I notice this has been brought up before, but it always seems to get... derailed...

I don't want to tell anyone how to play or invoke real-life equivalents, but it strikes me there's an interesting argument on both sides if we can remain civil...

Watching the old movies makes it kinda clear to me that we're not meant to be rooting for the Imperials. But, hey, the question 'what is Star Wars' is a lot more complicated today than it was thirty years ago. SW has changed and gaming has certainly changed. I remember the early 90s, when games like Ars Magica, Shadowrun and Vampire Masquerade were in vogue, with PCs that didn't seem any different than the villains (and in D&D, the 'grimdark' campaigns like Dark Sun and Planescape).

I'm sure the EU has plenty of Imperial examples, and not everyone on the Imperial side is a depraved, sadistic monster. And yet, it's still a very repressive regime run by Dark Jedi. That would seem to require a certain mind-set as PCs. I can imagine even many evil types feeling that Alderaan was kind of over the top - all those resources wasted, not to mention the huge PR fallout.

I can't help but feel that it wouldn't be right simply to use the Rebel scenarios with the numbers filed off. I mean yes, the classes and things would fit, sure. A rebel pilot and an Imperial one are just ultimately flying different ships, they are not different classes.

But AoR seems very much about playing the 'ragtag irregulars against the overwhelming force of the Empire'. Isn't it going to feel different if the PCs are backed up by Star Destroyers? It strikes me that if I was on the Imperial side, I'd be much more worried about being killed by my superiors than the Rebels. The movies make a running joke of Vader bumping off his underlings, after all.

And I guess you'd have to assume that the PCs were at least some kind of elite unit, not Stormtroopers 700,316 to 700,321. And even then, I would imagine the logistics and general feel of playing the Imperials would differ considerably to playing the Rebels. The morality of it for one, obviously (Owen and Beru seemed to be a fairly standard workday for Imperial troops) but also the role of the PCs, and how they feel about being tiny, mostly unvalued cogs in a huge, ruthless machine.

I'm sure there are morality decisions to be made in any war, even by the Rebels (is it okay to blow up a Moff's family when attacking an enemy base?) but these elements would seem to be greatly amplified for the other side.

On the other hand, is it a good thing to have a theme for a role-playing game? In Edge of Empire, you're not playing the Hutts or Black Sun crime lords... or Jedi, or Imperials. That might make for an interesting game, sure, but you're supposed to be playing scoundrels. In a 'Lord of the Rings' RPG, you're probably not playing orcs or nazgul. In the Warhammer battle game, you can play an orc or skaven horde... but in WHFRP, having an orc or skaven PC wandering around in an adventuring band in the Empire would just feel silly. Is there a strength in having a set feel and theme for a game?

Just thoughts - I'd be interested in hearing from both sides as long as we can keep the arguments polite and keep away from real-world stuff.

Playing Imperial PCs has been a thing since the earliest days of Star Wars gaming. It's absolutely doable, and there's no "one right way" to handle it.

Really, it all comes down to the group, the GM, and what the players want. It takes a certain degree of maturity and even-handedness to ensure that you're dealing with a group of realistic PCs with realistic motivations instead of folks who just want to be cavalier about walking through the streets of Mos Eisley shooting every innocent bystander they see, but there's no reason an Imperials campaign can't be fun and rewarding.

Also, don't let anyone else tell you what Star Wars does/should/must mean to you and your group.

Playing Imperial PCs has been a thing since the earliest days of Star Wars gaming. It's absolutely doable, and there's no "one right way" to handle it.

Really, it all comes down to the group, the GM, and what the players want. It takes a certain degree of maturity and even-handedness to ensure that you're dealing with a group of realistic PCs with realistic motivations instead of folks who just want to be cavalier about walking through the streets of Mos Eisley shooting every innocent bystander they see, but there's no reason an Imperials campaign can't be fun and rewarding.

Also, don't let anyone else tell you what Star Wars does/should/must mean to you and your group.

Yep, that's sort of what I thought. I can see why some players - there's one in my group - might like it. I'm pretty old-school when it comes to RPGs, but played maturely, I could see how it might be good.

And as you say, 'Star Wars' means different things to different people.

I guess I'm just musing about the fact that AoE is specifically set up to connect with those fans who liked the original movies, and will likely be Rebel-focused.

That's not to say that those people who play the other side are having BadWrongFun of course. Fantasy Flight or George Lucas won't kick down someone's door and confiscate their game just because they have a thing for bulky white and black armour

I think an "Imperials as heroes" themed game is ripe territory for roleplaying and can be done very well if you have a mature group and a good GM. Playing an Imperial character doesn't necessarily define the party as baby-eating monsters anymore than being a Paladin in D&D binds you to being Lawful Stupid. Unfortunately, the immature, baby-killing take on playing a "villain" or "evil" character in an RPG often is the stereotype that gets the spotlight.

I'm reminded of the Hand of Judgement series by Timothy Zahn that explores a group of Stormtroopers who set out on their own to right wrongs and remove corruption from within the Empire. They're deserters and arguably going about performing heroic acts, but throughout the series (duology?) they remain loyal Imperials. It's a great concept for a roleplaying party.

Or, even if you wanted your characters to remain within the Imperial command and control structure, there are still many opportunities for your characters to explore the mindset of someone on the "other side." I think, when considering the actions and motivations of Imperial characters, it's also important to look at things through their point of view. How would an Inquisitor feel about Jedi who survived Order 66? Would he think he was making the galaxy a safer place by hunting down what he believed to be religious extremists? Or what about the Stormtrooper who had friends or family members that were killed on the first Death Star? A character who signed up for Imperial service because a friend or family member was killed in a rebel raid would possess a very powerful motivation for wanting to defeat the rebellion.

I don't think it would be all that difficult to remove some of the assumed advantages of being a member of the Imperial military either. If your players were a part of a unit tasked with rooting out a rebel cell on Coruscant, they wouldn't expect to be able to simply call down an orbital bombardment to bail them out of a tough situation. Perhaps your players are in the ISB or Imperial Intelligence and they're working to infiltrate a rebel cell. Such a character would hardly be expected to receive a tremendous amount of logistical support for fear of blowing their cover.

You could even play a straight-faced evil party, if you wanted to. Not for planet-killing empowerment fantasies, necessarily, but as an opportunity to understand in how easy it is for a group of people to take part in something terrible. The young Imperial officer who slides from honorable service to brutality and atrocity could be an interesting character, and he could be done well if the group (and GM) are able and willing to handle those themes. For that matter, you could just as easily play a rebel who believes that the end justifies the means and sacrifices the moral high ground for an immediate advantage. Obviously, not everyone is going to want to play that sort of game.

Perhaps the biggest factor for the "morality" and tone of an Imperial game is simply the people involved and how they're prepared to deal with those issues in a game.

Thanks, that's kind of the reasoned input I was looking for. I'm glad the discussion hasn't degenerated into name-calling.

I was musing on how it would be done, what aspects would need to be changed, and whether or not it would even be a good idea. You've given me some food-for-thought on that.

One player discussed it - I think he's ultimately going to play an Imperial defector who finally switches sides after Alderaan. Another players really didn't like the concept at all, as AoE is being pushed as a Rebel-themed game tying into the original movies. He suggested that if you wanted to play Judge Dredd, there were games like Deathwatch or Dark Heresey that let you play 'evil' right out of the gate.

I would personally prefer to go with the Rebel side, but as a GM I'm interested as to how the other side would work. So thanks for your input.

For my part, I've been through the 90s grimdark/anti-hero tragic hipness phase RPGs at the time were infatuated with, and well, I'm not there anymore. I like morally complex characters I have also seen them go so horribly bad as well - either intentionally (playing for shock value, or simply trolling people) or unintentionally (for example going all "rapey" not being aware that the GM or one of the other players has a personal experience with **** or child abuse, etc - awkward doesn't begin to describe how that ends up). But all that's at the table level and suited to taste.

Published support has been a stickier issue for me - because a published product has no idea what sort of table it is heading into, and a publisher has a liability (to the licensor, as well as PR exposure, etc) that any given player or GM does not (you pull a That Guy move in a game you alienate just the people at the table, or the larger friendship spheres in extreme cases, people don't write complaint letters to George Lucas because of what your Trandoshan did last session). In Star Wars there have been several characters who begin as fiercely loyal to the New Order/High Human Culture but in the EU most/all of these follow the same narrative arc of loyalty-challenge-disillusionment-rejection-restitution/redemption: General Medine, Adar Tallon, Mara Jade, Starkiller (if we want to get into the video games), the examples are numerous. In this mindset I don't see a whole lot of need for mechanical support needed, but setting and plot support is okay. In one of the last threads the example given was the old WEG Imperial Sourcebook - useful for both the Imperials-as-PCs (until they change sides) as well Imperials-as-NPC-antagonists.

The real sticky part is publishing material where this arc isn't the intended one. Where characters are not meant to become members of the Rebellion/New Republic, and remain loyal to the Imperial ideology. This is definitely not an area Lucasfilm was ever interested in going, and I have no doubt they have rather strong language in the license about presenting such content. Again, not sure how much mechanical material is needed here, or how much is desirable from a GM or developer point of view beyond the material that could be presented as described above).

For some context here, back in 2001-2003 I once wrote and developed for a mature content RPG (unlicensed, in house setting), so I have a little familiarity with the point of view of the developer as well but am only a fan and consumer of FFG games. I've also been lurking here (being a fan of SWRPGs in general and soon to be GMing a EotE campaign of my own) so I am familiar with how this topic has been discussed before so I am trying to be sensitive to that as well (in addition I'm trying to stick to the Rebellion era covered by the game, the context changes slightly in an Old Republic game or one set in the Cade Skywalker Legacy era where Empire and Sith are separate factions).

I think Rikoshi hit the nail on the head when he said that running an Imperial PC campaign requires a certain degree of maturity.

The problem is, there seems to be a dire shortage of mature players, as far too many Imperial campaigns wind up getting derailed due to at least one player deciding to embrace the "backstabbing asshat" nature that the EU has largely painted the Imperial military with. So in many instances, you only get a handful of decent games before it all goes down the crapper.

Now, if you do have a suitably mature group, it could be a very interesting campaign, and one that could be done using existing material, just with some of it re-fluffed to fit an Imperial feel. However, one possible wrinkle that I see is that the Empire is big on uniformity, so you're not as likely to have the mixed bag of character types that you would in a regular EotE or AoR game. That's not to say that each character would be the same, but they'd likely all have the same base career, such as the "Hand of Judgment" group of stormtroopers from the Allegiances and Choice of One novels; they've got different areas of aptitude, but they're all stormtroopers.

Thanks Bahamaat, Donovan, that's very insightful input (really like your blog stuff too, Mr Morningfire!)

Our EoE game is only just starting, and while I've paid a pretty penny for an AOE book from the US, any AoR campaign is still really in a vestigial stage. I've told that player who showed an interest in this that I might be interested in doing a short one-on-one campaign for him as a backstory to how he defected. But I'm trying hard not to be clichéd about it, and as you mention, this is a route that many characters seem to have gone in the games and books.

The problem is, there seems to be a dire shortage of mature players, as far too many Imperial campaigns wind up getting derailed due to at least one player deciding to embrace the "backstabbing asshat" nature that the EU has largely painted the Imperial military with.

Agree complete about the maturity required... I'm surprised the EU hasn't been kinder to the Imperials though - the movies don't really present a sympathetic Imperial (apart from Vader at the end) while I've briefly read about a few things like the Fel Empire (and supposedly Thrawn wasn't a complete monster either?)

For my part, I've been through the 90s grimdark/anti-hero tragic hipness phase RPGs at the time were infatuated with, and well, I'm not there anymore. I like morally complex characters I have also seen them go so horribly bad as well - either intentionally (playing for shock value, or simply trolling people) or unintentionally (for example going all "rapey" not being aware that the GM or one of the other players has a personal experience with **** or child abuse, etc - awkward doesn't begin to describe how that ends up).

I hear that! As a female gamer who mostly GMs for guys, I'm lucky to have a long-standing bunch of players who are pretty sensitive about such things around me. Used to get a lot of it when I was younger, but most gamers my age tend to be a bit more mature.

Lots of food-for-thought in the points you make. We've already established an Empire that's not led by Sith, so we can play on the whole internal struggle between the dark jedi and the non-Force-using Imperials within the Empire. And indeed even within the Rebellion, who we intend to play as very sceptical of the Jedi (they don't have the excuse of Order 66 any more). I'm planning on making the Rebels very suspicious of the same order that apparently cut and ran when they were needed most. We have an Emergent among the character concepts so far, but she completely self-identifies as a Rebel and not a Jedi of any description.

I'm not sure on how the 3rd book is going to handle Jedi, but I do know that neither Rebels nor Imperials are going to be glad to see them back... No idea what we will decide on eventually, but the possibility of a three-way struggle has raised its head (or even a four-way one, with the 'Fringe' being very strong in our campaign too...)

Agree complete about the maturity required... I'm surprised the EU hasn't been kinder to the Imperials though - the movies don't really present a sympathetic Imperial (apart from Vader at the end) while I've briefly read about a few things like the Fel Empire (and supposedly Thrawn wasn't a complete monster either?)

I think a part of the issue is that the Empire was painted so heavily as being the go-to villains in Star Wars that much of the early EU writers (Timothy Zahn being the notable exception) simply didn't bother to portray the Empire as anything more than a giant monolithic evil.

I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, but it's much the same as how most media portray Nazi Germany, to the point I very nearly cheered when Docter Erskine said in "Captain America: The First Avenger" the line about how most people forget the first country the Nazis invaded was their own, a fact that for a lot of Americans is sadly true, with Brad Pitt's character in the Tarantino film "Ingloreous Basterds" being a prime example of how folks thought German = Nazi when nothing could be further from the truth. And perhaps regrettably, the Galactic Empire as portrayed in the movies has some very strong Nazi undertones. Granted, from a film-making perspective, it worked to help the audience identify who the bad guys were in the story that Lucas was telling, particularly if you consider that for all Lucas really knew, he was only going to be making that one movie, not starting up one of the most lucrative media franchises in the history of merchandising.

Another players really didn't like the concept at all, as AoE is being pushed as a Rebel-themed game tying into the original movies. He suggested that if you wanted to play Judge Dredd, there were games like Deathwatch or Dark Heresey that let you play 'evil' right out of the gate.

Although the book will be Rebel based, there is nothing stopping you running a pure Imperial game with it. Ok, the fluff points toward fighting the Imps but the careers cover the Imperials just as much as the rebels. And I doubt it will take very long before some fan made material for Imperials hits this site. Hell, I ran a Stargate game using the Edge of the Empire on Saturday, it worked quite well so I doubt playing an Imperial fighter wing or a group of ISB agents would tax the AOR game much.

Eldath

I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, but it's much the same as how most media portray Nazi Germany, to the point I very nearly cheered when Docter Erskine said in "Captain America: The First Avenger" the line about how most people forget the first country the Nazis invaded was their own, a fact that for a lot of Americans is sadly true, with Brad Pitt's character in the Tarantino film "Ingloreous Basterds" being a prime example of how folks thought German = Nazi when nothing could be further from the truth. And perhaps regrettably, the Galactic Empire as portrayed in the movies has some very strong Nazi undertones. Granted, from a film-making perspective, it worked to help the audience identify who the bad guys were in the story that Lucas was telling, particularly if you consider that for all Lucas really knew, he was only going to be making that one movie, not starting up one of the most lucrative media franchises in the history of merchandising.

I was leery about doing the Godwin's Law thing because that seemed to be precisely what derailed the previous Imperial threads... In retrospect, it really didn't help that Lucas chose to call his iconic bad guys 'stormtroopers'. That carries all kinds of unfortunate implications.

Of course, pretty much every dictatorship or totalitarian regime will have some things in common, and that was the case throughout history. But the Nazi thing is still relatively recent history - there are still people alive who fought in WWII and for many the subject is still raw...

Anyway, even if we never go the full Imperial PCs route, I'm still interested in making the Imperials something other than stereotypical villains - that they have a range of archetypes and opinions, and even internal factions. That's one reason I wanted Tarkin as Emperor rather than Palpatine.

I'd be surprised if we don't see an Imperial sourcebook with advice on playing and running Imperial campaigns at some point in the product's life cycle.

It probably won't be right away, but then I've been wrong about there even being an AoR Beta rulebook, so it's anybody's guess as to when such a book would be released.

I was leery about doing the Godwin's Law thing because that seemed to be precisely what derailed the previous Imperial threads... In retrospect, it really didn't help that Lucas chose to call his iconic bad guys 'stormtroopers'. That carries all kinds of unfortunate implications.

Honestly people. Lucas was born in 1944. He grew up watching war movies where the good guys endlessly kicked the crap out of Nazis. He made Star Wars (bad guys Space Nazis), Willow (bad guys fantasy Nazis), Indiana Jones (bad guys actual Nazis) and Red Tails (again, bad guys actual Nazis).

They are supposed to be Nazis, and you are supposed to hate them for being Nazis.

Christ almighty that this even needs explaining...

Seriously does anyone actually think Lucas didn't know what a Nazi was or would feel any compunction about using them as bad guys?

Maelora, with the arrival of ErikB, your thread is now derailed. Take what you have and run!

I worry that the younger generations don't seem to understand precisely why everyone thought Nazis were bad people. It bodes ill for the future.

Just thoughts - I'd be interested in hearing from both sides as long as we can keep the arguments polite and keep away from real-world stuff.

I think my position was pretty clear in one of the other locked threads - there's room enough in the galaxy for all manner of play.

You wanted virtuous paladin like Jedi? Not a problem. You want a straight up Rebels versus Empire? Clearly that's easy. You want a darker Blake's 7-ish take on the Rebels versus Empire? Actually I think that Blake's 7 would make an awesome Star Wars campaign. You want to explore the terrorism side of insurrection, with a black ops team that will do anything it can by any means necessary to bring down Palpatine? I just wrapped up that style of campaign and it was ridiculously fun.

And then of course there's my core world princess who is very much a pro-imperial supporter, was heartbroken that terrorists were responsible for Alderaan and will gladly report all seditious elements she encounters to the ISB - and she's been hella fun to play.

So yeah, there's no reason that a universe as vast as this cant support all sides of play.

Deleting to avoid real world concerns. . .

Actually, strictly speaking, I find the nazi/Imperial link pretty weak.

Never mind. It's not worth getting into when the opening post pretty explicitly said LEAVE THE REAL WORLD OUT OF THIS.

Out of interest how old are you?

Old enough to have some really good points and entertaining posts. Do you really need to know his exact age? If he says 16, are you going to berate him for being a "young whipper snapper that doesn't know the true horrors of war?"

Lay off bro. We aren't getting into the "Are the Imperials secretly Nazis?!" debate here. It doesn't matter. The Empire is the Empire. Any similarities are likely planned, but ultimately unimportant. Proving that Lucas was inspired by the Nazis in his creation of the Empire will do less for you than masturbation.

(I would also like to point out the fact that with literally 2 seconds of investigation [namely visiting Dess's profile] you could discover the answer to your question.)

We need an Internet Law to cover ErikB's uncontrollable need to jump into any and every Imperial thread to piss in the proverbial punch pool.

Anyone got any ideas on what to call it?

I think Rikoshi hit the nail on the head when he said that running an Imperial PC campaign requires a certain degree of maturity.

The problem is, there seems to be a dire shortage of mature players, as far too many Imperial campaigns wind up getting derailed due to at least one player deciding to embrace the "backstabbing asshat" nature that the EU has largely painted the Imperial military with. So in many instances, you only get a handful of decent games before it all goes down the crapper.

Now, if you do have a suitably mature group, it could be a very interesting campaign, and one that could be done using existing material, just with some of it re-fluffed to fit an Imperial feel. However, one possible wrinkle that I see is that the Empire is big on uniformity, so you're not as likely to have the mixed bag of character types that you would in a regular EotE or AoR game. That's not to say that each character would be the same, but they'd likely all have the same base career, such as the "Hand of Judgment" group of stormtroopers from the Allegiances and Choice of One novels; they've got different areas of aptitude, but they're all stormtroopers.

Maturity has nothing to do with it. A bunch of immature players could play impys cause they think it is cool as much as a mature group could play cause they wanted to play impys having to make hard choices about their loyalty and following orders.

Likewise, being vehemently or even violently opposed to playing an impy does not make you immature. My view on playing impys is pretty close to ErikB's tho I wont push the issue here cause what anyone else wants to play is not my business or concern. Asking here what someone thinks is asking for people to give even extreme opinions tho.

I would point out that maybe the impys are backstabbing asshats cause for 40 years in the EU the guy in charge made sure you had to be a backstabbing asshat to get promoted. Which is pretty much the EU canon for nearly 30 years in real life.

Agree complete about the maturity required... I'm surprised the EU hasn't been kinder to the Imperials though - the movies don't really present a sympathetic Imperial (apart from Vader at the end) while I've briefly read about a few things like the Fel Empire (and supposedly Thrawn wasn't a complete monster either?)

I think a part of the issue is that the Empire was painted so heavily as being the go-to villains in Star Wars that much of the early EU writers (Timothy Zahn being the notable exception) simply didn't bother to portray the Empire as anything more than a giant monolithic evil.

I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, but it's much the same as how most media portray Nazi Germany, to the point I very nearly cheered when Docter Erskine said in "Captain America: The First Avenger" the line about how most people forget the first country the Nazis invaded was their own, a fact that for a lot of Americans is sadly true, with Brad Pitt's character in the Tarantino film "Ingloreous Basterds" being a prime example of how folks thought German = Nazi when nothing could be further from the truth. And perhaps regrettably, the Galactic Empire as portrayed in the movies has some very strong Nazi undertones. Granted, from a film-making perspective, it worked to help the audience identify who the bad guys were in the story that Lucas was telling, particularly if you consider that for all Lucas really knew, he was only going to be making that one movie, not starting up one of the most lucrative media franchises in the history of merchandising.

Since we have gone there....

You can say that alot of hollywood paints all germans as nazis and all nazis are completely evil, and that is wrong, but I will come back that 'I was just following orders' or not knowing what is happening at the extermination camp next door is a form of moral cowardice that isnt much better.

I bring this up because that is the biggest problem I have with being an impy. There is no way that I would stay an impy after any one of a large number of atrocities the Empire committed with permission from the very top. To have a game that did not take that into account would not be a game I would play in. To stay an impy after alderaan would, to me, be an implicit support of the empire at least as bad as any explicit supporter could be. That is not a game I would play. I would not find it fun.