PDA

View Full Version : DSP's



Ralzma02
24 January 2002, 06:34 PM
I walk into a bar, in the slums of a large town on a peaceful planet, I am trying to stay out of sight, because the 4 other men i am with are on an important mission to find a spy with information about a large crime ring, they know who he is, and if he moves they will find him. So we must be secretive. Nobody knows i am with the group, i have shadowed them, because I am the only one who knows enough about ships to get us out safely, and since i am not being paid to fight, or find the spy, only to fly the ship, i sit at the bar.

From the moment i walked in this shady looking character glares at me continously, even when i sit down next to him. He is still staring, so i pull out my illegal heavy blaster, and push it into his stomach. I intend to scare him a little, that only, what can i say i am a jerk, but not a murderer. So he throws back his cloak to reveal 2 blasters at his side, he lunges for them. I pull the trigger, and leave a basketball size hole where his entrails used to be. Was he innocent? do i deserve a DSP? let me know your thought

Moose
24 January 2002, 06:39 PM
If I were your gamemaster and these sort of actions were common I would award you a dsp. However if this sort of shot first ask questions later mentality is uncommon with you I would let it go. Either way I would have probably handled the situation more covertly, but sometimes the best method is brute force. Sorry for the convulated answer, but its hard to say without knowing how you RP your character.

VixenofVenus
24 January 2002, 07:34 PM
Since you weren't looking for that guy, don't know if he was a good guy or a bad guy, I would give you a DSP. You just sat down and provoked him to draw his weapons . . . what if he was an undercover Republic/Rebel Officer?

Jaden
24 January 2002, 07:51 PM
I think vixen nailed it on the head. This man had done nothing hostile towards you nor had he threatened violence to anyone nearby and you stuck a blaster in his gut, then when he reacted to your provocation, you fired. His only crime....being shady and staring at you. Sorry bud, but I grant you 1 DSP.

One DSP is not much more than a warning that you're on the wrong path here, it's not like 1 will push you to the darkside unless you do things like this all the time, in which case you may have enough DSPs for you to fall.

Peeper
24 January 2002, 09:24 PM
I don't think a DSP is warranted here. The character in question killed in his own defense. It may not have been a good idea to pull out your blaster first, but you didn't have to use it until the other guy was going for his guns. Whether the shady fella was good or bad is irrelevant to the issue of a DSP. You didn't sit down, pull out your blaster, and shoot the guy in cold blood. You tried to scare him so that he'd stop staring at you, but when he went for his weapons, you fired in self-defense. I would not rule this an evil act, and thus you would gain no DSPs.

kermit
24 January 2002, 09:33 PM
but to quote yoda, if i may "fear, anger, agression, the dark side are they"

u pulling the blaster on some guy would come under at least one, if not all three - he wasnt doing anything wrong, and if u didnt like what he was doing u could have moved or said something

but i agree that it would depend on how the character has behaved in the past

Gulmyros
24 January 2002, 10:04 PM
Ok, now flip the scenario.

You're sitting in a bar. A guy comes in who catches your attention. He notices you looking at him and keeps an eye on you. A short while later he comes over and sits down beside you. Without a word he pulls his (as you put it) illegal heavy blaster and shoves it in your stomach.

Who's the aggressor here? Who's the bad guy and who gets the dark side point?

For all you know you just blasted a hole in someone who thought you looked like someone they used to go to school with way back when....

You might as well have handed him a blaster so you wouldn't be shooting an unarmed man. :)

Anyway, if that's all the info I had to go on, then I'd give out the DSP.

:)

Gully

Master Dao Rin
24 January 2002, 10:09 PM
No DSP.

darth maim
24 January 2002, 11:00 PM
If you felt he was shady you should have attempted intimidation... Maybe bring a bit of attention on him (ever see The golden Child? Remember the bad guy at the airport with Eddie Murphy?) Even spoken to him at all or return his icy stare... if he pulled first or even showed the intention of going for you blast away... in the instance you described YOU GET A DSP. Sorry it's the way I see it and it's definately the way I'd call it in my game.

Perhaps he too was trailing this person you were watching... notices you guys have been nosing around his mark and is keeping an eye on you.

Fab
25 January 2002, 03:42 AM
Originally posted by Peeper
I don't think a DSP is warranted here. . . . you fired in self-defense.

No, actually the 'villain' was going to fire in self defense. I believe a DSP is warranted in this case. From years in martial arts I've learned that the best defense is not to even get into a situation like that. If this was real life and the guy was staring you down, you shouldn't have sat next to him, and certainly not pulled a weapon on him.

I would have sat where he couldn't have seen me without turning around completely on his bar stool. If he continued to be a problem, I would have loosened my blaster in its holster but continued to try and keep a low profile.

I read a story once of a man who saw someone being chased by a man with a gun. So this man pulls out his own gun and shoots the other armed man. Turned out the man chasing the other one was a plain clothes detective. In trying to do a good deed, he wounded a cop. The moral of the story is only pull out your weapon when you are ABSOLUTELY sure that it's warranted.

Jak Knife
25 January 2002, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by Fab

I read a story once of a man who saw someone being chased by a man with a gun. So this man pulls out his own gun and shoots the other armed man. Turned out the man chasing the other one was a plain clothes detective. In trying to do a good deed, he wounded a cop. The moral of the story is only pull out your weapon when you are ABSOLUTELY sure that it's warranted.

If this situation happened in a game would you award a DSP? The man's intensions were good even if his decision making was bad. I have always weighed in the intentions behind the act. In the above case I would not award a DSP, in the case stated in the begining of this thread I would because as I see it the situation arose from fear, parinoia, and aggressive nature (not extremely aggressive)..

I intend to scare him a little, that only, what can i say i am a jerk, but not a murderer.
Pulling the blaster was confrontational and therefore aggresive.

I do have one more question though, Ralzma02 does your character have any DSP's and is he force sensitive?

Fab
25 January 2002, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by Jak Knife
If this situation happened in a game would you award a DSP? The man's intensions were good even if his decision making was bad. I have always weighed in the intentions behind the act. In the above case I would not award a DSP . . .

I agree. The intention was to help, not cause evil, so I don't think in my example a DSP is called for. But a few years in a penal colony might remind the player (had it been a RPG incident) to ask questions first and shoot later (in civilized systems at least).

Say . . . that gives me an idea for the next adventure I run.

Tony J Case, Super Genius
25 January 2002, 09:06 AM
The one thing that nobody has asked, the most important factor in if I would hand out a DSP or not - is the character Force sensitive?

If he is not, I would not give him a point. If he is sensitive, I most certanly would. Either way, I'd also hit him with non-game mechanic reprocussions - He's now hunted by the law, wanted by a widowed spouse, and that sort of thing.

Ralzma02
25 January 2002, 10:55 AM
OK to answer your questions, the character does not have any other DSP's nor is he force-sensitive.

Also, here is what actually happened "out of game", THe gm purposely moved the character next to a man who was glaring at him (which is a very specific look, to look findingly and angrily), so my char put the blaster in the guy's stomache, and the GM told me that my char then "sees two blaster pistols pointing at his chest". So I asked if i could have made a reflex save, which I passed, and then I decided to shoot him. This shows that i was not planning to kill the man "out of game" but only to do an intimaidate check, with a bonus for the gun. yet the GM bypassed that, so he decided to shoot him. Do any of you have different opinions now? just interested. This will help he and I become better at the game. THis was only his third time being a GM.

Also, should an action which results in a DSP rely more on the PC's intention, or outcome of the action. Because in a situation, not this one, but if a character got into a fight and killed a undercover rebel officer, where the PC is not the aggressor, does he deserve a DSP, because he doesn't know the enemy was a rebel, so he though he was defending himself, as opposed to killing a warrior against tyranny. His intention was defense, or completing a mission, but the outcome was the killing of a rebel. So I would like to hear all of your opinions on if a DSP is based on intention or outcome.

Donovan Morningfire
25 January 2002, 11:51 AM
Sounds like this bloke deserves a Dark Side Point all the way. You went out of your way to provoke the guy, and when he tried to defend himself, you blasted him. Definite black-hat stuff, and worthy of a DSP, regardless if you're Force-Sensitive or not. Doing stuff like that is just evil, pure and simple.

Hold up, let me rephrase that. The actions merit a Dark Side Point, regardless of intentions. It just sounds like your GM was being a whiny little snot. He may want to tell a story (or just up the body count), but you should still have total control of your character's actions. Sounds like your GM hosed you pal. Best advice, complain to the nitwit, or if he refuses to change, ditch him and find another group. Or maybe even start your own group. If the other players feel as you do (and he's screwed them like that in the past), they may just jump ship to your game.

BrianDavion
25 January 2002, 12:48 PM
this story reminds me of something that happened in vancouver BC a few years back...

a guy was in a 7-11 picking up some stuff... he saw a guy give him a dirty look.. so this guy pulled his gun and shot the guy... needless to say it was second degree murder plain and simple :)
I would award a dark side point because NO ONE who is a "good upstanding citizen" would do that... I mean, you approcuhed a guy looking at you funny and put a gun to his gut... and then when the guy moves to defend HIMSELF (look if some guy came up and put a gun to my belly I'm going to assume he's intending to shoot the thing) you shoot him and claim self defence? good god! thats like killing your parents and then asking for mercy because you are an orphan!

Ralzma02
25 January 2002, 01:21 PM
Look at it this way.

My PC is Lando, Han is coming off of the Falcon, I say to him, "you've got a lotta nerve coming here after what you pulled (A little intimidation, and the Armed Guards Behind me, which are kin to the blaster in his gut)". So the "GM" makes Han reach for his blaster, and the guards shoot him, Does Lando or the Guards deserve a DSP? Though this of course didn't happen, it is like the situation. So it gives a slight different perspective.

My real question is should a GM ever make your character do something that you haven't chosen to do, accepting that they have no previous DSP. So it isn't the Dark Side controlling him.

Gulmyros
25 January 2002, 01:46 PM
This shows that i was not planning to kill the man "out of game" but only to do an intimaidate check, with a bonus for the gun. yet the GM bypassed that, so he decided to shoot him. Do any of you have different opinions now? just interested. This will help he and I become better at the game. THis was only his third time being a GM.Ok, I'm still unclear on one thing - why was sitting next to this guy with your blaster drawn such a good idea in the first place?

In my experience with new players and GMs, it's better to avoid the situation entirely rather than argue about it afterward.

Coudn't you just leave? Maybe buy the guy a drink? Say hello? Sit next to him WITHOUT a blaster and ASK why he's staring at you?

I mean, if the first and best option is to pull a heavy blaster, why not point it at the bartender? Tell the guy to quit looking at you or you'll shoot the barkeep? That oughta work (<--- sarcasm, btw...)

But sure, the GM wanted to shoot you but you got to shoot first. I understand that. And in that sense your motives weren't necessarily any worse than his. But you let yourself get into that position where there was danger, and you enhanced the danger with your weapon. That can't be his fault.

Anyway, I think I've said my piece.

:)

Gully

Talonne Hauk
25 January 2002, 01:53 PM
You pulled first. If you didn't pull, you wouldn't have seen the two blasters. I think that pretty much sums it up there. Sorry, but I would have given you a DSP. I think your GM was more than a little manipulative, though. On the other hand, it's your job to see through the smoke and mirrors and tread the correct path.

Tony J Case, Super Genius
25 January 2002, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by Ralzma02
Also, here is what actually happened "out of game", THe gm purposely moved the character next to a man who was glaring at him (which is a very specific look, to look findingly and angrily), so my char put the blaster in the guy's stomache, and the GM told me that my char then "sees two blaster pistols pointing at his chest". So I asked if i could have made a reflex save, which I passed, and then I decided to shoot him. This shows that i was not planning to kill the man "out of game" but only to do an intimaidate check, with a bonus for the gun. yet the GM bypassed that, so he decided to shoot him. Do any of you have different opinions now? just interested. This will help he and I become better at the game. THis was only his third time being a GM.


Ok, I'm confused now - lets see if I got it right.

You were following an associate (an NPC), watching his back in a bar.

The GM has this associate moves near a guy looking extra hard at him.

Intent on covering your accociate, you move close to the glairing guy and pull your blaster.

He draws on you, you opt to shoot him in an effort to intimidate him? Now I'm no expert, but shouldnt the imtimidation roll come right after you get the drop on him?

Hmmm, the more I think about it, the more I think the DSP was warrented.




Also, should an action which results in a DSP rely more on the PC's intention, or outcome of the action.


The nature of the Dark Side, plus the millions of combinations of situations, makes a sweeping statement like that imposable. There is no hard and fast checklist that detail when a player should get a dark side point or not. It's all about the GM instinct and feeling of the situation. Was there another way out of the situation? Did the character use the appropriate amount of force? Was the character excessive? Is the character Force Sensitive? All these and more need to be answered before a GM can hand out a DSP.

A Jedi has to get past a guard into an enemy command center. His options are to rush the guards cut them to pieces with his lightsaber or use telekinesis to clobber the guard with a packing crate and knock him out. The Jedi code clearly says that a Jedi doesn't use the Force to attack folks, yet the other option is to out and out kill the guard. Which is the right course of action? Is it still the right course of action if the circumstances were different?

Fab
25 January 2002, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by Tony J Case, Super Genius
The one thing that nobody has asked, the most important factor in if I would hand out a DSP or not - is the character Force sensitive?

Why does it matter? Force-sensitive is simply a skill, or a talent. Now if the shooter used the force to determine that the glaring "bad-guy" was simply trying to put a name to a face (maybe he recognized the shooter from college or something) but went ahead and threatened him anyway, then it matters.

Otherwise, I would think it matters if the shooter were a Jedi. In that case, just pointing the blaster at him might merit a DSP, even without the gunfight.

But even if the shooter doesn't even believe in the Force, he shot and killed another man. If he provoked that confrontation, then I would think a DSP is called for. We're only talking about a DSP, not making the PC switch to the Dark Side completely. One DSP is a slap on the hand, which I think the PC deserves for his actions.

If he was simply reacting to the bad guy's move, just reacting faster, then MAYBE no DSP. Otherwise a DSP regardless. Your mileage may vary.

Ralzma02
25 January 2002, 02:14 PM
In reply to those who said I should not have sat down in the first place. I agree, the trouble was the GM sat me down without my permission. And then jumped past my request for an intimidate, to him pulling blasters.

Fab
25 January 2002, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by Ralzma02
In reply to those who said I should not have sat down in the first place. I agree, the trouble was the GM sat me down without my permission. And then jumped past my request for an intimidate, to him pulling blasters.

It sounds like the GM is partly to blame for this, then. If he left you no options to get around the situation, then I don't think a DSP is called for. Pushing a PC into a certain action is one thing, but an action that causes a DSP to be given out is another.

Perhaps it advances his storyline to have this badguy killed in the bar. I think he could have steered you to make the same thing happen in a different way, but that's just my opinion.

Tony J Case, Super Genius
25 January 2002, 03:39 PM
Originally posted by Fab
Why does it matter? Force-sensitive is simply a skill, or a talent.

It matters a great deal. A Force sensitive has to toe the Jedi line more than the non sensitive. They dont have to hold completly to the ideal of a Jedi like they do, but they have to hold closer to them than the average Joe 6-Pack. A non-sensitive has to try much, much harder before they get a DSP.



Otherwise, I would think it matters if the shooter were a Jedi. In that case, just pointing the blaster at him might merit a DSP, even without the gunfight.

That, in my thinking, is way too harsh. A Jedi would be preventing things from getting out of hand, from moving up to the next level - stopping the fight before it had begun.

Now, that is assuming that the Jedi doesn't gun the poor bastard down. If he does pull the trigger, then we're talking about something else altogether.



But even if the shooter doesn't even believe in the Force, he shot and killed another man. If he provoked that confrontation, then I would think a DSP is called for. We're only talking about a DSP, not making the PC switch to the Dark Side completely. One DSP is a slap on the hand, which I think the PC deserves for his actions.

You have an interesting dichotomy here. You're quick to give out the Dark Side Points, but they only carry a portion of the seginifcance they should. A DSP is a grave, serious matter that could very well lose the player his character. At the very least its a dark stain on his soul that effects the character forever. It is, in short, much more than just a slap on the wrist.

wolverine
25 January 2002, 07:05 PM
Another possibility you all have missed. A quick flick of a switch to Stun and then the shot.

AS for me. First off, i have done this, admittedly as a gm twice, both times the player got out of it in a strange and innovative way. The one time a player got into this type of situation on his own, i dropped the DSP like a quater at a Pool hall.

It does sound to me like the Gm was partially at fault, but you deserved the dsp in my mind.

Gulmyros
25 January 2002, 07:20 PM
In reply to those who said I should not have sat down in the first place. I agree, the trouble was the GM sat me down without my permission. And then jumped past my request for an intimidate, to him pulling blasters.Well then, Ralzma02, you have a bigger problem than the assigning of DSPs...

As a general rule the GM should ask you what your character does. Then you should declare something, then the GM should tell you what happens as a result of your actions.

If this guy's gonna decide on his own what your character is doing, then why is it even your character? If he wants to control things, that's what NPCs are for...

I'd have insisted that my character does what I say, not what the GM wants to see.

:raised:

Gully

Grimace
25 January 2002, 08:38 PM
I'm kinda confused too. Did the GM not let you decide where to sit? Did he make your character pull his blaster without you deciding this? If he did, you need to talk to the GM and let him know that this isn't the way to effectively GM. As Gulmyros suggested, the GM should ask for your actions, and then inform you of what those actions achieve.

Beyond that, and assuming you had the choice to pull your blaster out, your character deserves a DSP. There was no reason to pull a blaster when talking would have been a better action. Even getting up and leaving the table would have been a better action. The moment you pulled a blaster, you became the aggressor against a person you had no idea what his intentions were. Since his response to you poking a blaster at him was to draw his own...but he didn't open fire on you, chances are he wasn't outright evil, otherwise he would have blasted you. So your character acted irresponsably and resulted in the death of a person that probably wasn't evil. That gets you a DSP in my book (and obviously a lot of other's books as well).

If your GM made you sit, and made your character draw your blaster, and gave you a DSP for your actions taken from that, then your GM is mistaken and needs to re-read on how to GM. I know you said you're both new to the game, so perhaps he accidentally was too heavy handed and put you into a position you didn't want to be in.

BrianDavion
25 January 2002, 08:42 PM
sounds like your GM was trying to force you to do something.. sign of a bad GM, if I was you I'd consider ditching the game

darth maim
26 January 2002, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by Ralzma02
OK to answer your questions, the character does not have any other DSP's nor is he force-sensitive.

Also, here is what actually happened "out of game", THe gm purposely moved the character next to a man who was glaring at him (which is a very specific look, to look findingly and angrily), so my char put the blaster in the guy's stomache, and the GM told me that my char then "sees two blaster pistols pointing at his chest". So I asked if i could have made a reflex save, which I passed, and then I decided to shoot him. This shows that i was not planning to kill the man "out of game" but only to do an intimaidate check, with a bonus for the gun. yet the GM bypassed that, so he decided to shoot him. Do any of you have different opinions now? just interested. This will help he and I become better at the game. THis was only his third time being a GM.

Also, should an action which results in a DSP rely more on the PC's intention, or outcome of the action. Because in a situation, not this one, but if a character got into a fight and killed a undercover rebel officer, where the PC is not the aggressor, does he deserve a DSP, because he doesn't know the enemy was a rebel, so he though he was defending himself, as opposed to killing a warrior against tyranny. His intention was defense, or completing a mission, but the outcome was the killing of a rebel. So I would like to hear all of your opinions on if a DSP is based on intention or outcome.

If it's purely self defense it doesn't matter if this guy is a rebel, a storm trooper or frickin jedi master mother teresa :D ... The force doesn't choose political sides man. I don't base it purely on intention as a stupid idea and action (even with the best intentions) is still stupid. I say in this instance take the DSP without an arguement (he's the GM) but still talk to him and explain that he needs to be a wee bit clearer on the intentions of an NPC with blasters trained on you or at least let ya make an intimidation check... Also for future refrence try talking before you whip out the guns. If this guy was bad news you would've known pretty quickly by chatting it up or making a spectacle of yourself (which also would have made it easier for the rest of your party to look for this guy they were seeking without being noticed).

Jan Tolbara
26 January 2002, 02:05 AM
Whether the character is Force-sensitive or not is irrelevant, IMO. The Star Wars universe is a setting of clear-cut heroes and villains, where most everything is black and white. Good and evil acts and intentions should be easy to define.

Pulling a gun on anybody without being threatened first sends a signal that aggression and violence are intended, which is clearly defined as aspects of the dark side of the Force. Since the character in question pulled his gun first, the DSP should be awarded. If the character drew his weapon in response to somebody else's threat, I would not award a DSP due to the action being done in self-defense.

Fab
26 January 2002, 05:51 AM
Originally posted by Tony J Case, Super Genius
It matters a great deal. A Force sensitive has to toe the Jedi line more than the non sensitive. They dont have to hold completly to the ideal of a Jedi like they do, but they have to hold closer to them than the average Joe 6-Pack. A non-sensitive has to try much, much harder before they get a DSP.

Jedi and Force-Sensitive are not necessarily the same thing. This guy could have been (he wasn't) Force-Sensitive without trying to live up to the Jedi's high ideals. In that case he would have been just a regular guy like you and me with a sort of "sixth sense" is all. I wouldn't hold that character to a higher standard, that is unless his sixth sense told him that the glaring stranger was harmless, just not very socially well-adjusted, then the DSP would be for sure.


That, in my thinking, is way too harsh. A Jedi would be preventing things from getting out of hand, from moving up to the next level - stopping the fight before it had begun.

That's why I might have given a Jedi a DSP for the pulling of the blaster alone. Just because someone gives a Jedi a dirty look doesn't mean he would be permitted and correct to pull a blaster on him. That sort of rush to a fight is a telltale sign that he's already headed down the Dark path. The DSP is merely a token of that.


You have an interesting dichotomy here. You're quick to give out the Dark Side Points, but they only carry a portion of the seginifcance they should. A DSP is a grave, serious matter that could very well lose the player his character. At the very least its a dark stain on his soul that effects the character forever. It is, in short, much more than just a slap on the wrist.

I play the d20 version of the game, so the character's first DSP is only just a slap on the wrist. Unless this guy has the constitution of a 84-year-old wino, one DSP is meaningless in the big picture. Now in the d6 version, you're right, one DSP could have major consequences. But as I was speaking from the d20 point of view, I think the first three or four DSPs are simply warnings. Not until the character has acquired half a dozen is there really any potential of losing him to the Dark Side.

VixenofVenus
26 January 2002, 07:50 AM
Even Han Solo, the baddest of the 'good guys', only pulled out his gun AFTER Greedo had pointed his gun at Han and told him his intention to kill him.

Therre were only a few times in the movies where Han drew his pistol first - a) vs. Vader in Cloud City, but by then he had learned that Vaders intentions were always bad, b) vs. the Probe Droid on Hoth, which shot at Chewie before it even saw Han, c) vs. the Ewoks, and he was in the process of being captured, d) in various battles when sneaking up on people, and he always either snapped a twig and beat em up or engineered their capture so they could take his clothes (including the battle on the Millenium Falcon in E4, because the two sets of Stormie suits were unscathed from blaster burns, so only the stormies fired in that unseen but heard battle).


This is why I would give you a DSP . . . that is, IF you had been controlling the character during that time. I personally think your GM should get the DSP. Either we don't know what was going on, or he is more controlling than GOD!!! Most 'good' GMs don't need to force their PCs to do what the storyline needs, they just set the stage in a way that they know the Player will take the bait.

If he had wanted you to sit down there, he could have bided his time and had the guy send you a drink, etc, etc.

Ralzma02
26 January 2002, 09:59 AM
Ok, since the majority believe he was deserving a DSP, as do I. If I was able to make the Intimidate, and succeed, or not, does the Char deserve a DSP for having the blaster in the guys stomach?

VixenofVenus
26 January 2002, 10:12 AM
I think the DSP is when you shot him, everything else up to that point was in a grey area. But that's my opinion.

Talonne Hauk
26 January 2002, 11:24 AM
At the time when you pulled your blaster, you still had the option of re-holstering, switching to stun, whatever. Once you pulled the trigger, you were intent on doing harm. That's when and why you received the DSP.

Ralzma02
26 January 2002, 09:47 PM
Ok so if there is no DSP for the intimidation alone.

New Situation: I don't pull my blaster and just intimidate, he pulls his blaster, I pull mine, I beat him to it, he dies, i don't get a DSP. Because it was self defense.

So place that with the original situation, if there is no dsp for the intimidate, i have the blaster out anyways, which we established to be not evil enough for the DSP, then when he pulls his weapon with "the intent to do harm", and i defend myself, agaisnt his self defense, I get a DSP. So alone they are ok , but when you place them togeather they are evil, correct?

Yes, I could have put the blaster away, and i would have, but he did not give me time, he pulled too, what was i supposed to do, let him shoot me, It was he or I. You could say he might have not shot me, but I was in the same boat as he, how did i know? Remember I did not choose the situation, the GM did. What would your char have chosen in the situation? So if it is about the intent to do harm, if in any combat situation you have the intent to do harm, yet we don't get DSP anytime we shoot someone, why is this different?

Gulmyros
26 January 2002, 10:16 PM
Remember I did not choose the situation, the GM did. What would your char have chosen in the situation?Heh, I'd have shot him, taken the DSP in stride, lived to fight another day, then turned my blaster on the GM and pulled the trigger. . . . . . .

:)

Gully

Talonne Hauk
26 January 2002, 11:07 PM
Well, if he pulled two blasters, you could have punched him with your free hand. How was he going to block it? It would have been much more cinematic and funnier if you were able to coldcock the NPC. All this aside, you're getting more and more defensive about this scenario. I'd talk to your GM. It appears he put you in an unavoidable situation. If the situation had played out without any manipulation from your GM, you would have definitely deserved a DSP. But because you feel manipulated, it's a grey area. If I were your GM, I wouldn't have manipulated you into that situation. But I've been gaming for more than 20 years. It sounds as if you and your GM are novices at this. Talk it out with your GM, see if you can avoid these types of confusing situations until the two of you are more comfortable with the game and your playing styles. But if he won't budge, don't whine. Just take the DSP and play.

Tony J Case, Super Genius
26 January 2002, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by Ralzma02
New Situation: I don't pull my blaster and just intimidate, he pulls his blaster, I pull mine, I beat him to it, he dies, i don't get a DSP. Because it was self defense.


. . . . but it was self defense in a scenario that you created. You drew first. You forced his hand. I might not, but a more hard ass GM would - and you would have a hard time arguing the point.



Yes, I could have put the blaster away, and i would have, but he did not give me time, he pulled too, what was i supposed to do, let him shoot me, It was he or I.


Not necessarily - going in knowing that you might have to fire, switch to stun. Grab his gun arm (see any John Woo flick), snatch his pistol out of its holster as you draw on him, or just simply dodge out of the way. If there was no other alternative - and I mean *NO* other, then you might get off.

Again - this all depends on if the character is Force Sensitive. If he's not, then he's good to go. He might have bounty hunters after him, but not necessarily a DSP.



So if it is about the intent to do harm, if in any combat situation you have the intent to do harm, yet we don't get DSP anytime we shoot someone, why is this different?

There's the intent to do harm, and then there's unnecessary and extreme actions. Straight up cold blooded murder, even of someone as evil as a Stormtrooper, is grounds for DSP. Getting them in combat is another story.

Tao
30 January 2002, 02:20 AM
Honestly, I consider myself pretty harsh as far as DSPs are concerned, but I dont see why he would get one at all. It seems to me his rook GM wanted a fight so bad he was going to manufacture one, regardless of the actions of the character. I feel the players actions were brash and irresponsible, but once you have a gun pointed at your chest the fight has begun. He didnt fire when the man was unarmed, but did so when his life became in immediate danger. Since it is his first darkside point I would let him off with a warning (and an armed officer or bounty hunter).

Also, why would it matter if he was Force Sensative or not. There is natural law that applies to all people, regardless of whether or not you are Force Sensative. Evil is evil, regardless of how the commiter looks upon it. Plenty of bad things have been done by people who felt they were doing the "right" thing.

Tony J Case, Super Genius
30 January 2002, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by Tao
Also, why would it matter if he was Force Sensative or not. There is natural law that applies to all people, regardless of whether or not you are Force Sensative. Evil is evil, regardless of how the commiter looks upon it. Plenty of bad things have been done by people who felt they were doing the "right" thing.

I dont have my books with me at work so I can't quote you passage and verse, but in short the more a character is in tune with the Force, the closer they have to toe the line. Sure a character will recieve a DSP for the most vile acts (blowing up planets and so on) regardless of the level of sensitivity, but minor violence and indiffrence to violence is acceptable for non-sensitive. Force Sensitive dont have to adhere 100 percent to the Jedi code, but they have to stay more in the light than the average joe.

At least, that's what the book says.

BrianDavion
30 January 2002, 08:25 AM
anyway, I still think that from the sounds of it, you need a new GM...there are some basic rules for GMing and one of em is never to FORCE your player to do something directly

a better option is, as they said, to subtly GUIDE you.
I suggest talking to your GM and explaining that he shouldn't try and force actions like that, and "and if a game has a GM who does that, the game's not worth playing".


that being said, in a D20 game, 1 DSP i NOTHING... keep in mind luke has 2 of the things:)

darth maim
30 January 2002, 12:21 PM
It seems to me that those of you guys who say no DSP are doing so on the basis that the GM "forced his actions". It seems to me from his original post that the GM did little other than say "there's a guy at the bar staring you down" and when he said I want to sit at the bar took his vaugueness and tuned it on him by sitting him next to the guy. It was the player who then decided to jam a blaster in his gut and threaten him causing the NPC patron to flash his own blasters and reach for them.

I'm still saying DSP in this case. Just take it and move on.

Master Dao Rin
30 January 2002, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by Tony J Case, Super Genius

I dont have my books with me at work so I can't quote you passage and verse, but in short the more a character is in tune with the Force, the closer they have to toe the line. Sure a character will recieve a DSP for the most vile acts (blowing up planets and so on) regardless of the level of sensitivity, but minor violence and indiffrence to violence is acceptable for non-sensitive. Force Sensitive dont have to adhere 100 percent to the Jedi code, but they have to stay more in the light than the average joe.
At least, that's what the book says.

Personally, I think being sensitive to the Force means you're tempted more, not that one is more suseptible to tip over the edge by looking hard at a little fluffy kitty; or that non-sensitive types can get away with more risky things before they get a "point". Like some have mentioned: evil is evil, it doesn't matter who you are, even if you only have 1 midichlorian in your body.

I certainly DO NOT think there should be a "scale" for a certain select group of people, and a totally different measuring stick for the other group. This is contrary to the Force and its workings, I would argue.

I've never really liked the way they've describe the "Code" or the Jedi's responsibility to it and The Force in the EU books, so thats where I'm coming from at any rate if you're wondering why I'm not spouting company dogma.

The way I see it:

*A character comes in the bar.

*A guy stares him down.

*Character tells him to back off with his blaster (admitly a little rash, and not something a normal sane person would do, but then again, he's got a right to growl for his personal space and hey! its a game and supposed to be fun and fictional)

*Guy thinks he is fast enough to dodge a blaster bolt 2 cms from his body (obviously, this guy is reeeeeally stupid - would you get agressive with someone who's already got the drop on you clear and free and got a blaster to your head?!?) So he PULLS HIS OWN GUNS and starts a shootout. Dumb, real dumb. At this point said guy, if he had more than two brain cells, should have been negotiating and maneuvering to appease said aggressor (cops don't start shooting at kidnappers when they've got guns to people's body parts - which is the same situation, different context ... in other words, you don't start getting agressive when someone has a gun pointing at your head, until you AT LEAST distract the dude enough to get the drop in return on the baddie!). This is exactly the same situation Han was in with Greedo - Greedo wouldn't have gotten a DSP if Han had just simply pulled out his gun and attempted to fire - Han would have been dead too.

*Character easily lays waste to said guy for being stupid enough in refusing to back off and leaving character alone.



Personally, as the GM, I would award no DSP for character - whether he's FS or no - because the guy was asking to be shot for drawing his guns in return when the gun was already drawn, pointed, cocked, and ready for business at his chest or whatever it was. The guy initiated the combat, not the character. How else did the guy expect it to go when he pulled his own guns in return?

Now, if the character simply drew his gun and fired at the guy point blank in one fluid movement before the guy had a chance to pull his own guns, thats different. Then a DSP. As the Jedi Council dealing with Jedi in this type of situation, the stupid fool of a Jedi would have his spurs, robes, and lightsaber taken away too. :D

If I was your gm, I would have given the character a coup de grace maneuver free and clear for that stunt ... I hope you didn't have to roll to hit!

darth maim
31 January 2002, 07:44 AM
Originally posted by Master Dao Rin


The guy initiated the combat, not the character. How else did the guy expect it to go when he pulled his own guns in return?



How is this even remotely possible? The NPC was acting in self defense. Plain and Simple. If someone came at you like a psychopath and stuck a gun to your midsection (let's assume you believed the man was going to shoot you no matter what you did), and you had two pistols on your sides.... if you went for them in the off chance of surviving would you honestly think that you initiated a fire-fight? That's like saying that by locking your door you somehow initiated your house being broken into by a burgalar.... Doesn't make any sense.

Master Dao Rin
31 January 2002, 08:46 PM
Well, from the way the scene was described, the character had already drawn his gun out, and had it pointed at the guy before he was able to react or do anything. There was an implied moment of tension, where (I assume) they stared at each other, if even only for a moment - an attempt at intimidation, which the poster later revealed to be true. He didn't draw his gun and shoot. He drew his gun and pointed - big difference.

Then the guy reacted, forcing the character then to react to the guy's reaction. The guy, revealed his guns, then drew - a clear indication of intent (and violence if that matters to you) - he chose to make it a gun fight. End of story. He paid the price and now is six feet under!

I don't know about you, but lets just say if a robber came into the bank and pointed a gun at me - and I was the security officer with a gun - I certainly wouldn't pull out my gun when the bad guy already has his gun trained on me. Thats asking for a lot of trouble, and you stand a very good chance of taking a bullet without ever clearing your holster. My hands would be up and I'd be workin' that psychology training that I'd have been given when dealing with psychopaths. Talk him outta of doing something rash, like starting to shoot people sorta deal. :)

Same situation with Han and Greedo - Greedo pulled a gun on Han - did Han draw his gun in return? :rolleyes: No, he talked him into letting his guard down and then blew the creep away across the table - now that was smart. And no DSP, because thats good clean Hollywood Western / Star Wars fun. :D

Granted, if I was that character in this situation I never would have drew my gun on the creep ... but to each his own! :)

Grimace
31 January 2002, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by Master Dao Rin

I don't know about you, but lets just say if a robber came into the bank and pointed a gun at me - and I was the security officer with a gun - I certainly wouldn't pull out my gun when the bad guy already has his gun trained on me. Thats asking for a lot of trouble, and you stand a very good chance of taking a bullet without ever clearing your holster. My hands would be up and I'd be workin' that psychology training that I'd have been given when dealing with psychopaths. Talk him outta of doing something rash, like starting to shoot people sorta deal. :)

Same situation with Han and Greedo - Greedo pulled a gun on Han - did Han draw his gun in return? :rolleyes: No, he talked him into letting his guard down and then blew the creep away across the table - now that was smart. And no DSP, because thats good clean Hollywood Western / Star Wars fun.


The only problem with both of your examples, Master Dao Rin, is that both instances are cases where the person who is brandishing the gun is the BAD GUY! The bank robber and Greedo were both "bad guys". Thus, using that analogy, the PC who draws his gun and points it at the staring NPC is a "Bad Guy". Good guys don't "skin their smokewagon" (love that quote from Tombstone:D ) on people who are staring at them. Good guys ask "Why are you looking at me?" or "What's your problem?" (for the more gritty good guys) By this alone, it can be construed that the PC who drew his blaster was the "bad guy" and therefore the agressor. Granted, it wasn't the smartest thing for the NPC to whip his blasters out, but that's a matter for the GM to work out.

Overall, the shooting of the NPC is the logical end result of an action that shouldn't have been taken (drawing the blaster). Since the action of drawing the blaster WAS taken, which resulted in the death of a person for no reason other than "he was staring at me", that paints the PC as performing an evil act, and therefore would warrant a DSP.

With the question of the GMs decision making/railroading being brought into the equation, it opens up the whole matter of "would the PC have been in the position to pull the blaster and therefore shoot the NPC if the GM hadn't have forced him to sit at the table with the staring NPC". That makes the whole thing hard to judge, IMO. As someone else once said on this thread...the GM should get a DSP. :? The again, what happens when the GM becomes consumed by the Dark Side? 8o

Talonne Hauk
31 January 2002, 10:30 PM
"Then the guy reacted, forcing the character then to react to the guy's reaction."
Whew. Lots of reactions going on around here. I think we can cut to the nub of the argument by focusing on the first part of the above statement. "Then the guy reacted..." To WHAT?!? A gun pulled on him. WHY?!? Because he dared to give an evil look to the PC. Y'see, maybe the NPC thought the PC was somebody else. Maybe he was feeling crotchety, and just wanted a little tussle. We don't know, though, because the PC blew him away as soon as the NPC tried to react. And that's why the PC deserves a DSP. It's a contrived situation, played out by a couple of people new to the game, and probably to RPG's in general. It's not fun to be pushed into a situation by your GM, like cattle in a loading pen, but it's happened to most of us, I'm sure. In this case, it's a learning experience.

darth maim
31 January 2002, 11:11 PM
Originally posted by Master Dao Rin
The guy, revealed his guns, then drew - a clear indication of intent (and violence if that matters to you) - he chose to make it a gun fight. End of story. He paid the price and now is six feet under!


With this logic the PC wasn't possibly trying to intimidate the guy because he revealed his blaster and drew... that's a clear indication of intent and violence right? What if the NPC was trying to back the PC down with a little intimidation of his own... kind of a you aren't the only guy with a blaster around here... think of movies for endless examples... how many time have two characters had weapons leveled at one another trying to warn the other that if you shoot me I'm gonna squeeze off a shot and take you with me? Kind of a "look in this situation we're both just as dead so why don't you put that thing away and let's clear out and go our seperate paths..."

BrianDavion
1 February 2002, 11:12 AM
ok, lets look at this from the NPCs POV.

your sitting at a bar having a drink.. you see this guy come in.. he's looking around a bit oddly, obviously looking for something, maybe he's dressed funny, maybe you just don't like the look or him.. whatever you lok at him funny... he walks up to you and puts a gun to your belly... thats a bad thing... that would be an evil act for sure... did the NPC react in a bad manner... yes he did..

but back to the bank situation.. if said physcopath is holding a gun to your bely, you try and do something that makes him shoot you.. whose fault was it? yours or his?

Master Dao Rin
1 February 2002, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by Grimace

The only problem with both of your examples, Master Dao Rin, is that both instances are cases where the person who is brandishing the gun is the BAD GUY! The bank robber and Greedo were both "bad guys".

I agree - the character in this case is a jerk, and the player admitted it in his first post that is the way he is playing the character. But not every bad guy deserves a DSP just for acting like a jerk! Thats what they're supposed to do! Bad guys are scum, and deserve what they get - I wouldn't have given the victim a DSP either if the situation was reversed. But it was clear that the character's original intent was to tell the guy to back off, not shoot him, until the guy thought to be a hero and quick draw a bad guy who already had the drop on him ... :rolleyes:

Bottom line - I wouldn't penalize a character for acting in character. Thus, I wouldn't give a DSP to a Sith for using Force Grip / Fear after he had already fallen to the Dark Side - its what the Sith is supposed to do! Right?

Master Dao Rin
1 February 2002, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by darth maim

With this logic the PC wasn't possibly trying to intimidate the guy because he revealed his blaster and drew... that's a clear indication of intent and violence right? What if the NPC was trying to back the PC down with a little intimidation of his own... kind of a you aren't the only guy with a blaster around here... think of movies for endless examples... how many time have two characters had weapons leveled at one another trying to warn the other that if you shoot me I'm gonna squeeze off a shot and take you with me? Kind of a "look in this situation we're both just as dead so why don't you put that thing away and let's clear out and go our seperate paths..."

But they both didn't have their blasters drawn at each other from the moment! Character drew - guy swung off his chair, sweeping away trenchcoat (or whatever) - preceded to quickdraw - and lost.

It didn't happen the way you just stated ...

Master Dao Rin
1 February 2002, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by BrianDavion
ok, lets look at this from the NPCs POV.

your sitting at a bar having a drink.. you see this guy come in.. he's looking around a bit oddly, obviously looking for something, maybe he's dressed funny, maybe you just don't like the look or him.. whatever you lok at him funny... he walks up to you and puts a gun to your belly... thats a bad thing... that would be an evil act for sure... did the NPC react in a bad manner... yes he did..

but back to the bank situation.. if said physcopath is holding a gun to your bely, you try and do something that makes him shoot you.. whose fault was it? yours or his?

Its no one's fault but your own if you do something stupid that gets yourself killed. Normal people don't try to be heroes when a psychopath is waving a gun around in their general direction; foolhardiness is almost as bad as being a psychopath.

Sure, the gun toting psychopath is a baddie and deserves whatever is coming to him, but that doesn't mean you should jump out with guns blazing either. In that case there is no other way for the situation to be resolved except in violence. Thats why Jedi are counselled so much about defense over attack.

However, this is also Star Wars - and thus has a touch of Western - and therefore a good shootout never hurt anyone. :) (meaning, DSPs shouldn't be awarded in this case, since it was a stupid, yet dramatic, fight).

And clearly, from your NPC pov example above, the moment the NPC decided :"Oh, this guy looks odd, dressed funny - I don't like the look of him so I'll stare meanly at him" Thats a clear challenge of "authority" (this here is my bar, sorta deal), and so there you go - the NPC initiated the situation ...

:D

BrianDavion
1 February 2002, 12:25 PM
"Bottom line - I wouldn't penalize a character for acting in character. Thus, I wouldn't give a DSP to a Sith for using Force Grip / Fear after he had already fallen to the Dark Side - its what the Sith is supposed to do! Right?"

Damn straight I would.. if your char is evil your going to rack up a dark side point, if your char is a Jerk and does bad things, he's going to get a darkside point. you mention a sith after he's fallen to the darkside, which is a bit diffrent anyway, since IIRC this char had not yet earned a SINGLE DSP...

still, you make it sound like if you act in char it doesn't matter.. I have news for you.. it DOES mattter... acting in char is no excuse to get away with doing evil and not suffer the concequences.


I mean, let's say you come up with a char idea.. the idea is a young jedi who.. tends to have a short fuse...

well this char tends to act on it once or twice being perfectly in char... now here's the problem... unintentiaonly that char starts turning to the dark side... now would you say he shouldn't have any DSP because he was just acting in char? thats silly and unrealistic.

if a player earns DSP it's because he did bad things.. if he was in charcter and did bad thigns he earns DSP because.. OBVIOUSLY THIS CHARCTER ISN'T A TOTATLY GOOD PERSON.

Talonne Hauk
1 February 2002, 04:28 PM
Just because a PC plays in character doesn't make him immune to earning a DSP. Hey, if the PC plays his character as slightly bad, this just reinforces it, right? Kind of like a Red Badge of Courage. And it wasn't clear that the character was trying to intimidate by pulling his blaster. He could have done that without pulling it. So buy playing belligerently, and then acting on it, he earned a DSP. No one initiates a fight by merely staring. Next time someone stares at you cross-eyed, give him a poke. And then explain to the judge, "Well, he gave me a funny look." I'd like to hear what the judge says to that.

darth maim
2 February 2002, 05:38 AM
Originally posted by Master Dao Rin
Bottom line - I wouldn't penalize a character for acting in character. Thus, I wouldn't give a DSP to a Sith for using Force Grip / Fear after he had already fallen to the Dark Side - its what the Sith is supposed to do! Right?

Absolutely I would give an evil character DSP's for every evil act...

Your example is like saying:

"Why prosecute a boxer for beating his wife? Boxers fight... it's what they do."

"If a crack addict robs you and burgalarizes your house... that's cool because that's to be expected of a crackhead."

Using this kind of logic excuses such atrocities as hate crimes, murder, drunk driving as well as just about every other crime known to man... Why do we have police again? Oh yeah, just because a person regularly exhibits a certain type of behavior doesn't make it right or even excusable.

Period!

Master Dao Rin
2 February 2002, 12:14 PM
Okay, okay - I was generalizing a little too much there - chill out, I'm coming clean. :D

Yes, when you blow up a planet: that is cause for a DSP no matter who you are - even if you're Moff Tarkin. Yes, being a Luke Skywalker can get you a DSP if you do something completely vile - like ginsu your father for no good reason, it was an accident sorta deal.

What I meant to say is that there is a point where even Tarkin would stop gaining DSPs after several planet kills, or Vader Force griping one too many incompentent Imperials. Or Fett after his umpteenth assassination. DSPs rules should also include some sort of moderation too, when in character for the player, if you take my meaning. :)

(Go figure, moderation and the Dark Side!)

My point is, I don't see this description as particularly life shattering or character changing in scope for this particular thread, and so I still say no DSP. The guy was being a regular jerk, and the result is he blew away another barfly. Big deal. I bet all the patrons didn't even blink! :)

BrianDavion
2 February 2002, 12:32 PM
yes, but you fail to see that the differance here is that the char didn't have a single DSP...

sides. DSPs for darksiders should be handed out... (I mean, you can fall to the dark side and just sort of get yourself a little wet.. or you can wallow in it like a pig in mud:)

I agree, if someone has 50 DSP already you proably don't need to be QUITE as bigilant, but you should try and keep it up no matter what

Gulmyros
2 February 2002, 12:53 PM
Hmmmm.... methinks this is becoming a debate between what constitutes evil, and what constitutes the perception of evil.

MDR, I'm going to borrow your examples of Tarkin, Vader, and Fett for a second. I promise to give them back when I'm done. :)

On one side are the campers who believe that evil is evil always, forever, and every single time. They give Vader a DSP for every single Force Grip. They give Fett one for each assassination, and Tarkin would get one for every planet smashed to little tiny asteroids.

On the other side are the folks who believe that the dark side demands more than it gives, ultimately. That is to say that evil folks need to do bigger and badder things to continue down the dark path or accumulate more DSPs. In this case, Fett gets DSPs early on pretty quick, but once the dark side's got him, only the more gruesome ones earn DSPs anymore, or significant acts of evil really warrant a DSP. They claim that this must be so, or else how could the big bad guys like these three have DSP totals so incredibly low for their line of work and established behavior???

Which camp is correct? I think both. That is, I think that either can work, so long as the campaign is consistent.

If the game uses the evil is evil always and forever concept, tho, I think that many significant NPCs need to have their DSP totals bumped up a bit. Otherwise the PCs can quickly become 'more' evil than your biggest baddest bad guys in the campaign.

Now, in my games, I run evil is evil always and forever. I explain it like the foul line in bowling. Run your foot across the line and the buzzer sounds, and you get penalized. Each step across the foul line in my games earns the character a DSP. What happens with the bad guys is that they don't mind so much anymore. Vader gets a foul. He shrugs. After all, he fouls all the time - so what's the big deal?

In this way the characters don't perceive the nastiness of high DSP totals. Once you've got 15, is that 16th really so bad? But the Force is like that foul line. It doesn't care how many times you've stepped over it in the past. Each time you step up and cross the line, the Force buzzer sounds and your score (DSP total) is affected.

To be fair, tho, I've played in both types of campaigns. And neither is more right or wrong than the other. Like any game rule, it is what it is, and as long as the GM is consistent, the players can work within the limits of the game.

But show me a GM where blaster ranges or damages are subjective and we've got a problem....

:)

Gully

Talonne Hauk
2 February 2002, 01:18 PM
This has become similar to a previous thread elsewhere; DSP's: Harsh or Lax? Look it up, a lot of similar points were debated. I basically fall into the evil is evil camp, because the Dark Side Sourcebook basically states that the more DSP's a character earns, the harsher the physical penalty because the body starts to rot from within. After a while, a bad guy should start to look at his skin falling off his arm and think, "Hmmm. Maybe I ought to send someone else out to handle my light work."