limbs and burning, Palpatine going down a reactor shaft.

But that's something I'd be really hesitant about putting into game mechanics. Even if it might be a fitting idea to say "Dark Siders can't use Light Side Force Pips," making it understandable why Darksiders might overestimate their abilities until they get one really bad Force roll with nowhere near enough Dark pips to do what they need. . . that would feel overly limiting.

1 hour ago, Luahk said:

I mean to call someone obtuse...

What else is there to call it when you give someone the knowledge they need to achieve their goal, and they ignore it?

I told you how to do what you want to do in my first post. Not 5 in.

You heard one word in that though that you didn't like and you turned off your brain, instead of looking at how it worked, and seeing that it does what you want it to do.

1 hour ago, Luahk said:

I am satisfied it will help

Yea, it's just a reverse version of what I told you to do in the first place.

You're welcome.

2 hours ago, Luahk said:

I have. A corruption mechanic is not the morality mechanic. I spoke about people losing their minds and becoming slaves to the darkside rather than bending it to their will.

Something that works alongside the storytelling losing their characters Sanity...is not in any way becoming an NPC.

I'm not ...at all...asking for lightside. Notice the heading of the whole thread?

The morality mechanic, on its own, is sufficent for lightside playthroughs. It is not -needed- for competent RPers/storytelling but is a good measurement and cost to using the darkside pips for a jedi character.
In some campaigns i've seen it used as a way for players to litterally sense something is different in someone rather than just recognising their action someone -feels- wrong.
I am not...at all...asking for a jedi but for a sith and a sith in the Old Republic's Sith Empire and thus, I feel, it alone is not sufficient.

I feel that..narratively..there should be more cost for using the darkside especially when you're just chugging the juice. You can, should, still play a character who has lost their mind. You could RP now as the person who is enslaved to the item etc without becoming an NPC. You can accomplish this -without- a system. But I would like one..anyway. Much like we have the morality one.

A sanity/Trauma mechanic is a potential answer that i'd eluded to!
No I do not have the Gen core rulebook. But I can look it up.

You need to listen to the solo shot podcast

It follows the redemption of an inquisitor. And only uses the in game mechanics and role play. I dont think you are going to get what you want if you and you players dont work together to create good story and role play. This is not something you can force with mechanics. Trying to likely will cause resentment.

@Luahk , if I'm reading you right, this is what you're saying:

Light side characters have to resist a fall. They have to watch their actions carefully and avoid garnering conflict, or they'll start falling to the dark side.

Dark side characters don't. All they have to worry about is Strain and Destiny points, which is no more than the light-side PCs. They don't have to watch their actions, because they aren't worried about slipping. In a campaign focused on dark side characters, this is lackluster.

You want a mechanic to make them concerned about going too dark side?

I would argue that the system works as designed. There is a freedom in going dark side and not having to watch your actions. If you now have them watching their actions in order to not fall further... you sorta lose the whole point of going dark side.

I'm not sure how to best get what you're after mechanically speaking. Anything I think of that uses or adapts the Morality system ends up making redemption easier or harder or removes the freedom of the dark side.

The whole point of the dark side is that it is a quick path to power and there is the lie that the dark side brings freedom, when it really gives you a worse set of chains. Freedom from morality doesn't actually make you free.

To try and help you more, what sort of stuff do you think makes them more dark? What do you envision as pushing them further down that path? Is it only "power" and the use of conflict-generating abilities? Is it the standard morality stuff? Something else?

And what mechanical consequences do you want to see?

I see this as all being best handled through roleplaying. But I do sympathize with the desire to have a metric for it, as I am much the same and would want it if I were in this situation, though I would likely reach the same conclusion due to the difficulties inherent in this such a thing.

@P-47 Thunderbolt
' They don't have to watch their actions, because they aren't worried about slipping. In a campaign focused on dark side characters, this is lackluster.'
Yes.

' You want a mechanic to make them concerned about going too dark side?'
No.

I see the usage of the darkside itself as inherently dangerous. (I put this in bold because I feel this has been wildly missed despite numerous posts and i'm unsure how to be clearer. Not to be a ****.)
As in every time you use it that it costs you, changes and alters you in ways beyond simple morality.

I am aware @Daeglan of the redemption mechanics. That's not at all what i'm discussing or seeking. Nor am I trying to 'force' anything.

I am also aware, as @emsquared laboured with, about the morality system. I do not feel that it comes close to covering what I highlighted in bold.
If i did I wouldn't be here.
what you said in your first post was describing a secondary morality system with aesthetic or intangiable differences. Which have no actual mechanical cost and end up at the same conclusion of the Morality system of you becoming an NPC.
That's not cutting it for me.
And whilst the Trauma mechanic introduced in the Genesys core is a good start i've not tried it to say that it does work but on paper that's more what I want.

It strikes me, based on this conversation, that most of you are perfectly happy with the set up as is. That the current format works perfectly fine, even in the setting i'm using, so there is no deficiency to speak of. So it could just be that I have a fundamental disagreement upon the way in which the Darkside works.

Mr @ErikModi

16 hours ago, ErikModi said:

I'd say that's the difference between "heroic characters" (the PCs and important NPCs) and "everyone else," but maybe that's just me.

I don't see it that way, or at least I don't set up things nor do I RP in a setting where that is the case. You go on to say...and perhaps most PRECISELY..lie in the disagreement with your intriguing philosophy again where we diverge (and i'm happy to do so btw I've no problem with being the other side of the fence)
' It's their galaxy, everyone else is just living in it.'
I get this sentiment. I seriously do. But this is..the hero of tython's galaxy...or THeron shan's. We often RP as characters significantly below the "Heroric" level. But with the potential to get there. Certainly when I set the table that's what I am for my players to RP in whenever we use this setting. ESPECIALLY as darksiders. They are special, as force users its easy to say they have high potential or something, but they're not Luke's party special yet.

Back toThunderbolt (not that I don't appreciate all responses but he and I have had other chats a lot of times before) I've tried for years to handle this through roleplay. It has had varying degrees of success and failure.

The reason I use this system, or any for that matter, is consistency and objectivity. I imagine many here have come from forum or text based RP where dice are not used...I prefer them because of what options it lends to me. I've tested a few home rules before that I wasn't satisfied with because they were too punishing (as I think Erik said) or actually did the reverse and made it even less of consequence to use darkside characters. I'm hoping to figure out something that lends that consistency whilst remaining in that narrative crux.

12 minutes ago, Luahk said:

Back toThunderbolt (not that I don't appreciate all responses but he and I have had other chats a lot of times before) I've tried for years to handle this through roleplay. It has had varying degrees of success and failure.

The reason I use this system, or any for that matter, is consistency and objectivity. I imagine many here have come from forum or text based RP where dice are not used...I prefer them because of what options it lends to me. I've tested a few home rules before that I wasn't satisfied with because they were too punishing (as I think Erik said) or actually did the reverse and made it even less of consequence to use darkside characters. I'm hoping to figure out something that lends that consistency whilst remaining in that narrative crux.

I want to make it clear, I understand you don't want to rely entirely on roleplay. I get that and would feel the same if I were in your situation.
Okay, now that we're on the same page, I'll rephrase my questions and see if that gets us anywhere better:

14 hours ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

What sort of stuff do you think physically corrupts or damages them? What do you envision as furthering the damage? Is it only "power" and the use of conflict-generating abilities? Is it the standard morality stuff? Something else?

And what mechanical consequences do you want to see?

I'm thinking one way would be to track dark side pips used, then roll against it like with Morality, but separate from that mechanic. At certain milestones, they pass a threshold and get some consequence applied.

That last question is especially important.

So at 25 points, X applies. At 50 points, Y applies. At 100 points, Z applies, at 200 A, at 400 B, etc.
Or it can be linear, so 25-50-75-100-125-etc.