Soooo.... why d'you do it all the time then? <genuinely trying to understand>

Ideally to bring it up now, in the beta and before the new TV series and movies, explain why I don't like it being brought up, and then never hear the T-word in relation to Star Wars ever again .

Yes, that's the default. But are 100% of them? In your game, yes, and that's fine. But we're having an Imperial civil war where there are four factions, one of which is broadly Lawful Neutral and another is pro-alien under Thrawn.

I don't like violence in real life so I like the idea that it is only to be employed as a last resort when it really, really has to be used. So a war just to decide who gets to be king is still kinda cool but it isn't as cool as Star Wars where the stakes are higher.

It's a mickey take of extreme right-wingers, and the crazy paranoia some felt at the end of the Cold War.

I dunno. They have clearly read a lot of books on the Soviet war machine. For fun. I suspect they were going for producing something intended to be entertainingly cool rather than to ridicule its subject.

Like I say, not a parody, exactly. A homage maybe?

But _you_ seem to be saying that players who like the Empire are bad people. No?

More misguided and in need of a history lesson.

How does what anyone else does in their games impinge on your fun?

I really, honestly don't give a **** what people do in their own games. I care what I read in the FFG and Disney products I buy when I want to escape in to Star Wars. (Okay, that probably isn't entirely true but I can generally keep things to disapproving looks and quiet resentment they keep it to themselves).

Uhm... Luke is a terrorist as much as he is has freedom fighter

I cannot express how little I want to get in to that.

Come on, try.

Come on, try.

Well, if I was Disney, I would ban the use of the T-Word to describe the alliance. So even Imperial propaganda uses different vocabulary.

Secondly, make the Empire so clearly bad justification isn't up for debate.

Thirdly, the alliance just don't act like T-Words. They attack military targets head on in open battle, wear uniforms and fly fighters, drive tanks and generally act like allied soldiers in the second world war.

And just generally imply that the Alliance is made up of Us, and the Empire are Them. Rebel Commandos are Navy SEALS. Stormtroopers are brainwashed North Korean soldiers.

Thirdly, the alliance just don't act like T-Words. They attack military targets head on in open battle, wear uniforms and fly fighters, drive tanks and generally act like allied soldiers in the second world war.

Gee... Attack on Endor - no uniforms, irregulars, blowing up a ground base shielding a government project - Gee, not Terrorists? right on the border, actually. Same level as the embassy bombing attempts by partisans in various african colonies in the past, and yes, they WERE labeled as terrorism.

Several of the extended universe elements have also had rebel irregulars (read as PC's) not in uniform destroying Imperial forces in populated areas. Using stealth to attack with full surprise, and targeting civil governance rather than military targets.

The difference between an irregular and a terrorist is, legally, nothing. Semantically, the terrorist is doing it to create terror, while the irregular is doing it to achieve military objectives, with terror as an added benefit.

The best known irregular is Jesse James, CSA Army - he was a bank robber, and one who often blew up the bank afterwards, robbed trains and blew up tracks and bridges, whilst not wearing uniforms most of the time. (He was a squad leader at one point, so should have been promoted to Corporal by the organizational system of the time.) He commited atrocities - scalping and murdering surrendered union troops. Creating terror. He was, by modern sensibilities, part of a terrorist arm of the Confederate Military. And when later, he is quoth as having said that his robberies were nothing more than continuing the war... since his parent military surrendered, he was in fact a terrorist by the semantics, as the military objectives had ceased to exist.

Oh, and the heroes of the US revolution were labeled as traitors by the UK, and the perpetrators of the Boston Tea Party as traitors and terrorists. One side's patriotic irregulars are the other sides rogue terrorists...

Do you want to play a terrorist? I sure as f*ck don't

Gee... Attack on Endor - no uniforms, irregulars, blowing up a ground base shielding a government project

Those were Special Forces, and the commandos are clearly wearing camouflage uniforms.

Well, then you must play imperials, as they are the legitimate government, keeping order in the galaxy - trying to keep the rebels from letting it all spin out of control and turn into chaos.

Well, then you must play imperials, as they are the legitimate government, keeping order in the galaxy - trying to keep the rebels from letting it all spin out of control and turn into chaos.

Those are Nazis. If Disney think it is good idea to pay four billion dollars for Nazis vs. Terrorists - whoever wins we lose they are really, really dumb.

And in general f*ck off you troll.

Takes one to know one, good on you.

Or: let go of your feelings, your fear and don't give into the dark side and be all hateful because someone has a different opinion than yours...

I really, genuinely think people will have more fun pretending to shoot at space nazis than they will pretending to be space Al-Qaeda. I think it is good for the game and Star Wars in general if they make this effort.

What do you think?

(I think it is easier to make the Alliance Not-Terrorists than it is to make The Empire Not-Nazis)

I do not pretend to speak for anyone but myself and my group (as I more or less know what they enjoy), to do so I would be arrogant, boderline sociopathic and an idiot. Also, to take on such a normative and deterministic position is pointless, this is a game, a fantasy setting (set in space) wherein player groups can do as they wish.

If you for instance watch TCW you see that moral ambiguity is very present in the series - its not nearly so black and white as Anakin wants it to be, hence his fall to the dark side (good intentions and hell, you know what I mean). Star Wars is more complex than what you make it.

Yeah. I don't want to play a terrorist either

What an odd and nonsensical reply, it perfectly avoids relating to anything I wrote. Just to mention it: my players performed a terrorist action last session, by placing explosives in the imperial centre in Bestine, and blowing it up...

Would you then recommend that FFG put out a game about playing terrorists?

Yknow. If they asked your advice.

... and "reset" was hit again...

Dude, I am asking you straight up:-

If FFG have a choice to put out a game where people play terrorists or a game where they do not play terrorists, which do you think they should go with?

Yes I agree. Putting out a game where people play terrorists would be a very bad idea.

Dude, I am asking you straight up:-

If FFG have a choice to put out a game where people play terrorists or a game where they do not play terrorists, which do you think they should go with?

Red her... I shouldn't deign to answer such a leading and stupid question, but here goes: I think they should create an open-ended game wherein the players could choose for themselves. So neither of your alternatives are good enough for me. Moral ambiguity and uncertainty is something I enjoy to employ in my games, whenever possible. If players prefer to see themselves as freedom fighters, good on them, that won't mean that civilians will treat them as such... if they prefer to see themselves as terrorists (which I'd argue no one really does, no matter what the opposing faction says, what history labels them as, and so on), they could still be seen as freedom fighters by some, and terrorists by others.

Moral simplicity only exists where fundamentalists are concerned, whatever their flags, uniforms, beliefs and political colours.

But you'd wholly endorse them if they made the Empire so evil and vile - by committing wanton acts of things like **** and the dismembering of children - that not a single individual could suggest they were good guys? Yes, because Disney would do that. In fact, I hear they're planning on kicking a Star Wars Rewrite over to broadway so that people can watch it happen live, on stage, alongside scores of sparkly dancers and belting sopranos.

Red her... I shouldn't deign to answer such a leading and stupid question, but here goes: I think they should create an open-ended game wherein the players could choose for themselves. So neither of your alternatives are good enough for me. Moral ambiguity and uncertainty is something I enjoy to employ in my games, whenever possible. If players prefer to see themselves as freedom fighters, good on them, that won't mean that civilians will treat them as such... if they prefer to see themselves as terrorists (which I'd argue no one really does, no matter what the opposing faction says, what history labels them as, and so on), they could still be seen as freedom fighters by some, and terrorists by others.

Moral simplicity only exists where fundamentalists are concerned, whatever their flags, uniforms, beliefs and political colours.

Amen.

But you'd wholly endorse them if they made the Empire so evil and vile

They do kinda blow up planets with Death Stars.

And America blew up Hiroshima with an a-bomb. What's your point?

Yes, they blew up a planet - so why the hell do you need FFG to hammer home the fact they're evil? Yes, perhaps by the standard, most of the Empire is evil, but a lot of players and GMs want to explore BEYOND that single-minded, black and white possibility and delve into a more realistic scenario.

I don't want to play a terrorist. If you can make sympathetic Imperials in a way that doesn't impinge on the Alliance being unambiguously the good guys I'll take suggestions.

You don't want to play a terrorist? Then don't! The material as written in the books does not paint the Alliance to be evil, and doesn't make a blatant point of saying "the Empire are actually a bunch of misunderstood boy scouts" - with the material being used AS WRITTEN, you have your way. All people here are saying, and all they have EVER said, is that IN THEIR GAMES they might want to explore other avenues. This DOES NOT infringe upon your pro-Rebel, anti-Empire expectations; this DOES NOT mean that you need to play a game you don't want to. By the same token, this DOES NOT mean that we need to agree and convert to your own ideals and wants in order to be able to play a game using these rules or rulebooks.

So by all means, love the Rebels and hate the Empire, but please stop trying to force-feed your opinions to people. We KNOW you love the Rebels and loathe the Empire, but constantly saying as much to us will NOT make us change how we wish to play or explore the game AT OUR OWN TABLES, and won't help you make the game into MORE of a Rebellion = Heroes than it already is .