There are two subjects being discussed here: sexuality and love. Your argument is that indulging pure sexuality without attachment (casual sex) should not stir the passions that lead to the dark side, but giving in to a deeper love of another should. You seem to be very passionate about this view.

 

Since morality is subjective, your view is correct within the context of your own life. But we're talking about Jedi here. There is no passion, there is peace. By giving in to their desire, a Jedi is breaking this first rule even if there is no attachment.

 

I believe a Jedi could fall in love without risking the dark side. It would have to be unconditional love that did not require attachment, and accepted the loss of the loved one without fear.

 

I understand the point you're trying to make. It is not, however, borne out by either the existing canon material or the game.

 

The issue that the Jedi in the Old Republic era take with romance and marriage is specifically that it leads to attachment. To quote Yoda (not Old Republic, but a staunch conservative nonetheless), "Attachment leads to jealousy. The shadow of greed that is."

 

Or, to go with a SWTOR example, here's the treatment the topic receives in the "Lovers and Secrets" quest on Tython. (You can get this quest at about level 5 if you roll a Jedi.)

 

 

 

 

There really isn't a lot of wiggle room here- the Jedi in this era consider relationships a Big Bad. If you can find supporting evidence for the notion that sexuality is *also* taboo, I'd love to see it- so far, though, your only tie is, again, conflating passion and love with sex.

I'm not sure there is a canonical source which clarifiee the Jedi "rules" on sexual relationships vs romantic ones. Lucas never went anywhere near dealing with sexuality in the movies, and none of the books or comics I've read since have delved in the area either. Lucas was clear that his movies, particularly the prequels, were for kids, and he felt no need to bring adult themes into them. It leaves open to interpretation if Jedi are supposed to be platonic or just not develop strong emotional attachments. Of course even the latter is full of holes, as even thef Jedi Masters often express affection for their fellow Jedi, including Padewans and "younglings". I get the impression Bioware will offer options ranging between "close friends" and fade outs. But as they want to keep it a PG games, don't expect any serious romance.

Question is, how many choices in this game that lead to your Jedi doing the Kessel run with random npcs and getting darkside points doesn't involve taking advantage of someone emotionally compromised? Edited January 13, 2012 by kalonthar

For my part, the whole "leads to" philosophy is nonsense. This is called the slippery slope argument and it's a logical fallacy. That a person could be inspired to jealousy by love is not a significant reason to forbid love outright. I realize that does put me at odds with a great deal of jedi orthodoxy, but that's because the jedi orthodoxy is lawful stupid. I note that Luke took a wife and did away with the prohibition and, as I understood it, it's a point of contention during the Old Republic.

 

I was almost sold by the argument of the young jedi lovers on Tython, to a degree, but I wasn't going to lie for them (not that I liked spying, either) and I consider their request that I do so (and attempt at bribery) to be indicative that theirs was an immature, jealous love that I suppose could indeed lead them down the path to the dark side. I would've liked the option to advocate they come forward honestly while defending their relationship.

 

The jedi code espouses mastery of one's emotions (rather than the other way around) it does not really dictate emotionlesness, as each of the masters clearly displays emotions. So the call would be for a jedi undertaking a romantic relationship to do so rationally and with the awareness that there may be duties that take precedence over that relationship. Not so hard a concept for adults, I think.

 

I would hazard to say that the assignation of dark side points for casual encounters yet not for companion romances is making the presumption that (in the case of a light side jedi, at least) the romance is undertaken with discipline and rationality, whereas a one night stand implies the character is giving over to the vicissitudes of passion. That is a bit presumptuous on the designers part, perhaps, but so too is the idea that there are radically, diametrically opposed forces and every action can only be categorically assigned to one or the other with no mitigating circumstances or shades of gray. Catch-22.