PDA

View Full Version : Wookie Jedi problems



DirkGreystoke
12 January 2002, 07:30 PM
Ok GMs out there. I have this NPC ally that helps out my character. He is a Wookie Jedi Knight. Campaign is in the days of the Old Republic, 1000 years before The Phantom Menace. This NPC got really mad (long story) and the GM decided that he went into Wookie rage. The question is does the Wookie Jedi get a Dark Side Point for attacking an opponent while in rage? It's just that this NPC is a friend of my character and I would hate to have to fact off agianst him some day....

Kas'ir Faywind
12 January 2002, 09:10 PM
Yes he does get one.

However dont worry about facing off with him yet he wont even be tainted until he has enough DSP's equal to half his WIS ability. Then you might have to get him to atone or worse he could just plain attack you.

Krad-edis
12 January 2002, 10:29 PM
Originally posted by Kas'ir Faywind
However dont worry about facing off with him yet he wont even be tainted until he has enough DSP's equal to half his WIS ability. Then you might have to get him to atone or worse he could just plain attack you.

It really depends on what system you are playing in as far as the amount of DSPs one receives before they turn to the Dark Side. The D20 system is pretty generous in allowing characters to have up to an average of 5-8 DSPs (Assuming the average Wisdom is 10 to 16) before they are even in danger of turning, where in the D6 version, it is possible to go over to the Dark Side with as little as 2 DSPs, and a given that most will definitely turn by 6 DSPs.

As for whether or not the Wookie deserves a DSP, you can look at the issue of a Jedi losing control of himself...attacking in a rage. Loss of control, being angry, causing more damage, all of this cannot be good....DARK SIDE POINT!

The Wookie should not try, but make sure not to let that sort of thing happen. I would think a Jedi Knight would be beyond "Wookie rage", and the Wookie should be disciplined by the Council for his loss of control. You can't have a Lightsaber toting, force using, pissed off Wookie roaming about the galaxy....it just isn't safe :D

Superdog
12 January 2002, 10:45 PM
It seems to me any wookie following the way of the Jedi would have learned to control his emotions and would not go into Wookiee rages unless under all but the most extreme cases. I don't think he would have passed his (holy crap, I was about to say gempukku) uh, trials or whatever they're called if his Master still knew he flew into Rages inder the circumstances the average Wookie did.

Donovan Morningfire
13 January 2002, 05:47 AM
A Wookiee Jedi, heck even just a Force-Sensitive Wookiee, wouldn't recieve a Dark Side Point for going into the rage, under either system. But if he took any kind of aggressive action, then the doors are thrown wide open.

Going from various bits of EU, the Jedi train themselves not to no longer feel emotions, but to keep from being controlled by emotions. A Wookiee in a state of rage is being controlled purely by his anger. And while it gives him great bonuses, it opens him up to the Dark Side's influence. Even if used in the best of intentions, an evil action is still an evil action. And acting from a state of pure anger makes it very hard to discern right from wrong.

Superdog hit on a very good point. A Wookiee Padawan that couldn't control his temper would never make it past the Trials.

Sithspawn
13 January 2002, 04:35 PM
A Wookiee Jedi should be able to control his rage. Should he not then I probably wouln't give the DSP for going 'into' rage, but the problems are casued from here on. From this point on the Wookiee would be striking out in extreme anger, and Yoda tells the rest. I say extreme anger because it would have to be one heck of an incident to enrage an average wookiee, let alone a Jedi.

I used a Wookiee Jedi NPC recently againt the players in my Dark Side campaign. I deliberately used a Wookiee so that when the PCs took the upper hand he would go into rage. A couple of PCs were KO'd from the enraged Wookiee who was combining attacks from his Ryyk Blades, brawling & force lightening. The PCs were able to over-power him eventually thanks to the parties Dark Side Witch nullifying the Jedi's power! He didn't kast long enough to discover the outcome of his enraged outburst.

Darth Bile
14 January 2002, 06:24 AM
What system was this campaign under, if it was the D6 system, he should've forced a willpower roll instead of just ultimately saying he raged, that was not right in the first place, and yes, depending on his actions in rage, he should've gotten a DSP, for raging, if he commited evil while raged, if he didn't attact a sentient or creature, then no, he should not have gotten a darkside point.
I don't know if willpower is used in the d20 system or not, so i can't give an opinion for the D20 system.

VixenofVenus
14 January 2002, 03:56 PM
A wookiee jedi raises lots of problems . . .

First, as a GM, you need to decide whether the Jedi can control when he rages and if when he goes into a rage it automatically means a DSP.

Some GMs have chosen to make Wookiee rage an automatic DSP, just for acting on anger . . . that's pretty harsh.

But those are things you need to decide, and then stick by your guns.

Corsair
14 January 2002, 04:26 PM
Well... when a Wookie goes into rage he is .. at this point .. acting out of anger.

Think of the Dark Side Marauder and the Rage Feat (or skill .. not sure). In essence its the same thing. The character goes into rage in order to inflict grevious bodily harm.

The result of just going into rage though is an automatic DSP. Whether or not the act committed or the intent was evil or not .. a DSP is assigned just for going into Rage.

Wookie Rage is pretty much parrallel to this for a Wookie Jedi. As the Rage is only brought upon by anger, if the Wookie Jedi does go into rage, then the Jedi is going against the principles of the Jedi by acting out of anger. The Wookie may not get a DSP for the acts he/she commits while in rage, but a DSP is given for going into rage.

darth maim
14 January 2002, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by VixenofVenus
A wookiee jedi raises lots of problems . . .

First, as a GM, you need to decide whether the Jedi can control when he rages and if when he goes into a rage it automatically means a DSP.

Some GMs have chosen to make Wookiee rage an automatic DSP, just for acting on anger . . . that's pretty harsh.

But those are things you need to decide, and then stick by your guns.

I look at it like this...

The Force feat Rage automatically gives a DSP and it is identical to wookiee rage therefore I give a DSP for Wookiees that go into a rage (if they are Jedi and have been warned against anger) Especially since PC's willingly go into Wookiee rage for the bonuses.

Radagust
15 January 2002, 09:47 PM
First off, yes wookie Jedis should have better control over their raging ability. But in the SW core rules it states tha the only time someone gets a Dark side point is when they use the Force to kill. So no you should still be in good hands with the wookie.As also being a Gm of the Star Wars universe D6 and now D20 system, I thought it was cool that when a Wookie rages he/she is not able to call upon the Force, or while he/she is concentrating ton the Force the character can not rage.

darth maim
15 January 2002, 10:32 PM
Originally posted by Radagust
First off, yes wookie Jedis should have better control over their raging ability. But in the SW core rules it states tha the only time someone gets a Dark side point is when they use the Force to kill. So no you should still be in good hands with the wookie.As also being a Gm of the Star Wars universe D6 and now D20 system, I thought it was cool that when a Wookie rages he/she is not able to call upon the Force, or while he/she is concentrating ton the Force the character can not rage.

D6 may require the use of the force to get a DSP but in D20 it is stated as this:

"A character gains Dark Side points in three ways:

Using a Force point to call upon the darkside
Using a Darkside Force-based skill or feat
Performing an evil act"

It further defines an evil act as causing gratuitous or unneccessary injury. A wookie in a rage does by nature this very thing.

Going strictly by the rules this is a no-brainer

Fab
16 January 2002, 03:45 AM
Originally posted by darth maim
"A character gains Dark Side points in three ways:

Using a Force point to call upon the darkside
Using a Darkside Force-based skill or feat
Performing an evil act"

It further defines an evil act as causing gratuitous or unneccessary injury. A wookie in a rage does by nature this very thing.

Going strictly by the rules this is a no-brainer

I disagree. What if the Wookiee goes into a rage and is totally ineffectual? Is that an evil act in and of itself? I agree it lends the PC to committing an evil act but being in a rage isn't evil per se.

I had a Wookiee Jedi who was on a ledge. The man he was trying to save from falling produced a blaster and tried to shoot him. The Jedi went into a rage in an attempt to hoist the man up with superior strength and hopefully knock him unconscious. Neither happened. He only succeeded in pulling himself forward off the ledge. Due to his rage, and the increased VP, he wasn't killed in the fall. Had he not been in a rage, the fall would have killed him. I don't call that evil. He went into a rage with the intent to subdue the human, and then the rage ended up saving his life when he pulled himself off balance. So a rage isn't evil as such, but evil can come from a rage.

darth maim
16 January 2002, 08:41 AM
anger is on the path to the darkside... remember that little nugget? Anyway, you run it your way, I'll run it mine.

Sithspawn
16 January 2002, 09:03 AM
The Jedi went into a rage in an attempt to hoist the man up with superior strength
Personally I would not have let a PC go into rage in this instance. In fact I do not allow PCs to choose to go into rage. I go off player reactions and actions and the situation before hinting that they are getting angry. I don't think that most wookiees, let alone a Jedi, would really want to go into an uncontrollable rage. I your above example should the wookiee become enraged he would be more likely to knoch the other guy off the ledge, not save him. Rage is about uncontrollabe anger. In Rage a wookiee will not stop until all adversaries, and occasionally allies, have been eliminated. A Jedi would not put himself into rage, and I agree with DSPs being given to any Jedi Wookiee for going into rage regardless of their actions.

Gulmyros
16 January 2002, 11:39 AM
Couple things to throw into the mix.

(Please note - the following tidbits are illustrated with the d20 rules, since I have that book out at the moment. Mechanics might change from system to system, but I think the basic principles are the same in both.)

First, Wookie Rage is not like "Hulking Out" ala Dr. Bruce Banner. Wookie Rage shouldn't be triggered simply by ANY emotional crisis. In the above example about a ledge, if the Wook's that determined to get the guy up from the ledge - spend a Force Point. :)

Next, there should be a difference between an ENRAGED Wook, and a Wook who's RAGING. Gui-Gon, Han Solo, and even Chewie are allowed to be angry. There's no rule against that. But there ARE repurcussions from ACTING on that anger.

Next, the CR states that "When necessary, the Wookie can fly into a frenzy." That being said, I doubt that I'd let a Wookie (Jedi or not) declare a Rage to accomplish a specific goal. Frenzy is frenzy. And to me frenzy does not imply control.

Next, note that a Wook who's RAGING cannot use any skill, feat, or power that requires concentration - including any Force-based power. So it's impossible for a RAGING Wookie to earn a DSP for calling on the Force to commit an evil act while Raging. Since, um, they can't call on the Force.

Next, not all RAGING results in gratuitous damage. A Wook (non-Jedi) is attacked by 6 Stormies who are trying to kill him. He decides to fight and kill or be killed. After two rounds one Stormie is down, and the Wook's getting blasted pretty good. He gets angry and RAGES. With improved abilities and complete reckless abandon, he starts shredding Stormies. Eventually they're all dead. Now, no Force Point was spent, no Force skill or feat was used, no innocent bystanders were even there, much less injured, and no evil act was committed. By the book, no DSP.

Before you jump all over the scenario - remember that it's a non-Jedi in that example. If the Wook's a Jedi (why this thread started in the first place), then you've got anger management issues. And we all know that Jedi have to tread a more careful path to avoid being controlled by their emotions.

But UNLIKE the Dark Side Marauder's Rage ability, a Wookie Rage does not come directly from the Dark Side. Take a look at the DSSB and check out the first paragraph about Dark Feats. They ALL require the character to draw on the Dark Side, and at the very least, are Force Feats - which are excluded from Raging Wookies.

So yeah, a Wook Jedi who gives in to his anger is not following the path very well, but by the book they're not AUTOMATICALLY gaining DSPs for doing so. There's no guarantee that they're doing evil, and it's impossible for them to call on the Force in ANY way during the Rage.

But hey, Frenzy is as Frenzy does... so there's no guarantee that DSPs aren't waiting around the corner. Who knows, while fighting the Stormies in the street you just might cut down Grandma as she crosses at the corner....

:)

Gully

Fab
16 January 2002, 04:42 PM
Darth Maim, Sithspawn, and Gulmyros all brought up good points. To be honest, the scenario I mentioned above was my first time GMing a Star Wars adventure, and the player of the character in question tends to metagame as much as possible. I was too busy trying to remember the rules and so forth to be paying attention to his tendencies. So on that point, I was at fault.

Thinking about it after the fact, it does seem like an un-Jedi thing to do. The next time he tries it, I think I will hand out a DSP. It does seem to be the first steps along the path to the Dark Side.

On the other hand, the Core Rulebook states, "When necessary, the Wookiee can fly into a frenzy." It does seem like a conscious decision to let go. Sort of like deciding to go temporarily insane. While, again, it's a very un-controlled (and therefore un-Jedi act) it doesn't sound like his decision to do it was that far off base.

Had his Wookiee been a non-Jedi, I think he would have been well within his rights to declare, "I think I will rage now." After all, he gets bonuses to strength and vitality, and some saves, but had to weigh that against the penalties on defense.

So I guess my final position (for now) is that raging isn't evil per se, but it is uncontrolled, which should gain a Jedi a DSP, but not necessarily a non-Jedi (unless he uses his rage to rip up a busload of school children or something). And that Wookiee rage is a decision ("when necessary") by the Wookiee, not necessarily based purely on circumstances.

Donovan Morningfire
16 January 2002, 06:09 PM
Fab, just a bit of advice when it comes to assigning DSPs. More of a guideline, but it's served me pretty well over the years of running Star Wars (both systems):

"The more a player argues he doesn't deserve a Dark Side Point, the more and more he proves he does deserve it"

which in tandem with

"The Gamemaster always has the final say"

can make your life as a GM all the easier.

Pretty much, go with what sounds right for you. We here at the Holonet are just giving our opinions by and large, listen and ignore as you see fit.

darth maim
16 January 2002, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by Fab
Darth Maim, Sithspawn, and Gulmyros all brought up good points. To be honest, the scenario I mentioned above was my first time GMing a Star Wars adventure, and the player of the character in question tends to metagame as much as possible. I was too busy trying to remember the rules and so forth to be paying attention to his tendencies. So on that point, I was at fault.

Thinking about it after the fact, it does seem like an un-Jedi thing to do. The next time he tries it, I think I will hand out a DSP. It does seem to be the first steps along the path to the Dark Side.

On the other hand, the Core Rulebook states, "When necessary, the Wookiee can fly into a frenzy." It does seem like a conscious decision to let go. Sort of like deciding to go temporarily insane. While, again, it's a very un-controlled (and therefore un-Jedi act) it doesn't sound like his decision to do it was that far off base.

Had his Wookiee been a non-Jedi, I think he would have been well within his rights to declare, "I think I will rage now." After all, he gets bonuses to strength and vitality, and some saves, but had to weigh that against the penalties on defense.

So I guess my final position (for now) is that raging isn't evil per se, but it is uncontrolled, which should gain a Jedi a DSP, but not necessarily a non-Jedi (unless he uses his rage to rip up a busload of school children or something). And that Wookiee rage is a decision ("when necessary") by the Wookiee, not necessarily based purely on circumstances.

This is exactly the method I use. Although I am not quite so leniant to non-jedi as you sound. Basically my rule of thumb regarding rages and non-force users is this: If they kill or do substantial damage to anyone who wasn't attacking before they entered the rage they get a DSP. (Regardless of whether or not they are attacking in a malicious way after the PC enters a rage) It is viewed as self defense in my opinion at that point.

Fab
17 January 2002, 03:47 AM
Originally posted by Donovan Morningfire
"The more a player argues he doesn't deserve a Dark Side Point, the more and more he proves he does deserve it"

I love that concept.

I guess I was being a little too lenient with DSPs. They seemed to be a pretty severe thing to me, and so I was waiting for a severe moment to give one out, like a cold-blooded murder or something to that effect.

Now I see that perhaps for a non-Jedi it might take more to earn one, but for a Jedi, who is ripe for the picking by the Dark Side, it could take much less to merit one.

It's hard to gauge. This was my first time GMing a Star Wars RPG. I've been doing other RPGs for about 22 years now, but your first foray into a new system always comes with mistakes like this.

I appreciate the advice.

Radagust
18 January 2002, 07:47 PM
Hey Darth Maim,
In other words, all Jedis are Evil then. When you stated that they commit an Evil act. I think GMs will know when the Jedi is about ready to commit an Evil act, at least I forworn my Jedis before they commit the Evil act. I have been talking about all jedi wookies with some of my players, and they understand this. Now if a wookie goes into a rage it's because someone ticked them off and so technical it is in self defense. What does the rule book say about Self defense?

darth maim
18 January 2002, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by Radagust
Hey Darth Maim,
In other words, all Jedis are Evil then. When you stated that they commit an Evil act. I think GMs will know when the Jedi is about ready to commit an Evil act, at least I forworn my Jedis before they commit the Evil act. I have been talking about all jedi wookies with some of my players, and they understand this. Now if a wookie goes into a rage it's because someone ticked them off and so technical it is in self defense. What does the rule book say about Self defense?

Okay, first of all I give plenty of warning to my players if their actions will result in a DSP.

Second, Let's say you go into McDonald's and order a McRib sandwich. The person on the other side of the counter says "Sir we are no longer carrying the McRib." You then go apesh*t and pummel them into the fryers. A month later you are on trial for murder and claim self defense. Good luck getting that by a judge. Just because you were "ticked off" about the lack of McRibs doesn't make it self defense.

That may be an extreme but it applies even if you walk in and find your wife of twenty years riding your best friend. It's a crime of passion... not self defense. You are still guilty of the crime but it's because you lost control of your emotions. The judge may look at you and say "Hey man, sucks that your wife is a dirty skank... see you in about twenty years. Next case"

You really should read through what you say and actually think about it before you go shooting off your mouth.