StarDestroyer.Net BBS

In the movies I can recall at least two cases where the Jedi harmed living beings by directly using the Force. Yoda knocked out Palpatines guards and Luke choked the guards at Jabaas palace. Both of them were light side Jedi. So why is Force choke considered a dark side ability ?

Because to some it's considered an aggressive attack. It is at heart an telekinetic attack on a specific body part, thus considering it Dark Side only is rather stupid. Most of what the movie has shown us is that intent matters far more then what is being thrown out.

It's probably not inherently dark-side, but the act of slowly choking your enemies to death is an aggressive one. There might be circumstances where it could be done while still remaining on the light side, but they're probably rare enough that it's officially a dark-side ability to discourage people from falling into its trap. "Dark-side ability" should probably really mean "ability with significant risk of falling to the dark side, do not use".

Choking someone who can't defend himself is pretty low even without using the Force to do it.

I think in both cases cited above it is done to threats. The Gammorren Guards come up to Luke with mean grins and axes whilst the Imperal Guards are getting their wierd swords out when Yoda executes his sort of what I like to call "Force Plum"

Yoda say only use the force for klnowledge and defence never for attack.

in both cases with Luke and Yoda, neither the guards or the gammoreans were killed but simply incapacitated.


in both cases the power was used in defense. Force Lightning on the other hand appears to have a use in attacking someone.

Isolder74 wrote:Yoda say only use the force for klnowledge and defence never for attack.

in both cases with Luke and Yoda, neither the guards or the gammoreans were killed but simply incapacitated.


in both cases the power was used in defense. Force Lightning on the other hand appears to have a use in attacking someone.

How can we be sure they are only incapacitated may I ask? Is there a novel reference you can give me to still my wondering mind?

The Guid wrote:

Isolder74 wrote:Yoda say only use the force for klnowledge and defence never for attack.

in both cases with Luke and Yoda, neither the guards or the gammoreans were killed but simply incapacitated.


in both cases the power was used in defense. Force Lightning on the other hand appears to have a use in attacking someone.

How can we be sure they are only incapacitated may I ask? Is there a novel reference you can give me to still my wondering mind?

Well they were still breathing once he passed

Yoda just knocked the red guards out

In viewing, the slam against the wall didn't have enough force to kill, just enough to knock them unconscious and leave a nasty headache in the morning. At most, they might have a mild concussion. A killing blow would have dented the wall from the force.

LadyTevar wrote:In viewing, the slam against the wall didn't have enough force to kill, just enough to knock them unconscious and leave a nasty headache in the morning. At most, they might have a mild concussion. A killing blow would have dented the wall from the force.

Though of course, we can't make assumptions about the composition of the wall, and Yoda may well have used a constriction effect along with the ragdoll effect.

On re-reading, I'm not saying Yoda's a cold-blooded murderer, just that scene isn't very clear.

To me, it seemed very clear that Yoda wanted them out of the way for the fight, and so used no more Force than was necessary to do that.

LadyTevar wrote:To me, it seemed very clear that Yoda wanted them out of the way for the fight, and so used no more Force than was necessary to do that.

I meant clear evidence as to whether dents in the wall or the apparent severity must mean the guards were only stunned. Yoda's intentions and attitude are clear enough.

If magnitude and intent are the major contributing factors in whether or not something is light/darksided, then force lightning could also be included. Dooku incapacitated Anakin with lightning in AOTC when Anakin attacked him, and Anakin was only out for a few minutes at most.

Whether or not Dooku planned to skewer an unconcscious Anakin later is immaterial, since it CAN be used merely for self-defense just as Luke's force choke on Jabba's guard was.

The Shadow wrote:In the movies I can recall at least two cases where the Jedi harmed living beings by directly using the Force. Yoda knocked out Palpatines guards and Luke choked the guards at Jabaas palace. Both of them were light side Jedi. So why is Force choke considered a dark side ability ?

Because in the games the bad guys only get to use these powers. Then people read the game mechanics back into the movies and ignore the scenes that don't fit.

Yeah, and Yoda's rhetoric. Clearly, from the movies, Yoda either changed his philosophy after the Clone Wars, or he's a total hypocrite (or a Machiavellian reasoner.. ie: pre-emptive defense isn't really "an attack"), as if the Sith couldn't use such logical loopholes to justify all their actions.

From the movies we can't tell their intent because Lucas provides us with no internal dialouge. Such rationalizations have to be taken from the novels or comics, if such rationalizations are provided...

The Jedi use their share of "aggressive attacks" in the movies. Witness Yoda brutally tossing a lightsaber into the chest of a clone in ROTS, or the repetative use of Force Push by Jedi against battle droids (who of course have no soul, so it's okay to slaughter them). I can't think of a single "Sith power" that the Jedi don't use in the movies. Even lightning! Of course nobody believes that really happened, it always has to be Yoda merely channelling back part of Dooku's attack as a purely defensive gesture (if you buy that).

I'm not assuming the Jedi are infallible, but I think there's a bit of a disconnect between what they "ought to do" (in our estimation) and what they actually do onscreen.

Even lightning! Of course nobody believes that really happened, it always has to be Yoda merely channelling back part of Dooku's attack as a purely defensive gesture (if you buy that).

I had always assumed that was the logical conclusion. If someone throws a ball at me, and I catch it and throw it back, it generally isn't assumed that I pulled the ball out of my pocket.

According to the WotC's official rulings, using the Force to crush organs and otherwise directly damage living tissue is a Dark Side thing because you're using the Force to damage life.. to hurt itself.
That, and yet using the "Move Object" skill to push people around isn't. Hrm.

As for Sith lightning, I'm guessing that it actually requires some sort of special training to generate, and actually requires the user to feel malice or hatred.

The RPG, being a game, is very low on the canon scale, but it does sort of make sense.

Kurgan wrote:
Yeah, and Yoda's rhetoric. Clearly, from the movies, Yoda either changed his philosophy after the Clone Wars, or he's a total hypocrite (or a Machiavellian reasoner.. ie: pre-emptive defense isn't really "an attack"), as if the Sith couldn't use such logical loopholes to justify all their actions.

You can reason that away, simply with precog. Or anytime a Jedi bounces a blaster bolt back is cold blooded murder, since he acted first to deflect an attack before it came.

Which kind of opens up another 'cheat' for the Jedi when it comes to the morality of pre-emptive strikes/defense.

As Luke explained in Courtship of Princess Leia, none and all are part of the Darkside, it's the reasons why. Force choking may be like 99.99% of the darkside, but there may be some circumstances when it's absolutely necessary. Such as you don't have to use it slowly and sadistically like Vader, but use it to quickly crunch a persons trachea and snap their neck when a lightsaber or similar simply won't do. Or for some reason, you've run out of options trying to get someone to submit without killing them and choking them a little so they don't have the energy to move?

Noble Ire wrote:

Even lightning! Of course nobody believes that really happened, it always has to be Yoda merely channelling back part of Dooku's attack as a purely defensive gesture (if you buy that).

I had always assumed that was the logical conclusion. If someone throws a ball at me, and I catch it and throw it back, it generally isn't assumed that I pulled the ball out of my pocket.

Right, but people are still thinking in game terms with tautologies like "Lightning is a dark side power because it's used only by dark siders" which means Yoda can't have used it, even if we SEE him use it, so we have to invent another explanation (despite EU hints that even Yoda has "probed the Dark Side" whatever that means).

I have no desire to have yet another argument about this, I've heard a dozen excuses already. Other than the game tautology the main argument is that since Yoda spouts pacifist rhetoric in ESB, then he would never attack anyone with the force, and so it goes. Yoda, in his hot-headed warrior days, may let his opponent throw the first punch (or threatening gesture), but he definately attacks using the Force, so rationalize that how you must, I guess.

So how does this resolve in RPG terms? Did Yoda get a dark side point, or does he have to wait for the enemy to take their attack turn before he is allowed to counter attack? Or can he do it so long as he doesn't enjoy it?

Knife wrote:

Kurgan wrote:
Yeah, and Yoda's rhetoric. Clearly, from the movies, Yoda either changed his philosophy after the Clone Wars, or he's a total hypocrite (or a Machiavellian reasoner.. ie: pre-emptive defense isn't really "an attack"), as if the Sith couldn't use such logical loopholes to justify all their actions.

You can reason that away, simply with precog. Or anytime a Jedi bounces a blaster bolt back is cold blooded murder, since he acted first to deflect an attack before it came.

Which kind of opens up another 'cheat' for the Jedi when it comes to the morality of pre-emptive strikes/defense.

Excellent point. So really determining somebody's "alignment" based on visuals is impossible, given these factors.

Kurgan wrote:
The Jedi use their share of "aggressive attacks" in the movies. Witness Yoda brutally tossing a lightsaber into the chest of a clone in ROTS, or the repetative use of Force Push by Jedi against battle droids (who of course have no soul, so it's okay to slaughter them). I can't think of a single "Sith power" that the Jedi don't use in the movies. Even lightning! Of course nobody believes that really happened, it always has to be Yoda merely channelling back part of Dooku's attack as a purely defensive gesture (if you buy that).

I would like to also point out that in ROTJ novelisation, Luke skywalker stated that the first rule of a jedi when surrounded and in doubt was to attack. Therefore, despite Yoda pacificist statements, he and Obi-wan had clearly taught Luke to fight aggressively in battle, as opposed to just standing around and turning the other cheek.


A much better rationalisation for Force-choke would be that it would take a very cruel person to slowly, deliberately choke the living shit out of someone else.

In Jedi Academy single player, a Light-side Jedi can have both "Light" and "Dark" powers. Even Kyle shoots out lightning at his opponents near the end of the game. So game mechanics have changed over time, but people are still thinking of the original Jedi Knight's Force-mechanics.

Intent is probably the factor. Those who use the aggressive powers too much are likely those with more aggressive mindsets, making them more suspectable to falling to the Dark side because of the mental state required for increasing the effects of the aggressive powers (namely, aggression and hate).

As has been mentioned several times in this thread, intent seems to be key with the Force. Sith are supposed to use their power to dominate, control, and destroy. Jedi on the other hand are supposed to use their power to defend, preserve and guide. Luke and Yoda used their power against an imminent threat. The guards (both Royal and Gammorean) were more than willing/likely to kill Yoda and Luke. Yoda encountering Dooku just wanted to capture him, until Dooku escalated it, wanting to beat his former master. Luke had thrown away his lightsaber, he was not in a position to be a threat to Palpatine (at least not a physical one) and Palpy fried him anyway out of anger. Also, everytime Vader used the force choke, he had the intent to kill the person, or at least threaten and harm them.

Yoda wasn't using pacifistic rhetoric everyone. Pacifism involves not even defending yourself because war is evil. The fact is that Yoda only ever uses the force for knowledge or defence - the specifics of the actions do not matter - he is attacked first.

It does not matter that goes to Palpatine to attack him. He is defending the Jedi Order and the Republic which has been attacked. Palpatine even tried to have him killed. If someone sent someone to kill me and my family and would do so again I would consider it self defence to go to him and shoot him myself.

I seem to remember reading once that Plo Koon used force lightning on his students to teach them resiliance or something. I wish I could remember where I read that. I don't see it on Starwars.com or anything. If anyone else can remember hearing that, speak up, pleese!

PainRack wrote:

Kurgan wrote:
The Jedi use their share of "aggressive attacks" in the movies. Witness Yoda brutally tossing a lightsaber into the chest of a clone in ROTS, or the repetative use of Force Push by Jedi against battle droids (who of course have no soul, so it's okay to slaughter them). I can't think of a single "Sith power" that the Jedi don't use in the movies. Even lightning! Of course nobody believes that really happened, it always has to be Yoda merely channelling back part of Dooku's attack as a purely defensive gesture (if you buy that).

I would like to also point out that in ROTJ novelisation, Luke skywalker stated that the first rule of a jedi when surrounded and in doubt was to attack. Therefore, despite Yoda pacificist statements, he and Obi-wan had clearly taught Luke to fight aggressively in battle, as opposed to just standing around and turning the other cheek.


A much better rationalisation for Force-choke would be that it would take a very cruel person to slowly, deliberately choke the living shit out of someone else.

Right, but what about torturing somebody (not to death) rather than killing them? Say, to get information? I'm not personally advocating torture, but I mean, I can see how a Jedi might easily rationalize that as the "better way" or the "lesser evil." The same way you could say that lightning somebody into unconsciousness would be better than hacking off their head with your lightsaber.

Similarly the Sith could come up with all sorts of machiavellian justifications for their actions (bringing peace, freedom, justice, and stability to the new empire, safe and secure society, order to the galaxy, etc). Having good intentions seems an awfully convenient way to use power to do harm (that good may come of it). And the Jedi don't do this?

Is bloodlust/sadism the only true "sin" that will toss you onto the Dark Side?