KOTOR Light side vs Dark Side question
Thomas
decent jedi - but a few of the dark side quests ( killing bendak ) have been
too much to resist and I've gained dark points. Are the dark points going
to be detrimental to my character? I'm not sure how that's going to play
out - do they counteract the light points or just get added in addition to
them?
TIA,
Tom
Julie d'Aubigny
You can gain a few darkside points without breaking your character. You
probably will never be pure, but hey.
--
Elizabeth D. Brooks | kali.ma...@comcast.net | US2002021724
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
AeonAdventure | "Dobby likes us!" -- Smeagol
-- http://www.theonering.net/scrapbook/view/6856
LoneCoyote
"Julie d'Aubigny" <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3FCA95E6...@comcast.net...
> Thomas wrote:
> >
> > I've got a question regarding points. I've been basically trying to be
a
> > decent jedi - but a few of the dark side quests ( killing bendak ) have
been
> > too much to resist and I've gained dark points. Are the dark points
going
> > to be detrimental to my character? I'm not sure how that's going to
play
> > out - do they counteract the light points or just get added in addition
to
> > them?
>
> You can gain a few darkside points without breaking your character. You
> probably will never be pure, but hey.
>
I played through the game as pure as the driven snow. Never once got any
dark side points. About half way through or so, my character display, where
your stats are shown, showed my character with the force swirling around me
like a blinding snow storm with bright shafts of light.
Do you get a similar display with a dark side character?
Adam
I am at the first planet after Dantooine and I feel like I've had
about equal light and dark side points, yet im still closer to light.
I dont think its detrimental at least up to where I am.
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:55:04 GMT, "Thomas" <gold...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> I played through the game as pure as the driven snow. Never once got any
> dark side points. About half way through or so, my character display, where
> your stats are shown, showed my character with the force swirling around me
> like a blinding snow storm with bright shafts of light.
> Do you get a similar display with a dark side character?
Yes, it's kind of cool (the light side display). The dark side display
is apparently equally cool, but sinister and extra flame-y.
Sarah
> wrote:
>
> >I've got a question regarding points. I've been basically trying to be a
> >decent jedi - but a few of the dark side quests ( killing bendak ) have
been
> >too much to resist and I've gained dark points.
I didn't even think the situation (Bendak) should have earned dark points.
You've taken a legal bounty so what does it matter how it's carried out,
especially when the way it's carried out has a sort of poetic justice to it.
In fact, there were a couple of quests where I disagreed with the type of
points the resolution was assigned - this assignment breaks down whenever a
situation is presented that isn't simplistic. I also thought that the light
and dark choices in dialog were sometimes so extreme that anyone choosing
them would be viewed with suspicion, and rightly so.
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> I didn't even think the situation (Bendak) should have earned dark points.
> You've taken a legal bounty so what does it matter how it's carried out,
> especially when the way it's carried out has a sort of poetic justice to it.
> In fact, there were a couple of quests where I disagreed with the type of
> points the resolution was assigned - this assignment breaks down whenever a
> situation is presented that isn't simplistic. I also thought that the light
> and dark choices in dialog were sometimes so extreme that anyone choosing
> them would be viewed with suspicion, and rightly so.
I think that the dialogue choices were set up that way so that anyone
could look at them and see what will get them light or dark side points.
There's only one place in the game where it wasn't extremely obvious to
me (the murder trial on Manaan).
On the bounty thing, I think it's the idea of killing for money that
gets you the Dark Side points.
Sarah
> On the bounty thing, I think it's the idea of killing for money that
> gets you the Dark Side points.
But that's what a bounty is - killing for money. So if that's the reason,
you should get dark side points any time you carry out a bounty. You didn't
get dark side points for carrying out the other "legal" bounty. And the
problem is that if the character chooses to meet Bendak in the duel, their
motivation might not have anything to do with the purse but be something
else entirely. Since the motivation of the character cannot be known, I
think the system of assigning light/dark points based on choices is flawed.
Yes, it's easy to know what choices the game thinks are light vs. dark, but
that's because a very simplistic, one might almost say childish, view of
good vs. bad is used. Thank god it's only a game.
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> "Julie d'Aubigny" <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:3FCAB448...@comcast.net...
>
> > On the bounty thing, I think it's the idea of killing for money that
> > gets you the Dark Side points.
>
> But that's what a bounty is - killing for money. So if that's the reason,
> you should get dark side points any time you carry out a bounty. You didn't
> get dark side points for carrying out the other "legal" bounty.
As I recall, in just about every bounty, you *do* get Dark Side points.
If you don't get any for carrying out a bounty, it's probably because of
a scripting error or an omission.
> And the
> problem is that if the character chooses to meet Bendak in the duel, their
> motivation might not have anything to do with the purse but be something
> else entirely. Since the motivation of the character cannot be known, I
> think the system of assigning light/dark points based on choices is flawed.
> Yes, it's easy to know what choices the game thinks are light vs. dark, but
> that's because a very simplistic, one might almost say childish, view of
> good vs. bad is used. Thank god it's only a game.
Of course, if the game implemented the ability to express motivation,
then people would just use it to claim something high-minded rather than
base greed.
Since it's a game, it's not really something that bothered me when I
played it. It's also consistent with the Star Wars movies and EU.
Courageous
>Yes, it's easy to know what choices the game thinks are light vs. dark, but
>that's because a very simplistic, one might almost say childish, view of
>good vs. bad is used. Thank god it's only a game.
*laugh*
You have really no idea how hard it is to get this "right". The massively
multiply online gaming industry has tried as it might. Really: no can do.
C//
CCF
> I played through the game as pure as the driven snow. Never once got any
> dark side points. About half way through or so, my character display, where
> your stats are shown, showed my character with the force swirling around me
> like a blinding snow storm with bright shafts of light.
> Do you get a similar display with a dark side character?
You get flames and your character's physical appearance will chance-
gets more pale and gaunt.
mr bernard langham
> Since it's a game, it's not really something that bothered me when I
> played it. It's also consistent with the Star Wars movies and EU.
...and George Lucas' "interesting" personal political views...
"...There's probably no better form of government than a good despot."
-- George Lucas (New York Times interview, March 1999)
--
>^..^<
Bernard
www.cs.uwa.edu.au/~langhb01
"You may lose me on the east face/You may lose me on the west/I may be
covered over in the night/Bury me deep in your love." RIP Harry, 1965-2003
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> "Julie d'Aubigny" <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:3FCAC1BB...@comcast.net...
> > Since it's a game, it's not really something that bothered me when I
> > played it. It's also consistent with the Star Wars movies and EU.
>
> ...and George Lucas' "interesting" personal political views...
>
> "...There's probably no better form of government than a good despot."
> -- George Lucas (New York Times interview, March 1999)
Which is why, of course, the despots in the first three movies were such
shining examples of leadership.
Bill Seurer
> "Julie d'Aubigny" <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:3FCAC1BB...@comcast.net...
>
>>Since it's a game, it's not really something that bothered me when I
>>played it. It's also consistent with the Star Wars movies and EU.
>
>
> ...and George Lucas' "interesting" personal political views...
>
> "...There's probably no better form of government than a good despot."
> -- George Lucas (New York Times interview, March 1999)
Many people have said they think the best form of government is some
sort of benevolent monarch. So what?
Andreas Baus
> You can gain a few darkside points without breaking your character. You
> probably will never be pure, but hey.
What effect does being 'pure' actually have? My first char hit the light
end of the light side/dark side scale pretty quickly (what can I say, I am
a nice guy, so much that I even have problems being cruel to purely
fictious people in a virtual environment - that's why I'll probably never
play a dark side character, or only halfheartedly at best ;) and he got
surrounded by a glowing pillar of light on the character screen - and
there's a permanent effect icon on the right side, apparently liked to
this. Is that just for show, or does it actually have any benefits?
--
----
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[Insert joke here.] ----
--
an...@studcs.uni-sb.de (Andreas Baus)
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> Julie d'Aubigny <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > You can gain a few darkside points without breaking your character. You
> > probably will never be pure, but hey.
>
> What effect does being 'pure' actually have? My first char hit the light
> end of the light side/dark side scale pretty quickly (what can I say, I am
> a nice guy, so much that I even have problems being cruel to purely
> fictious people in a virtual environment - that's why I'll probably never
> play a dark side character, or only halfheartedly at best ;) and he got
> surrounded by a glowing pillar of light on the character screen - and
> there's a permanent effect icon on the right side, apparently liked to
> this. Is that just for show, or does it actually have any benefits?
Light Side force powers are much cheaper to use.
GungHo
news:snxyb.531420$6C4.526741@pd7tw1no:
> any dark side points. About half way through or so, my character
> display, where your stats are shown, showed my character with the
> force swirling around me like a blinding snow storm with bright shafts
> of light. Do you get a similar display with a dark side character?
You get the Hellbitch/Hellbastard display. Everything is kinda dark except
for the fire behind you. Your character portrait in the lower left-hand
corner darkens and your character's face turns grey with black veins and
your eyes go pale orange. It's pretty creepy.
Also of note, your "nude" suit changes, at least for the female. With a
darksider, you go from the legless top to a black and red jumpsuit with a
messed up red "H"-looking thing on the chest. This also shows as a
negative status symbol on your character portait screen.
I haven't tried it with a darkside dude.
GungHo
news:3FCAB448...@comcast.net:
> I think that the dialogue choices were set up that way so that anyone
> could look at them and see what will get them light or dark side
> points. There's only one place in the game where it wasn't extremely
> obvious to me (the murder trial on Manaan).
>
> On the bounty thing, I think it's the idea of killing for money that
> gets you the Dark Side points.
Well, you CAN kill the "super assassin" and take the bounty without getting
dark points. Taking Bendak's bounty doesn't really get you the points.
It's participating in the deathmatch.
Hong Ooi
<kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>mr bernard langham wrote:
>>
>> "Julie d'Aubigny" <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:3FCAC1BB...@comcast.net...
>> > Since it's a game, it's not really something that bothered me when I
>> > played it. It's also consistent with the Star Wars movies and EU.
>>
>> ...and George Lucas' "interesting" personal political views...
>>
>> "...There's probably no better form of government than a good despot."
>> -- George Lucas (New York Times interview, March 1999)
>
>Which is why, of course, the despots in the first three movies were such
>shining examples of leadership.
Well, you know, strange men wielding lightsabers is no basis for a system
of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the
masses, not from some farcical Jedi ceremony.
--
Hong Ooi | "Does *anyone* at WOTC bother to
ho...@zipworld.com.au | _think_ when making housecat stats?"
http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/ | -- MSB
Sydney, Australia |
Andreas Baus
> On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 07:33:43 GMT, Julie d'Aubigny
> <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>Which is why, of course, the despots in the first three movies were such
>>shining examples of leadership.
> Well, you know, strange men wielding lightsabers is no basis for a system
> of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the
> masses, not from some farcical Jedi ceremony.
Is that why Emperor Palpatine (apparently) never used a Lightsaber?
someone
On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 03:18:01 GMT, Julie d'Aubigny
<kali.ma...@comcast.net> posted:
>Sarah wrote:
>>
>> I didn't even think the situation (Bendak) should have earned dark points.
>> You've taken a legal bounty so what does it matter how it's carried out,
>> especially when the way it's carried out has a sort of poetic justice to it.
>> In fact, there were a couple of quests where I disagreed with the type of
>> points the resolution was assigned - this assignment breaks down whenever a
>> situation is presented that isn't simplistic. I also thought that the light
>> and dark choices in dialog were sometimes so extreme that anyone choosing
>> them would be viewed with suspicion, and rightly so.
>
>I think that the dialogue choices were set up that way so that anyone
>could look at them and see what will get them light or dark side points.
>There's only one place in the game where it wasn't extremely obvious to
>me (the murder trial on Manaan).
did you solve the hotel murder on manaan? I don't know if it was a glitch,
but I couldn't progress. the hotel manager told me the room was out of
bounds and I heard a rumour elsewhere of the murder, but could not do
anything else.
Hong Ooi
<an...@cip123.studcs.uni-sb.de> wrote:
>Hong Ooi <ho...@zipworld.com.au> wrote:
>> On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 07:33:43 GMT, Julie d'Aubigny
>> <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>>Which is why, of course, the despots in the first three movies were such
>>>shining examples of leadership.
>
>> Well, you know, strange men wielding lightsabers is no basis for a system
>> of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the
>> masses, not from some farcical Jedi ceremony.
>
>Is that why Emperor Palpatine (apparently) never used a Lightsaber?
I think the secret reason why Palpatine never used a lightsaber is because
he can't hit anything for crap. Trembling hands and all that.
Julie d'Aubigny
To get the quest, you need to wander Manaan with Jolee Bindo in your
party. The accused's wife will approach and ask for help. At that point,
you can begin your investigation.
It's never a bad idea, if you haven't already gone to Kashyyk, to go to
Kashyyk and get Jolee before going to Manaan. Or going back to Manaan if
you've already gone there.
LoneCoyote
> Well, you know, strange men wielding lightsabers is no basis for a system
> of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the
> masses, not from some farcical Jedi ceremony.
>
I mean, you can't wield supreme executive power just because you lobbed a
light saber
at some farsical tart.
|
Xocyll
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:
>mr bernard langham wrote:
>>
>> "Julie d'Aubigny" <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:3FCAC1BB...@comcast.net...
>> > Since it's a game, it's not really something that bothered me when I
>> > played it. It's also consistent with the Star Wars movies and EU.
>>
>> ...and George Lucas' "interesting" personal political views...
>>
>> "...There's probably no better form of government than a good despot."
>> -- George Lucas (New York Times interview, March 1999)
>
>Which is why, of course, the despots in the first three movies were such
>shining examples of leadership.
Well they were despots, but not "good" despots.
I can see what he means though.
Someone who is willing to do the right thing and isn't required to stand
for re-election every 4 years.
So they can take the long view instead of doing quick patch jobs that
cost more in the long run, but show them "doing something" before
election time rolls around again.
Of course when you add the old "power corrupts" meme, it's hard to
envision a GOOD dictator staying good.
Then again, imagine Mr. Rogers as the Emperor.
Oh my, Jedi in Cardigans.
Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> >Which is why, of course, the despots in the first three movies were such
> >shining examples of leadership.
>
> Well they were despots, but not "good" despots.
But we've seen no real expression of his political beliefs in the Star
Wars movies. The closest anyone's come to expressing them is Anakin in
Attack of the Clones...and look where that goes.
> I can see what he means though.
> Someone who is willing to do the right thing and isn't required to stand
> for re-election every 4 years.
> So they can take the long view instead of doing quick patch jobs that
> cost more in the long run, but show them "doing something" before
> election time rolls around again.
>
> Of course when you add the old "power corrupts" meme, it's hard to
> envision a GOOD dictator staying good.
>
> Then again, imagine Mr. Rogers as the Emperor.
>
> Oh my, Jedi in Cardigans.
--
Sarah
news:11glsvgsr10qf6ofd...@4ax.com...
> You have really no idea how hard it is to get this "right". The massively
> multiply online gaming industry has tried as it might. Really: no can do.
Given that I didn't say that I expect them to get it right (in fact, my
comments would imply that I think it would be rather difficult to do so),
you seem to be responding to a point that hasn't been made anywhere in the
thread. But that's ok. It's not the first time it's happened on usenet and
I'm sure it won't be the last! :-)
Sarah
> As I recall, in just about every bounty, you *do* get Dark Side points.
You don't for killing the assassin (forget her name). And when the legal
bounties are being described to you, Carth makes a comment about how it's
okay to take them because they're government sanctioned. He makes negative
comments about taking the Davik related bounties.
> Of course, if the game implemented the ability to express motivation,
> then people would just use it to claim something high-minded rather than
> base greed.
Yes, which is why implementing a system that assigns points for "good" and
"bad" deeds is doomed to be flawed no matter what angle it's approached
from, unless a very simplistic view of "good" and "bad" is used with very
simple situations. I found that some of the situations implemented were too
complex and hence open to interpretation, which was the point I was trying
to make.
> Since it's a game, it's not really something that bothered me when I
> played it. It's also consistent with the Star Wars movies and EU.
Agreed.
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> "Julie d'Aubigny" <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:3FCAC1BB...@comcast.net...
>
> > As I recall, in just about every bounty, you *do* get Dark Side points.
>
> You don't for killing the assassin (forget her name). And when the legal
> bounties are being described to you, Carth makes a comment about how it's
> okay to take them because they're government sanctioned. He makes negative
> comments about taking the Davik related bounties.
I tend to think that getting bounties is a dark side thing all the way.
I disagree with the game's approach to this.
> > Of course, if the game implemented the ability to express motivation,
> > then people would just use it to claim something high-minded rather than
> > base greed.
>
> Yes, which is why implementing a system that assigns points for "good" and
> "bad" deeds is doomed to be flawed no matter what angle it's approached
> from, unless a very simplistic view of "good" and "bad" is used with very
> simple situations. I found that some of the situations implemented were too
> complex and hence open to interpretation, which was the point I was trying
> to make.
Very true. The only complex situation that sets out to have a complex
resolution (and doesn't entirely succeed) is the trial on Manaan.
> > Since it's a game, it's not really something that bothered me when I
> > played it. It's also consistent with the Star Wars movies and EU.
>
> Agreed.
I'm also not sure how to really get the complex moral stuff into a game
- I know some games would certainly benefit - and have it resonate.
someone
On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 15:45:23 GMT, Julie d'Aubigny
<kali.ma...@comcast.net> posted:
I totally missed this quest. and I spent quite a while running about in
manaan talking to the npcs repeatedly. so I needed the old jedi.
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> >It's never a bad idea, if you haven't already gone to Kashyyk, to go to
> >Kashyyk and get Jolee before going to Manaan. Or going back to Manaan if
> >you've already gone there.
>
> I totally missed this quest. and I spent quite a while running about in
> manaan talking to the npcs repeatedly. so I needed the old jedi.
Yes, you do.
GungHo
news:bqfgf5$229$1...@news.tu-darmstadt.de:
> Is that why Emperor Palpatine (apparently) never used a Lightsaber?
Do you really need a lightsaber if you can just shock the shit out of
everyone? I know if I had the choice, screw swinging a lightsaber, that
looks like work.
Andreas Baus
> The only complex situation that sets out to have a complex
> resolution (and doesn't entirely succeed) is the trial on Manaan.
That one for example is almost impossible to judge, because it's virtually
impossible to say what is 'good' and 'bad' in that trial... is is 'good' to
defend the accused? What if you have found the evidence in the republic
base that *proves* he committed it? What if you haven't, and believe he is
innocent? There are so many different possible views, one could take hours
debating the situation and not come up with something resembling an
objective evaluation of how 'good' or 'bad' each possible outcome is.
Something like this is bad enough in a P&P game, where the game master is a
person who is (or should be) open to the opinions of the players...
CCF
> Julie d'Aubigny <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>The only complex situation that sets out to have a complex
>>resolution (and doesn't entirely succeed) is the trial on Manaan.
>
>
> That one for example is almost impossible to judge, because it's virtually
> impossible to say what is 'good' and 'bad' in that trial... is is 'good' to
> defend the accused? What if you have found the evidence in the republic
> base that *proves* he committed it? What if you haven't, and believe he is
> innocent? There are so many different possible views, one could take hours
> debating the situation and not come up with something resembling an
> objective evaluation of how 'good' or 'bad' each possible outcome is.
> Something like this is bad enough in a P&P game, where the game master is a
> person who is (or should be) open to the opinions of the players...
>
It is actually a simple issue: justice doesn't take a backseat to your
petty interests. He's guilty and should be punished for what he did. It
is expedience to use the "well he's on my side rationale". As far as
defeding him w/o all the evidence, well then you've failed to do yiur
job and should be punished for that.
Werner Arend
> mr bernard langham wrote:
>
>>"Julie d'Aubigny" <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:3FCAC1BB...@comcast.net...
>>
>>>Since it's a game, it's not really something that bothered me when I
>>>played it. It's also consistent with the Star Wars movies and EU.
>>
>>...and George Lucas' "interesting" personal political views...
>>
>>"...There's probably no better form of government than a good despot."
>>-- George Lucas (New York Times interview, March 1999)
>
>
> Which is why, of course, the despots in the first three movies were such
> shining examples of leadership.
...and which shows that, while Lucas might be right in a theoretical
sense, this reasoning usually doesn't survive a reality check. "Good"
autocrats are so infinitesimally rare that they might just as well not
exist.
Werner
Werner Arend
Andreas Baus wrote:
> Julie d'Aubigny <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>You can gain a few darkside points without breaking your character. You
>>probably will never be pure, but hey.
>
> What effect does being 'pure' actually have? My first char hit the light
> end of the light side/dark side scale pretty quickly (what can I say, I am
> a nice guy, so much that I even have problems being cruel to purely
> fictious people in a virtual environment - that's why I'll probably never
> play a dark side character, or only halfheartedly at best ;) and he got
> surrounded by a glowing pillar of light on the character screen - and
> there's a permanent effect icon on the right side, apparently liked to
> this. Is that just for show, or does it actually have any benefits?
You do get some benefits (these are not documented in the manual, BTW):
Light Consular: +3 Charisma
Dark Consular: +50 Force points
Light Guardian: +3 Strength
Dark Guardian: +1d8 damage
Light Sentinel: +3 Constitution
Dark Sentinel: Poison Immunity
Which means that the dark boni are much more interesting than the light
ones. +3 to an attribute means +1 or +2 to the relevant bonus. Nothing
to make a real effort for.
(Source: Bioware forums)
Werner
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> It is actually a simple issue: justice doesn't take a backseat to your
> petty interests. He's guilty and should be punished for what he did. It
> is expedience to use the "well he's on my side rationale". As far as
> defeding him w/o all the evidence, well then you've failed to do yiur
> job and should be punished for that.
There's actually more to it than just his guilt, which you can discover
in the game. It is not easy to discover it, and it can be frustrating
getting to that point.
Also, is it justice to have counsel who *won't* defend you?
Andreas Baus
> It is actually a simple issue: justice doesn't take a backseat to your
> petty interests. He's guilty and should be punished for what he did. It
> is expedience to use the "well he's on my side rationale". As far as
> defeding him w/o all the evidence, well then you've failed to do yiur
> job and should be punished for that.
Thank you for proving my point :)
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying you are wrong. To the contrary, you
made a valid argument... for *your personal* point of view! But there are
many more possible views out there, many of them likely to be radically
different from yours, so that it's just impossible to set up a scale to
assign a degree of 'goodness' or 'badness' to every possible outcome of the
situation that is objective or absolute. But that is exactly what a game
designer has to try when he wants to 'reward' the player with 'light
side'/'dark side' points as in this game, because, unlike a human game
master, a computer cannot be argued with (yet? :) in oder to try to
justify your position in case his opinion differs from yours...
LoneCoyote
"Andreas Baus" <an...@cip123.studcs.uni-sb.de> wrote in message
news:bqicg1$s75$1...@news.tu-darmstadt.de...
> CCF <c...@xsprintmailx.com> wrote:
> > It is actually a simple issue: justice doesn't take a backseat to your
> > petty interests. He's guilty and should be punished for what he did. It
> > is expedience to use the "well he's on my side rationale". As far as
> > defeding him w/o all the evidence, well then you've failed to do yiur
> > job and should be punished for that.
>
> Thank you for proving my point :)
> Don't get me wrong, I am not saying you are wrong. To the contrary, you
> made a valid argument... for *your personal* point of view! But there are
> many more possible views out there, many of them likely to be radically
> different from yours, so that it's just impossible to set up a scale to
> assign a degree of 'goodness' or 'badness' to every possible outcome of
the
> situation that is objective or absolute. But that is exactly what a game
> designer has to try when he wants to 'reward' the player with 'light
> side'/'dark side' points as in this game, because, unlike a human game
> master, a computer cannot be argued with (yet? :) in oder to try to
> justify your position in case his opinion differs from yours...
>
> --
anything to incriminate the offender, even though I knew after a short while
that he must be guilty or someone was from the republic side. This was a
case where from the information I had, I decided to go to trial and won.
Now, I did not receive any light side or darkside points for that. This was
probagly the case because I actually failed in my duty, but not on purpose.
People make mistakes. I did nothing morally or ethically wrong, so I was not
rewarded with dark or light side points. I assume that if you do get the
right information and he does not get off, that you are rewarded with light
side points. Or if you know the truth and get him off you are awarded with
dark side points.
Christopher Tong
> Light Consular: +3 Charisma
> Dark Consular: +50 Force points
> Light Guardian: +3 Strength
> Dark Guardian: +1d8 damage
> Light Sentinel: +3 Constitution
> Dark Sentinel: Poison Immunity
>
> Which means that the dark boni are much more interesting than the light
> ones. +3 to an attribute means +1 or +2 to the relevant bonus. Nothing
> to make a real effort for.
Well, if you're a consular, the Dark side bonus of 50 extra FP is pretty
much moot. I never came close to sapping all of my force powers as a
light side consular. The extra CHA helped, though. With a lightside
consular, you can more or less guarantee that anyone short of Malak is
going to fail their saving throws. For lightsiders, poison immunity is
pretty useless too, because they have the Force Valor tree and Heal
instantly cures all poisoning. I'll grant that the Dark Guardian bonus
is way better than the Light Guardian bonus.
Christopher Tong
> Andreas Baus wrote:
>> Julie d'Aubigny <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> The only complex situation that sets out to have a complex
>>> resolution (and doesn't entirely succeed) is the trial on Manaan.
> It is actually a simple issue: justice doesn't take a backseat to your
> petty interests. He's guilty and should be punished for what he did. It
> is expedience to use the "well he's on my side rationale". As far as
> defeding him w/o all the evidence, well then you've failed to do yiur
> job and should be punished for that.
It's not a simple issue. You're obliged to defend your client no matter
what you know. That's why you get neither Dark nor Light points if you
successfully defend him knowing that he is guilty. OTOH, reassuring him
that everything will be OK would get you Dark points. I assume that
convincing him to confess his guilt would get you Light points, but it
either can't be done or you need an obscene amount of points in Persuade
to do it. I wasn't very fond of that trial...
Chris
CCF
<spoilers!!!!!>
> There's actually more to it than just his guilt, which you can discover
> in the game. It is not easy to discover it, and it can be frustrating
> getting to that point.
No, he's 100% guilty even though he was framed for the crime he actually
committed. As far as finding it, just talk to enough folks.
> Also, is it justice to have counsel who *won't* defend you?
Sure, justice is that the guilty are punished and the innocent go free.
Having a good lawyer isn't just...just what works.
>
CCF
> It's not a simple issue. You're obliged to defend your client no matter
> what you know.
In the American system, yes. In reality there is nothing about an
adversarial system producing the most "just" outcome.
CCF
> Thank you for proving my point :)
> Don't get me wrong, I am not saying you are wrong. To the contrary, you
> made a valid argument... for *your personal* point of view!
Not my PoV, it is the Jedi code crap you have to learn. The code is an
absolute. The Jedi are not cultural relativists but strong absolutists.
The quest was prettty easy to figure out as long as you played the role
in the game and didn't think like a 21st century type person.
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> It's not a simple issue. You're obliged to defend your client no matter
> what you know. That's why you get neither Dark nor Light points if you
> successfully defend him knowing that he is guilty. OTOH, reassuring him
> that everything will be OK would get you Dark points. I assume that
> convincing him to confess his guilt would get you Light points, but it
> either can't be done or you need an obscene amount of points in Persuade
> to do it. I wasn't very fond of that trial...
If you ended the trial with his conviction and execution, there were
more things you could do...but it wasn't vital that you did.
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> Julie d'Aubigny wrote:
>
> <spoilers!!!!!>
>
> > There's actually more to it than just his guilt, which you can discover
> > in the game. It is not easy to discover it, and it can be frustrating
> > getting to that point.
>
> No, he's 100% guilty even though he was framed for the crime he actually
> committed. As far as finding it, just talk to enough folks.
Wait, so I said "there's more to it than just his guilt" and you said
"No, he's 100% guilty *even though he was framed for the crime* he
actually commited." Emphasis mine.
Why did you say "No, but I'll rephrase what you said, *only with
spoilers*?"
> > Also, is it justice to have counsel who *won't* defend you?
>
> Sure, justice is that the guilty are punished and the innocent go free.
> Having a good lawyer isn't just...just what works.
And how do you determine who's guilty without a good court system. And
if you have a good court system, how could you deny the accused counsel?
And if you give the accused counsel, how could you go forward with the
trial if the defense counsel turns around and offers evidence to convict
the accused? That's not justice. Yes, I agree, the guilty should be
convicted. That's not the same thing.
Julie d'Aubigny
Please, by all means, provide counterexamples. Right now all you're
doing is engaging in contradiction. That is not argument.
Andreas Baus
>>
>> Christopher Tong wrote:
>>
>> > It's not a simple issue. You're obliged to defend your client no matter
>> > what you know.
>>
>> In the American system, yes. In reality there is nothing about an
>> adversarial system producing the most "just" outcome.
> Please, by all means, provide counterexamples. Right now all you're
> doing is engaging in contradiction. That is not argument.
Yes, it is!
(SCNR :)
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> Julie d'Aubigny <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > CCF wrote:
> >>
> >> Christopher Tong wrote:
> >>
> >> > It's not a simple issue. You're obliged to defend your client no matter
> >> > what you know.
> >>
> >> In the American system, yes. In reality there is nothing about an
> >> adversarial system producing the most "just" outcome.
>
> > Please, by all means, provide counterexamples. Right now all you're
> > doing is engaging in contradiction. That is not argument.
>
> Yes, it is!
It may be the only Monty Python line I quote. Except maybe "albatross,"
which no one ever gets.
Werner Arend
Christopher Tong wrote:
> Werner Arend wrote:
>
>> Light Consular: +3 Charisma
>> Dark Consular: +50 Force points
>> Light Guardian: +3 Strength
>> Dark Guardian: +1d8 damage
>> Light Sentinel: +3 Constitution
>> Dark Sentinel: Poison Immunity
>>
>> Which means that the dark boni are much more interesting than the light
>> ones. +3 to an attribute means +1 or +2 to the relevant bonus. Nothing
>> to make a real effort for.
>
>
> Well, if you're a consular, the Dark side bonus of 50 extra FP is pretty
> much moot. I never came close to sapping all of my force powers as a
> light side consular.
Then you don't use your Force powers enough. I find the occasional
Force Lightning to be really useful since you haven't any significant
ranged damaging attack as a light Jedi. And that costs a lot of
Force points.
> The extra CHA helped, though. With a lightside
> consular, you can more or less guarantee that anyone short of Malak is
> going to fail their saving throws.
Does Stasis function on CHA? If yes, then I would agree that it's worth-
wile. But my impression was that most Force powers use the WIS bonus
as an adjustment to the enemy save's DC. All except Force Persuade,
of course.
Regarding saves, it took me a few rounds to stun Malak's apprentice.
His two companions didn't have an opportunity to do anything, but he
himself was a decent opponent, often made his saves, and recovered
fast.
> For lightsiders, poison immunity is
> pretty useless too, because they have the Force Valor tree and Heal
> instantly cures all poisoning. I'll grant that the Dark Guardian bonus
> is way better than the Light Guardian bonus.
Are there any players who invest in STR, BTW? For a Jedi all that
results is a little more damage, and I don't think +4 matters
much considering how high damage becomes in mid-game.
Werner
Werner Arend
defense. Justice wasn't the question here, your personal integrity
was. You had do to your duty without compromising your integrity
by lying or using Force powers to influence the outcome. And all
you did in the trial, if you did it right, was raise doubts and
present additional evidence that should be taken into consideration.
It was the judges that jumped to conclusions IMO. They should have
seen that the planting of evidence did not mean that the accused
was innocent. The most you should have been to achieve was a
second-rate "not guilty for the reason of insufficient evidence".
Werner
CCF
> CCF wrote:
>
>>Christopher Tong wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It's not a simple issue. You're obliged to defend your client no matter
>>>what you know.
>>
>>In the American system, yes. In reality there is nothing about an
>>adversarial system producing the most "just" outcome.
>
>
> Please, by all means, provide counterexamples. Right now all you're
> doing is engaging in contradiction. That is not argument.
>
No, actually saying the adversarial system is not based on a search for
justice is an argument but let me develop it just a tad bit better:
The adversarial system is not based on finding a "just" outcome. It is
based on a desire to limit the power of the state over the individual-
whihc is the primary concern. Any doubts about that and you can scope
the Bill of Rights to see that truth was somewhere far down the list of
concerns in the American judicial process to limiting the state (in
fact, you'll happily note that finding the truth isn't even listed as a
concern in those founding documents while making sure the state is
contrained is all over the place). Truth is a secondary concern of this
type of system becuase of the obligation mentioned- to defend your
client no matter what.
The defense attorney is not there to say, "Yep, my client did it, he
should be punished." His job to to get his client, guilty or not, off.
Similarly the prosecutors, while engaged in a search for the truth
,allegedly, are there to get "wins" as well. When the guilty go free
that is not justice just as if an innocent is punished that is also not
just. Simple as that.
CCF
> Why did you say "No, but I'll rephrase what you said, *only with
> spoilers*?"
Becuase his being framed, at a moral level, makes no difference.
> And how do you determine who's guilty without a good court system.
Atually the perfect justice system is an omniscient being who simply
knows these things. That failing, why is a defense obligated, on Manaan,
to defend a man they know to be guilty. In theory, defense attorneys can
not (in the US system) perpetrate a fraud on the court. Defining a man
the defense knows to be guilt falls into that category.
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> Julie d'Aubigny wrote:
>
> > Why did you say "No, but I'll rephrase what you said, *only with
> > spoilers*?"
>
> Becuase his being framed, at a moral level, makes no difference.
I think you misunderstood my question. I stated X. You restated X and
added spoilers. Why?
> > And how do you determine who's guilty without a good court system.
>
> Atually the perfect justice system is an omniscient being who simply
> knows these things. That failing, why is a defense obligated, on Manaan,
> to defend a man they know to be guilty. In theory, defense attorneys can
> not (in the US system) perpetrate a fraud on the court. Defining a man
> the defense knows to be guilt falls into that category.
SO it's cut-and-dried "Yes, he should fry" without looking deeply enough
into the situation to find out why he killed the Sith and why the Sith
tried to frame him? It's entirely possible that despite his guilt,
mitigating factors may result in a lesser sentence, rather than
execution.
Warren
> Julie d'Aubigny <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in
> news:3FCAB448...@comcast.net:
> > I think that the dialogue choices were set up that way so that anyone
> > could look at them and see what will get them light or dark side
> > points. There's only one place in the game where it wasn't extremely
> > obvious to me (the murder trial on Manaan).
> >
> > gets you the Dark Side points.
>
> Well, you CAN kill the "super assassin" and take the bounty without getting
> dark points. Taking Bendak's bounty doesn't really get you the points.
> It's participating in the deathmatch.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. In so doing, you're kind of
elevating yourself and glorifying your own power and pride. 'Course,
it begs the question as to why the other duels didn't cause dark
points. While not deathmatches, they still could be considering
quests for personal glory and power.
I did try to take out Bendak without going into the arena, but the
game doesn't allow it. I was kind of bummed out about that.
Warren
Tom
"Julie d'Aubigny" <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3FCDA865...@comcast.net...
> Andreas Baus wrote:
> >
> > Julie d'Aubigny <kali.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > CCF wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Christopher Tong wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > It's not a simple issue. You're obliged to defend your client no
matter
> > >> > what you know.
> > >>
> > >> In the American system, yes. In reality there is nothing about an
> > >> adversarial system producing the most "just" outcome.
> >
> > > Please, by all means, provide counterexamples. Right now all you're
> > > doing is engaging in contradiction. That is not argument.
> >
> > Yes, it is!
>
> It may be the only Monty Python line I quote. Except maybe "albatross,"
> which no one ever gets.
>
Ok - I can't help but notice that I started a huge thread, complete with
great political analysis of wide ranging topics. However, no one has really
answered my question...
That's usenet for you I suppose..
Tom
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> Ok - I can't help but notice that I started a huge thread, complete with
> great political analysis of wide ranging topics. However, no one has really
> answered my question...
>
> That's usenet for you I suppose..
I thought I had?
No. It'll make it harder to be absolutely pure - which would give you +3
to an ability score, depending upon your Jedi class - but it won't
really hurt you.
Dark Side - Light Side is an axis, or a spectrum, and you move up and
down that axis when you gain LS or DS points. If you look at your
character, you can see how light or dark you are. If you're light, DS
will cause the pointer to go down and your background to become less
white and glowy.
Christopher Tong
> Then you don't use your Force powers enough. I find the occasional
> Force Lightning to be really useful since you haven't any significant
> ranged damaging attack as a light Jedi. And that costs a lot of
> Force points.
They have throw lightsabre. But I mainly relied on my precipitously
potent paralyzing powers to stun them then use my 3d6 backstab bonus
with master speed to down the enemies.
>> The extra CHA helped, though. With a lightside consular, you can more
>> or less guarantee that anyone short of Malak is going to fail their
>> saving throws.
> Does Stasis function on CHA? If yes, then I would agree that it's worth-
> wile. But my impression was that most Force powers use the WIS bonus
> as an adjustment to the enemy save's DC. All except Force Persuade,
> of course.
> Regarding saves, it took me a few rounds to stun Malak's apprentice.
> His two companions didn't have an opportunity to do anything, but he
> himself was a decent opponent, often made his saves, and recovered
> fast.
Most force powers use WIS+CHA as save DC adjustments. A light side
consular can get a save DC of 40 towards the end of the game. Makes you
feel a little sorry for Bastila at the end.
> Are there any players who invest in STR, BTW? For a Jedi all that
> results is a little more damage, and I don't think +4 matters
> much considering how high damage becomes in mid-game.
It's pretty irrelevant. To hit and AC are much more important in this
game and DEX ends up being boosted as a result.
Chris
CCF
>
> I think you misunderstood my question. I stated X. You restated X and
> added spoilers. Why?
Becuase I added the *and he was framed part* whihc is a spoiler.
> SO it's cut-and-dried "Yes, he should fry" without looking deeply enough
> into the situation to find out why he killed the Sith and why the Sith
> tried to frame him? It's entirely possible that despite his guilt,
> mitigating factors may result in a lesser sentence, rather than
> execution.
Again, the Manaan justice system is a mystery to me so perhaps there is
no sense of justification. There have been plenty of legal systems where
intent was not an element of the crime despite its enormous import in
Anglo-American judicial history.
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> Julie d'Aubigny wrote:
>
> >
> > I think you misunderstood my question. I stated X. You restated X and
> > added spoilers. Why?
>
> Becuase I added the *and he was framed part* whihc is a spoiler.
Right, of course. Because it adds so much to the discussion?
> > SO it's cut-and-dried "Yes, he should fry" without looking deeply enough
> > into the situation to find out why he killed the Sith and why the Sith
> > tried to frame him? It's entirely possible that despite his guilt,
> > mitigating factors may result in a lesser sentence, rather than
> > execution.
>
> Again, the Manaan justice system is a mystery to me so perhaps there is
> no sense of justification. There have been plenty of legal systems where
> intent was not an element of the crime despite its enormous import in
> Anglo-American judicial history.
Well, I'm not exactly talking about intent. But, look, they let you off
for killing half or more of the Sith base because "the Sith lured you
in." If that's allowable, why would there be nothing similar for this
guy?
Andreas Baus
> Yeah, that's what I was thinking. In so doing, you're kind of
> elevating yourself and glorifying your own power and pride. 'Course,
> it begs the question as to why the other duels didn't cause dark
> points. While not deathmatches, they still could be considering
> quests for personal glory and power.
If you have Carth with you when talking to the Hutt about the duels for the
first time, he give you a justification; he says it's a good idea because
the prize money can help fuel the search for Bastila - and remember, he's a
"good guy", so if he says it's ok, then it must be...
GungHo
> Warren <wsmit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, that's what I was thinking. In so doing, you're kind of
>> elevating yourself and glorifying your own power and pride. 'Course,
>> it begs the question as to why the other duels didn't cause dark
>> points. While not deathmatches, they still could be considering
>> quests for personal glory and power.
>
> If you have Carth with you when talking to the Hutt about the duels
> for the first time, he give you a justification; he says it's a good
> idea because the prize money can help fuel the search for Bastila -
> and remember, he's a "good guy", so if he says it's ok, then it must
> be...
Well, the "regular" duels are non-lethal, so it's not like you're killing
people for money. Granted, you're just beating people up for money, but...
hey, it's Star Wars logic. A deathmatch is a different beast, though.
It's illegal, and there's only one possible outcome: somebody dies.
CCF
>>Becuase I added the *and he was framed part* whihc is a spoiler.
>
>
> Right, of course. Because it adds so much to the discussion?
Becuase the "complexity" you mentioned was that he was framed whihc
doesn't materialy change his situation whihc is that he was a guilty man
framed for a murder he did commit.
> Well, I'm not exactly talking about intent. But, look, they let you off
> for killing half or more of the Sith base because "the Sith lured you
> in." If that's allowable, why would there be nothing similar for this
> guy?
Because he wasn't lured into this arrangement to be killed was he? He
made that move on his own IIRC once he found he was being played whereas
the Sith lured you in to, presumably, kill you. Just a guess.
>
Julie d'Aubigny
>
> Julie d'Aubigny wrote:
>
> >>Becuase I added the *and he was framed part* whihc is a spoiler.
> >
> >
> > Right, of course. Because it adds so much to the discussion?
>
> Becuase the "complexity" you mentioned was that he was framed whihc
> doesn't materialy change his situation whihc is that he was a guilty man
> framed for a murder he did commit.
No, you assume quite a bit if you think that when I said it was complex
that I meant he was framed. That wasn't it at all. But, since I wanted
to *avoid* spoilers, I left it vague.
> > Well, I'm not exactly talking about intent. But, look, they let you off
> > for killing half or more of the Sith base because "the Sith lured you
> > in." If that's allowable, why would there be nothing similar for this
> > guy?
>
> Because he wasn't lured into this arrangement to be killed was he? He
> made that move on his own IIRC once he found he was being played whereas
> the Sith lured you in to, presumably, kill you. Just a guess.
Do you even know the whole story, or did you just go as far as getting
the video evidence and asking him about it? There *is* more to it.
Hermann Hesse
the
> first time, he give you a justification; he says it's a good idea because
> the prize money can help fuel the search for Bastila - and remember, he's
a
> "good guy", so if he says it's ok, then it must be...
But if you have Bastila with you the other times, she'll tell you otherwise.
// Hermann
Sargoth
gained light points, so there are plenty of points to offset any dark ones
you get on taris.
The points simply move the slider arrow up or down. After finishing the game
it seems that light side is the best to play if you are playing as a jedi
councilar. Since one finds some very nice +5 wisdom items that are light
side only. While the darkside seems to focus more on physical strenght.
"Thomas" <gold...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:Ihpyb.35382$ZmO....@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> I've got a question regarding points. I've been basically trying to be a
> decent jedi - but a few of the dark side quests ( killing bendak ) have
been
> too much to resist and I've gained dark points. Are the dark points going
> to be detrimental to my character? I'm not sure how that's going to play
> out - do they counteract the light points or just get added in addition to
> them?
>
>
> TIA,
>
> Tom
GungHo
> Then you don't use your Force powers enough. I find the occasional
> Force Lightning to be really useful since you haven't any significant
> ranged damaging attack as a light Jedi. And that costs a lot of
> Force points.
Eh... thematically, I have an issue with lightsiders throwing lightning. I
really think that the game should model the RPG more and give you Dark Side
points for using Dark Side powers.
And, Light Jedi can use Force Wave and Lightsaber Throw just as easily as
anyone else.
Werner Arend
Actually, I do agree. I have only just realized how powerful Lightsabre
throw can become so yes, I really don't need Force Lightning. Still,
even without using it, in one of the bigger fights on the unknown world
I and Jolee both exhausted our Force pools, and the result was that HK
had to kill two of the rancors and a few rakata on his own. I'd rather
have had the +50 points bonus then instead of the +3 CHA.
Werner
CCF
> Werner Arend <ne...@arcor.de> wrote in news:3FCDC8EA...@arcor.de:
>
>
>>Then you don't use your Force powers enough. I find the occasional
>>Force Lightning to be really useful since you haven't any significant
>>ranged damaging attack as a light Jedi. And that costs a lot of
>>Force points.
>
>
> Eh... thematically, I have an issue with lightsiders throwing lightning. I
> really think that the game should model the RPG more and give you Dark Side
> points for using Dark Side powers.
The real penalty, although your option is interesting, is the stupid
penalty you get for taking lightning. Better powers that cost much less
to use as a light sider than lightning.
>
> And, Light Jedi can use Force Wave and Lightsaber Throw just as easily as
> anyone else.
Force Wave is still the killer power of the game. It was the default
action for many many encounters in the game. Lightsabre Throw is grossly
underappreciated.