StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The Guid wrote: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.

A fair enough point. I think many people also see Luke's "I will not fight you father" strategy in the final scenes of ROTJ as further evidence of Yoda's pacifist teaching, ignoring the fact that this is something Luke apparently improvised himself (Obi-Wan wanted Luke to kill Vader, and Yoda wanted Luke to "conquer Vader and his Emperor"). Essentially the "Yoda pacifism" theory is based on two lines ("never for attack" and "wars not make one great") and the fact that he doesn't carry a lightsaber in ESB.

I don't agree with the people who says he's a pacifist. I'm merely saying that he seems more anti-war in ESB, when he was clearly quite "into it" (he expressed misgivings a few times, but otherwise he wholeheartedly supported the war) in Episodes II and III. Yoda is an effective killer, and he may have trained Luke that way. Luke's own pacifistic actions were his own. I agree that people get a false impression via selective thinking and then apply it to the prequels (ie: either they deny events happening, or berate the prequels for "betraying" the characters of the OT).

It's sort of like the argument that the Jedi aren't soldiers because of Mace Windu's line in AOTC ("we're keepers of the peace, not soldiers") and the fact that they don't wear uniforms (not Clone uniforms or Imperial uniforms), despite the fact that they act like soldiers in the last two movies.

Mad wrote: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).

It's true, in the SP of JA Kyle even says "a power isn't Dark or Lightside, it's how you use it" (along those lines anyway). In the game they tell you to stay on the light side, etc, even if you pick "dark side" powers. In MP, the sides of the force are clearly divided.

Jedi Outcast had a mixture of dark and light powers in single player (and you were given both sides as you went, you had no choice in the matter, like in JA). MP was divided into dark and light, except in two game modes... Holocron and Jedi Master. In Jedi Master you had everything (minus two powers, drain and absorb). In Holocron you could pick up random cubes that gave you a different power each, so you could easily mix and match sides. The SP storyline of both JK2 and JA forced you on the lightside, regardless of what powers you actually possessed or used.

The original Jedi Knight had the sharp delineation between dark and light and consequences if you strayed from the path in the SP storyline. MP you just had a sharp divide, but you COULD have a combination of dark and light as a level 6 disciple (necessarily weaker than everyone else on level 7 or 8 on a server, but still able to mix and match like nobody else could).

Mysteries of the Sith did away with the "sides" completely, by just having all the powers up for grabs (but you couldn't combine certain powers due to having to pick one from each category while force points remained) and you could mix and match dark and light. The SP storyline forced you to be on the light side, period.

So yeah, it's not straight. I'm not just thinking of the JK games though, but also the RPGs. I confess I've only read about them not actually played them.

Kurgan wrote: 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?

It appears however that the Jedi has already reached this rationalisation. I not sure if this was the name of the sourcebook(New Jedi Order Sourcebook by Wizards), but in one of the more recent RPG books, we learnt that Jedi padawan are "tested" by being sent down into Coruscant depths on some spurious mission. Along the way, they are authorised to do any amount of damage, just as long as they don't become "dark side".

In the movies itself, we clearly see that Qui Gon had no qualms with leaving Shimi behind. Cheating so as to get Anakin is acceptable, but not using force or deceiving Watto.Similarly, Obiwan has no qualms about using the Force to force a Deathstick smuggler to change his viewpoint.

The same goes with taking children away from their parents, forcing the parents to leave their jobs in the Temple so as to limit contact with their child and so on and forth.

Hell, even using the Dark Side isn't out of bounds. Mace Windu Vaapad and depending on the canonicity of the script, Yoda own venture into the Dark Side in AOTC so as to glimpse into the future are examples of this.

It would appear that the only reason why torture was unacceptable is because Jedi already have means of mind-ripping the information from their enemies.

Such gray morality makes for interesting storytelling, but is problematic for game mechanics, I grant you that.

PainRack wrote: Yoda own venture into the Dark Side in AOTC

What?

Yoda "probed the Dark Side" (whatever that means) in early script drafts of AOTC and (IIRC) the novelisation.

Kurgan wrote:Such gray morality makes for interesting storytelling, but is problematic for game mechanics, I grant you that.

I could write an entire essay on this, and why I feel that conclusion shortsighted. For fear of straying from the OP, I shan't -- I'll confine myself to stating that not every gaming paradigm has to conform to d20 or WEG.

I think it was dark side.

the difference between the Dark and the Light sides has more to do with power and domination then anything else.

The Sith (and extension non-Sith Dark Side users) want power to dominate and control everything, where as the Jedi (and non-Jedi Light Side users) are willing to let the "will" of the Force guide and control them

so it comes back to that it's not the talents themselves but how you use them that's Dark or Light, but it's true some talents have greater probability of giving that feeling of being able to control fate itself then others (thus it can be said that those are or will lead to the dark side).