You mention the First Order. This game is Legends. The First Order does not exist in this timeline. What happens after Return of the Jedi is the Thrawn trilogy and Dark Empire, both of which I recommend you read.

In official canon with the Resistance and First Order, there is no KOTOR or SWTOR. There is no Outlander, Zakuul, Vitiate, Sith Purebloods, Naga Sadow, Marka Ragnos etc. etc.

Secondly, many prefer it this way, picking a side and all.

The First Order, in addition to being Disneycanon(1) while all of SWTOR is NOT Disneycanon is also more than 3600 years in the future of SWTOR (and as far as I can see does not exist in times BBY).

Oh, yeah, and Star Wars is space opera rather than science fiction.

(1) That is, the new set of things that are "canon"(2) since Disney bought the IP from Lucas.

(2) In its derived sense of "definitive" or its double-derived sense of "blessed by an official source", neither of which have anything to do with the substantial bodies of ecclesiastical law that are the original sense of the word.

I don't mind going back to the original factions, which is what has been hinted at. But it does raise a lot of questions on plot and good writing.

But now that they've made the "Zakuul" bed, it would seem silly for it to just go *poof* and we're back to the original factions. Zakuul is still going to be there. Will they destroy the Eternal Fleet? Gravestone with creepy Room of Weird? Iokath? All that stuff is there, so those threads need to be tied up...unless we get some half-assed handwave.

And if we do go back to the original factions, there leaves the issue with Theron/Lana. Current "traitor" storyline aside (which honestly I think will end up being wrapped up with the "traitor" returning), I don't see Theron or Lana willing to just stick it out and go back to the way things were. The entire point of the Alliance was that they didn't want to fight the old war anymore. I don't see the Outlander/Commander being satisfied with that either. The old war is just...old.

You mention the First Order. This game is Legends. The First Order does not exist in this timeline. What happens after Return of the Jedi is the Thrawn trilogy and Dark Empire, both of which I recommend you read.

 

In official canon with the Resistance and First Order, there is no KOTOR or SWTOR. There is no Outlander, Zakuul, Vitiate, Sith Purebloods, Naga Sadow, Marka Ragnos etc. etc.

 

Secondly, many prefer it this way, picking a side and all.

Calm down, I meant that canon needn't mean that the Eternal Empire gets destroyed. Extended lore or no. That's all.

I don't mind going back to the original factions, which is what has been hinted at. But it does raise a lot of questions on plot and good writing.

 

But now that they've made the "Zakuul" bed, it would seem silly for it to just go *poof* and we're back to the original factions. Zakuul is still going to be there. Will they destroy the Eternal Fleet? Gravestone with creepy Room of Weird? Iokath? All that stuff is there, so those threads need to be tied up...unless we get some half-assed handwave.

 

And if we do go back to the original factions, there leaves the issue with Theron/Lana. Current "traitor" storyline aside (which honestly I think will end up being wrapped up with the "traitor" returning), I don't see Theron or Lana willing to just stick it out and go back to the way things were. The entire point of the Alliance was that they didn't want to fight the old war anymore. I don't see the Outlander/Commander being satisfied with that either. The old war is just...old.

I am kind of tired of it being the same ole' thing - republic versus empire. Plus they put a lot into forming this alliance for it to just get destroyed in a short time. It really points to how lousy our leadership must be for it to fail so miserably. I would like to see the alliance continue. It makes things interesting.

However, if they decided to go back to republic versus empire, then I think whatever side we chose on Iokath is our new faction. There are a lot of problems with that. For example, if you are republic and choose to side with Acina then how would they put it in story that you defected to the other side. And how come my characters who made that choice can no longer go to the opposite side faction's area on Iokath. I could have sworn that my SW was able to hang out in republic zones and my trooper in Imperial area. Now they cannot and only stay in the specific zone aligned with their class.

And of course, like you mentioned there is Theron and Lana (not to mention the other imperial/republic companions in our Alliance). A lot of players (myself included) spent time, credits, and resources to build up their influences to level 50. It would be lousy to take that away just because of our faction alignment (like Lana stays with imps and Theron stays with pubs and same with other companions).

And of course, like you mentioned there is Theron and Lana (not to mention the other imperial/republic companions in our Alliance). A lot of players (myself included) spent time, credits, and resources to build up their influences to level 50. It would be lousy to take that away just because of our faction alignment (like Lana stays with imps and Theron stays with pubs and same with other companions).

Not to mention the whole love interest quagmire. Theron has mentioned numerous times that he's kinda over the whole "Republic vs Empire" thing and it would be kinda silly to just default him back to the Republic.

And with the Empire, what about Acina? I don't see her just giving up her Empress title. And in the case of a Force user, especially a Darth Nox, I don't see that going over well.

I recall a lot of people were actually clamoring specifically for the return of faction-based stories before Iokath came out.

There is definitely a bit of a Catch-22 to the whole thing. As it is, a lot of the various events, FPs, stories, etc, are a little...weird. I mean, like, from a story perspective, how are we justifying, this week, that essentially the highest politically-ranked individual in the whole dang galaxy, is hunting in the Rakghoul Tunnels of Alderaan? Same thing goes for a lot of the other events, FPs, world boss content, etc. Pre-KotFE, the player character was kind of a big deal, but wasn't THE big deal.

The problem is that now, it's a little hard to go back. With 30+ companions whose loyalty is based primarily around the character's status as the Alliance leader, an effective personal Capital Planet on Odessen and even the Heroic system revolving around decking out the army at your disposal. How do we bring our characters back to who they were (which I think is what most people really are looking for when they ask for factions to come back) without having to hit a reset button again? I don't know that there's a good answer to that.

It does seem as though a lot of people really wanted the factions back. But I am firmly in the camp that does not, and I hope we will retain some option to stay at least partially outside the Empire and Republic. I enjoy being able to work with good people from both sides int he Alliance

For me, the Imp vs. Pub stuff is boring. I think we've moved past it. And, since our character is now essentially a galaxy leader, going back to serving either faction's leader would be a step down for them. I would strongly, strongly prefer an option to remain as an independent leader/peacekeeper with my own Alliance, and to step in to resolve conflicts around the galaxy as needed.

But I do also agree that unfortunately Iokath may have drawn a line in the sand. The Commander did side against one of the factions, and in both Iokath and Umbara, that faction makes no bones about the fact that they're now our enemy. So if we don't get absorbed into the faction we chose, I think that might end up being our ally against the other faction for a while.

It does seem as though a lot of people really wanted the factions back. But I am firmly in the camp that does not, and I hope we will retain some option to stay at least partially outside the Empire and Republic. I enjoy being able to work with good people from both sides int he Alliance

 

For me, the Imp vs. Pub stuff is boring. I think we've moved past it. And, since our character is now essentially a galaxy leader, going back to serving either faction's leader would be a step down for them. I would strongly, strongly prefer an option to remain as an independent leader/peacekeeper with my own Alliance, and to step in to resolve conflicts around the galaxy as needed.

 

But I do also agree that unfortunately Iokath may have drawn a line in the sand. The Commander did side against one of the factions, and in both Iokath and Umbara, that faction makes no bones about the fact that they're now our enemy. So if we don't get absorbed into the faction we chose, I think that might end up being our ally against the other faction for a while.

I agree. One of the strengths in 'legends' is the breaking of the light & dark dichotomy of the films, where the Empire is just bad (dark), and the Republic is good (light). The KOTORs made one's actions morally ambitious, and SWTOR gave faces and lives to the grunts in the Imperial army, it also showed us how militaristic the Republic can be (like trying to make WMDs) the Eternal Empire arc seems to be the ultimate combination of those things. Which is why I was so happy with it, and would like to see it somehow exist independent of the traditional sides, if possible.

I came back to scratch my star wars itch. I was highly disappointed with story. Once again I found myself fighting wait for it... droids. The only section that peeked my interest was when I was killing flesh and blood republic troops.

I dislike the alliance story line, you are the ruler of the galaxy, because to be frank to me it is dumb. More over companion collection just made me want to kill myself when I was doing it. Frankly I am tired of games trying to bring the good side and the evil side together in some sort of retarded alliance.

What did I like about the factions in the original game? On the sith side I got to torture people, I got to slam someones parents together in mid air, and brake their necks at the same time. I got to shock a slave anytime the option came up. Mostly went on a vengeance murder killing spree. Very relaxing after a bad day at work. Serving the Empire was always fun to me. Did the good guy thing in swg for years, so swtor started to become my bad guy game before it become pg.

Now let us talk about after, what I just described pretty much completely disappeared, the game has gone full time pg rating. So yes I do not wish to be the ruler of the galaxy, I wish to be a deadly sith warrior rampaging across the galaxy, and slaughtering flesh and blood republic forces.

Last but not least many will not want to admit this, but despite the trailers prior to the launch of this game. The Empire and the Republic have NOT gone to full scale war mode, by way of the player involved. The Illum pvp zone was scrapped. A warzone was put into was cross faction. Mini arenas were added. No incentive for world pvp. Not to mention opposing faction guilds could not declare war on each other. Even worse a large number of fps/ops had nothing to do with republic vrs empire. I have always felt the players got short changed on this in the game. GSF was ruined for most by excessive range of gunships. Hell even the Empire story at the end of the original game has fighting one of your own, not the republic. I do not know if that last part ever changed. I think the closset a player could ever come to feeling the immersive actions of empire vrs republic was the Balmorra missions on both sides.

Anyways ones players thoughts on factions and the alliance.

I think the closset a player could ever come to feeling the immersive actions of empire vrs republic was the Balmorra missions on both sides.

 

The entire culmination of the Knight storyline is to infiltrate Kaas City and slay the Emperor...even though it was just the Voice. The Agent storyline is woven through both factions. Even though the end "nemesis" for the Inquisitor is another Sith, it can get very political if you so choose to play it that way. I haven't played the Trooper in a long time, but I believe a lot of that had to do with the war as well if I remember correctly.

I love the whole "grey" aspect of the game. A member of the Dark Council who is neither Light nor Dark...one who struggles with her burdens. One who's first instinct is to Force choke first and ask questions later, but has a sense of pragmatism. Being a monster can be fun, but it's so awesome to dig deep into the story and really run with it. Just like with the Knight. No need to play an angel. Play a Knight who becomes jaded with the Order...one who feels that the Order is weak and unwilling to do what needs to be done in order to defeat the Empire.

The entire culmination of the Knight storyline is to infiltrate Kaas City and slay the Emperor...even though it was just the Voice. The Agent storyline is woven through both factions. Even though the end "nemesis" for the Inquisitor is another Sith, it can get very political if you so choose to play it that way. I haven't played the Trooper in a long time, but I believe a lot of that had to do with the war as well if I remember correctly.

 

I love the whole "grey" aspect of the game. A member of the Dark Council who is neither Light nor Dark...one who struggles with her burdens. One who's first instinct is to Force choke first and ask questions later, but has a sense of pragmatism. Being a monster can be fun, but it's so awesome to dig deep into the story and really run with it. Just like with the Knight. No need to play an angel. Play a Knight who becomes jaded with the Order...one who feels that the Order is weak and unwilling to do what needs to be done in order to defeat the Empire.

To be honest, I don't quite get the "pragmatic darksider" argument for the Empire, because more often than not, the LS choices are the pragmatic ones, with the DS ones being outright sadism or merely venting one's rage. Which is why a light-sided Sith Inquisitor is named Darth Imperius, for her service to the Empire.

It's true that choices and light/dark allocations are sometimes wonky.

You pick an answer and your character says something different, you spare someone for light points knowing that nothing good comes out of keeping this crook alive, or you get dark side points for killing someone but saving thousand after. Common problems in crpgs.

The writers/devs just can't every player reactions, and they can't consider deception (or the falling/turning of a character).

The lightest of lightest character could be the biggest dark side charcater in fact, he could also play dark to infiltrate and fight evil from the inside.

That said, i'm quite happy with going back to Empire vs Republic, and a smaller scale because half of the classes are non force users and frankly, i've finished kotet on a BH and on a Sorc, it will be a pain to do it again on any non force users for me.

Playing mostly empire, i'm also interested in how will Empress Acina play her cards. Loved Malgus and Marr, but this is different, and i won't underestimate her.

And on the "grey" aspect of the game, i find it's there, but not really aknowledged nor rewarded (it's surely a game design concern, i admit). And i find it strange because that's something that kotor 2 was about, with Kreia.

Even if you don't really pay attention to story, it's great, a grey jedi, that doesn't kill for fun nor helps everyone for peanuts.

But i'm still wondering why swtor barely mentions her nor expanded on her philosophy (have yet to finish consular and sith warrior, so maybe it's there, dunno)

Your missing my point Dracofish, what I am talking about is war, what you are talking about is skirmishes. The trooper story line did not end up being a full blown war story until the final missions on Corellia, and even then it was mostly talk. They talk about a full blown armor division taking part in your mission, but you never see it, except for one glimpse during one cut scene. When you look at the sacking of the temple on Coruscant, that was a full blown war/battle. Can you honestly point to any part of this game coming close to that? With it being Republic vrs Empire.

At any rate its one players point of view. Though I will be keeping my eye out for that yavin warzone, and seeing what they do with it.

To be honest, I don't quite get the "pragmatic darksider" argument for the Empire, because more often than not, the LS choices are the pragmatic ones, with the DS ones being outright sadism or merely venting one's rage. Which is why a light-sided Sith Inquisitor is named Darth Imperius, for her service to the Empire.

I've played through numerous times (before the "pick your alignment" toggle, which I hate by the way) and pretty much always end up with a Dark I character based on the choices that I make. I never make choices based on alignment...I make choices based on what I think that character would do. My numerous Warriors and Inquisitors are all Dark I (a couple Dark II), and my Knights are also Dark I. My Inquisitors always end up as Darth Nox.

I didn't enjoy going full Dark. The highest I got was Dark IV and I found that I was making Dark choices only for the purpose of being Dark, rather than actually playing a character. She felt like just a cackling pyscho and I dropped the playthrough around Corellia.

..I make choices based on what I think that character would do.

That's how it's supposed to be.

You do something, your alignment shifts (or not) and that may have consequences.

But it goes out the window the moment you put any reward behind light/dark V.

I've played through numerous times (before the "pick your alignment" toggle, which I hate by the way) and pretty much always end up with a Dark I character based on the choices that I make. I never make choices based on alignment...I make choices based on what I think that character would do. My numerous Warriors and Inquisitors are all Dark I (a couple Dark II), and my Knights are also Dark I. My Inquisitors always end up as Darth Nox.

 

I didn't enjoy going full Dark. The highest I got was Dark IV and I found that I was making Dark choices only for the purpose of being Dark, rather than actually playing a character. She felt like just a cackling pyscho and I dropped the playthrough around Corellia.

Why is that, I'm curious? Why would your pragmatism not keep you closer to the light?

Why is that, I'm curious? Why would your pragmatism not keep you closer to the light?

The definition of "pragmatic" means that you do things in a more practical way. I take that to mean that you consider your options and their repercussions before coming to a decision. Being pragmatic does not always mean taking the lightstided option. Just look at Lana. She's practical in spades, but she's definitely Dark.

In addition, being pragmatic also doesn't necessarily mean that you're not a Sith and can be harsh from time to time. For example. When the Outlander is first woken from carbonite, he/she is weak and can barely stand. Do my Outlanders take the time to shut down the power station that Vaylin overloads to save a people that they know nothing about? No. They're weak, they don't know where they are from sideways, and it's in their best interest to get the 'f' out of there. Practical, but the Dark option.

The definition of "pragmatic" means that you do things in a more practical way. I take that to mean that you consider your options and their repercussions before coming to a decision. Being pragmatic does not always mean taking the lightstided option. Just look at Lana. She's practical in spades, but she's definitely Dark.

 

In addition, being pragmatic also doesn't necessarily mean that you're not a Sith and can be harsh from time to time. For example. When the Outlander is first woken from carbonite, he/she is weak and can barely stand. Do my Outlanders take the time to shut down the power station that Vaylin overloads to save a people that they know nothing about? No. They're weak, they don't know where they are from sideways, and it's in their best interest to get the 'f' out of there. Practical, but the Dark option.

If Lana was a PC, I think she'd be neutral or Light 1. Still darker than Republic LS characters, to be sure, but her DS actions are limited to Shoot the Dog, for the most part, and she genuinely cares about people.

Of course, my SI saved the reactor due to having something of a chronic hero syndrome, as well as a hatred for backing down from challenges.

If Lana was a PC, I think she'd be neutral or Light 1. Still darker than Republic LS characters, to be sure, but her DS actions are limited to Shoot the Dog, for the most part, and she genuinely cares about people.

 

Of course, my SI saved the reactor due to having something of a chronic hero syndrome, as well as a hatred for backing down from challenges.

Lana disapproves of like everything my character does when it comes to going out of her way to help people or risking herself/the Alliance's interests to help people.

Lana disapproves of like everything my character does when it comes to going out of her way to help people or risking herself/the Alliance's interests to help people.

Well, remember that the interests of the Alliance are the only thing keeping the galaxy from falling apart. It'd be DS by Republic standards, but I don't think it'd raise any flags by Imperial standards (it's instructive, I think, that the exact same choice in Kaon Under Siege--mercy killing a rakghoul-infected man--is DS for Republic players but LS for Imperial ones).

Well, remember that the interests of the Alliance are the only thing keeping the galaxy from falling apart. It'd be DS by Republic standards, but I don't think it'd raise any flags by Imperial standards (it's instructive, I think, that the exact same choice in Kaon Under Siege--mercy killing a rakghoul-infected man--is DS for Republic players but LS for Imperial ones).

I'm not sure I'm understanding the reasoning here beyond game mechanics that might not make sense. A "Dark" choice is a "Dark" choice on Dromund Kaas as it is on Coruscant...that shouldn't make a difference. Lana is clearly not a lightsided character. So many people seem to think that she's a benevolent angel - she's not. She's a Sith. She has Dark Side corruption (eyes). She gets ticked off if you go out of your way (at all) to help other people. Because she puts your interests, and the interests of the Empire (and later the Alliance) first. That is a Sith trait. Not Jedi. And it's also the definition of being pragmatic.

I just finished Ziost for the upteenth time and she gets all sorts of bent out of shape if you let Theron take Master Surro (which I let happen every time because I play Sith who are struggling with having a Therony Cricket on their shoulder...the things we do for love...). Just as she gets ticked off if you let Kovatch live.

Just because she isn't cackling from the rooftops and throwing severed heads at people in the streets, that doesn't make her lightsided. As I've said, there are numerous ways to "do Sith" just as there are numerous ways to interpret the Sith Code. Not everything is black and white, which makes it so much more interesting. Not all Sith have to be WEEEE PYSCHO. The Inquisitor storyline gets really into the meat of that stuff and it's awesome. You can have this exact discussion with Ashara.

To bring it to another example, not involving Lana. My newest Inquisitor (the one in my fanfiction) just finished Makeb (she did it after Yavin Four...reasons). She's Dark I. She's practical. She let the Republic soldiers live (the ones you encounter when you're getting the engineers for the drilling platforms). She hit the "kill everything" button at the end because the Hutt forced her hand. She couldn't afford to let word get out that they'd saved the planet. Again, practical. Still Dark I. Why didn't she kill the Republic soldiers too? Because she's not a cray cray kill death murder mayhem character. She didn't see a reason to kill them. Not to mention Therony Cricket again, but that's beside the point.

Ok, let's go further back in time to pre-expansion stuff. The ghosts that she needed to bind. She let them go. Didn't force them at all...gave her word in blood. Why didn't she just do the "Dark" thing and bind them? She didn't feel she needed to. If they were willing to go of their own free will, why? And in the end, one insisted on staying with her anyways. So really win-win. That's why I say she's a pragmatic Sith, and those are typically the types of characters I play. They'll make Dark decisions when they need to for their own interests or those of their faction, but they won't do bad things just for the sake of being bad. No kicking puppies or anything like that.

I'm not sure I'm understanding the reasoning here beyond game mechanics that might not make sense. A "Dark" choice is a "Dark" choice on Dromund Kaas as it is on Coruscant...that shouldn't make a difference. Lana is clearly not a lightsided character. So many people seem to think that she's a benevolent angel - she's not. She's a Sith. She has Dark Side corruption (eyes). She gets ticked off if you go out of your way (at all) to help other people. Because she puts your interests, and the interests of the Empire (and later the Alliance) first. That is a Sith trait. Not Jedi. And it's also the definition of being pragmatic.

 

I just finished Ziost for the upteenth time and she gets all sorts of bent out of shape if you let Theron take Master Surro (which I let happen every time because I play Sith who are struggling with having a Therony Cricket on their shoulder...the things we do for love...). Just as she gets ticked off if you let Kovatch live.

 

Just because she isn't cackling from the rooftops and throwing severed heads at people in the streets, that doesn't make her lightsided. As I've said, there are numerous ways to "do Sith" just as there are numerous ways to interpret the Sith Code. Not everything is black and white, which makes it so much more interesting. Not all Sith have to be WEEEE PYSCHO. The Inquisitor storyline gets really into the meat of that stuff and it's awesome. You can have this exact discussion with Ashara.

 

To bring it to another example, not involving Lana. My newest Inquisitor (the one in my fanfiction) just finished Makeb (she did it after Yavin Four...reasons). She's Dark I. She's practical. She let the Republic soldiers live (the ones you encounter when you're getting the engineers for the drilling platforms). She hit the "kill everything" button at the end because the Hutt forced her hand. She couldn't afford to let word get out that they'd saved the planet. Again, practical. Still Dark I. Why didn't she kill the Republic soldiers too? Because she's not a cray cray kill death murder mayhem character. She didn't see a reason to kill them. Not to mention Therony Cricket again, but that's beside the point.

 

Ok, let's go further back in time to pre-expansion stuff. The ghosts that she needed to bind. She let them go. Didn't force them at all...gave her word in blood. Why didn't she just do the "Dark" thing and bind them? She didn't feel she needed to. If they were willing to go of their own free will, why? And in the end, one insisted on staying with her anyways. So really win-win. That's why I say she's a pragmatic Sith, and those are typically the types of characters I play. They'll make Dark decisions when they need to for their own interests or those of their faction, but they won't do bad things just for the sake of being bad. No kicking puppies or anything like that.

Well, yes, Lana is still Sith, clearly. And a Sith Inquisitor who's LS V is also still Sith (well, until KotFE starts blurring the lines, but that's a different story). Believe me, I love the SI storyline at least as much as you do; I just think it's more interesting being LS, because true service to the Empire involves challenging the Empire's damaging assumptions and practices. I didn't kill everything on Makeb, because it's pointless; the fiction of the planet being destroyed is only necessary to maintain right then and there, so that the Hutt fleet will leave. The Empire will secure Makeb afterward, and you couldn't keep knowledge of the planet not being destroyed secret after leaving it anyway, so any further Regulator loose lips are irrelevant. Again, there's an important difference between pragmatism and expedience, and DS choices very often slide into the latter.

Also, Lana doesn't get that annoyed at either of those Ziost choices; she forgets about Kovach almost immediately, and doesn't bring up Surro again after the decision. Also also, in-universe, DS corruption is a possible factor of merely using the dark side of the Force, which any SI is going to be dripping with regardless of their behavior.