Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="daddystabz" data-source="post: 4470918" data-attributes="member: 54231">Also, Mace Windu uses it on General Grievous, crushing his chest with it and thus giving Grievous the cough that he has all the time. I think people misunderstand jedi completely. Jedi TRY to not harm others with the force or at all for that matter BUT if they are forced to kill they will KILL to defend themselves and other innocents. Why is there no consideration of me killing a bad guy with my lightsaber? Did Obi-Wan absolutely have to slice Darth Maul in half with his saber? Jedi are led by the force with their sabers in combat. The force is what makes them deadly in combat. No one seems to ever question or think of giving dark side points for using a lightsaber to harm others. I am sorry but the force sometimes has to be used to harm others by lightside jedi in order to protect others. What is the use of taking a freaking force power if everytime you use it you go right down the dark path? By the way, the GM didn't decide to enact a houserule on us because I was abusing the power or even using it too much. I in fact rarely use the power at all, only having used it very sparingly since I have had it. He actually was reading through the core rulebook and came to the conclusion that he hasn't been issuing dark side points often enough. What made him look in the core rulebook about this stuff is actually another character in our campaign who is a jedi as well. He goes overboard with his force powers a LOT and kills everything in sight. We joke about him all the time saying that it is only a matter of time till he starts spewing force lightning and we nicknamed him Anakin. We try to hide Tusken women and children from him. In one episode of our Dawn of Defiance campaign he used Move Object to drop a Z-95 Headhunter space fighter on Durga the Hutt, killing him. I will quote to you a recent Jedi Counseling article that seems to agree with me that this all should be situational: "Q: I'm having some problems deciding what type of transgression some actions should be. How can you tell when something is blatantly evil (a major transgression), questionably evil (a moderate transgression), or dubiously evil (a minor transgression)? A: While the precise divisions are ultimately up to the GM, enforcing them as loosely or tightly as appropriate for the campaign, here are some guidelines to help you decide on corner cases. To decide if an action is "blatantly evil," ask yourself the following questions: <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Did the action harm a sentient, living character? </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Did the action harm a character that was at your mercy (helpless, unable to meaningfully defend itself, or something similar)? </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Did the action cause serious harm to a character (physically, mentally, or emotionally)? </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Was the action unnecessary to protect yourself or another character from an immediate, obvious threat? </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Was the action deliberate and the result intended? </li> </ul>If the answer to all of these questions is "Yes," then the action is almost certainly "blatantly evil" (a major transgression) and deserves increasing the character's Dark Side Score. Examples include murder, torture (including acts such as intentional mutilation or maiming), slavery, rape, and any similar act considered reprehensible by most civilizations. If exactly one question can be answered "No," then the action is probably "questionably evil" (a moderate transgression), which might be worth increasing the character's Dark Side Score. Examples include assassinating an Imperial warlord who is about to give orders to exterminate the population of a planet (it's in defense of others, but he's still at your mercy), tormenting a droid to extract information, or starting an unnecessary fight that results in serious injury. If exactly two of the questions can be answered "No," then the action is probably "dubiously evil" (a minor transgression) and likely doesn't deserve increasing the character's Dark Side Score. Examples include killing in self-defense or recklessly (but accidentally) causing injury to others. If three or more questions can be answered "No," then the action probably is not a dark side transgression at all. For example, destroying an object is not a transgression unless doing so also causes some sort of substantial harm to a character. Similarly, hunting an animal (not sentient) in the wilderness (not helpless) for sustenance (protecting yourself from starvation) is perfectly acceptable in all but the most unusual circumstances. Obviously, you'll still need to interpret the situation accordingly. How strictly do you want to define "harm"? For example, is a rich character harmed in a significant way by having a minor treasure stolen? Is a threat imminent and real, or is the character merely trying to justify unnecessary aggression? The purpose of these questions isn't to give you a never-fail method but to help you evaluate an action. When in doubt, go with your gut instinct. The more you have to parse and explain an action to make it acceptable, the more likely it is to be a transgression." This is directly from GM Sarli from Wizards of the Coast, one of the game's developers and is in my opinion the best way to look at these situations.  If I use Force Grip to defend myself and others from harm and accidentally I roll high enough with it to kill the enemy, you can answer easily two of these questions as "no" and thus it would not deserve a dark side point.  </blockquote>

Verification