Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer

The Empire and your personal Morality

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Story and Lore
The Empire and your personal Morality

FreePrometheus's Avatar

09.04.2012 , 06:00 PM | #11
Quote: Originally Posted by Imhotep View Post
Nope I cut off a guys head and gave it to his wife. Its a game nothing more. I dont consider the morality of the decisions at all because in the end its just pixels.
Well said

Tatile's Avatar

09.04.2012 , 06:04 PM | #12
I think the worst part of it is sitting there, thinking 'What just happened?' and then it slowly dawning on you that in the end this is just a tamer version of what's happened in real life (well, we haven't yet managed to slaughter billions in a single excursion, but I'm sure we're not far off.)

As an Imperial Agent player I always get a twinge of regret whenever I send someone back to HQ. I know it's what my Agent would do, he has a duty to the Empire, but a lot of the time I think it would be a lot kinder just to put a bullet in the poor sod's brain and be done with it.

It is a game and I do separate myself from it, but sometimes I just go 'Ahh, suck :/' but then I make myself a cup of tea and go back to shooting people and stabbing them in the back. Fun times.

OldVengeance's Avatar

09.04.2012 , 06:35 PM | #13
I tend to be a Lightside player that instinctively may avoid doing bad things in games. But whenever I play the Empire I find it a lot of fun to try and get into a character's head and role with the "evil" (or good) decisions they would do. It's especially fun when you add a bunch of Lightside decisions despite being Dark. I feel like it makes those fewer Lightside choices especially meaningful.

My Imperial Agent is fun because she fancies herself a patriot before being a kind person and those very often come into conflict.

Or my Sith Warrior, who's evil but still a pleasant boss.

kirorx's Avatar

09.04.2012 , 08:09 PM | #14
Quote: Originally Posted by CharlieBrown View Post
Whenever both sides cooperate I think "we need more of this". Specifically:


It shows the moral ambiguity inherent in armed conflict.

A very long time ago, in a middle school far, far away a visiting scoutmaster for Boy Scouts of America told us a story about an experience he had in the Desert Storm conflict. He was part of a a convoy that was ambushed and he was forced to retreat in a different direction than his squad. Working to regroup with his men, he was caught unarmed by an opposing soldier. Basically having nothing to lose, he threw up his Scout sign. The opposing soldier also put up his Scout sign and walked away.

Fictionalized or not, it left an impact on me. I never considered that those involved in armed conflict were "people", in the emotional sense, and were able to make decisions based on their own morality and not some greater goal assigned to them from someone in an office 3,000 miles away.

When I hear about similar stories, I think that this something I'd like to see represented more often. The above two story lines gave me the opportunity to see it.

Playing a Sith Warrior all dark felt boring after playing my inquisitor that way. Adding some light side choices as they made sense (no killing of innocents, for instance) made way more sense to me than just the full "ALL HAIL THE EMPEROR!!!" rhetoric that a pure dark side story would give you. We need to see more of that.

TL;DR Yes.
Your scout leader may have fabricated that story a bit, but nevertheless he was making a very good point and I am glad to hear that you learned from that .

Understanding that an enemy soldier is also a soldier much like yourself and treating them as such is..HONOR.

As a guy that has spent several years in the infantry this pleases me very much...

TheBetty's Avatar

09.04.2012 , 09:35 PM | #15
I think it's funny how the commonly thought best dark side decision is a Jedi one :P

Team Rocket style haha.
If force choking Jawas is wrong, I don't want to be right.

Keil's Avatar

09.04.2012 , 09:56 PM | #16
My main is a Bounty Hunter so I had to choose Empire and I am full light side.
I am invested in my BH so I tend to RP in the convos and decisions. Though I'm a BH, I follow the BH code loosly. Nothin' personal, it's my job. when it comes down to the "Kill" or "Don't Kill" options, I usually always pick "don't kill" and freeze them in carbonite. If a person I'm working for confronts me and questions my actions.. I won't allow it and will pick a dark side answer (even if I don't want the dark side points).
Basicly my Bounty Hunter sticks to the code and gets the job done while still having some compassion in the final say.
"Ni'haata lo'gar peti'run. Nihatta te'werd gar'haaran." (The shadows are only deeper when the light is brighter.)
(swg Elder Bounty Hunter, never played another class)

CompetitorX's Avatar

09.05.2012 , 12:30 AM | #17
I'm still working on my first character which is a level 47 juggernaut. I enjoy playing on the empire side, however, some of the decisions I think would be considered evil are shown as lightside. I have had moments where I thought the decision I chose didn't match what I had in mind, which was trying to make evil choices, but they were considered good.

alricka's Avatar

09.05.2012 , 01:36 AM | #18
I recently had a situation like this with my Gunslinger on Hoth. It's part of the world quest, I think. Both the Empire and the Republic were being attacked by some crazy pirates and so an Imperial captain decided to go ahead and offer us a temporary alliance. He fulfilled his end of the bargain but the Republic command there suspected that he was going to betray us after we deal with the pirates. So we betrayed him first. When I confronted him and explained my reasoning (it's either them or us after all) he still maintained that he was going to honor the deal with us as he was being dragged to captivity. I still think betraying the Imps was justified considering they are at war with us, but I feel bad for that captain nonetheless.

My Gunslinger is now on Belsavis, and to be honest, I was kind of shocked when I learned that the Republic is imprisoning people who never commited crimes against the Galaxy - they were descendants of incarcerated criminals and their only crime was that they were born on Belsavis. I mean, seriously? And the Republic is supposed to be the good side?

At least when I played as a Sith Warrior I knew upfront what I'm signing up for.

By the way, this thread belongs to the Story & Lore Forum, I think.

Retrogame's Avatar

09.06.2012 , 12:00 PM | #19
First off, I think it should be said that there's a contradition inherent to the game whether or not you choose good or bad, light or dark, and that is, in simple terms, the world is populated with nameless, faceless goons that you have to blast to pieces by the thousands regardless.

If you get past the sheer number of "people" your character has killed, and go into the RP aspect of conversations, the Empire in particular presents some great RP entertainment value.

I have played a Sith Juggernaut all the way to the end. I tried to RP the character as another take on the idea of Darth Vader, i.e. "there's still good in him." Also as though he was a tragic anti-hero such as in classic literature or plays. My choices were often dark, but also occasionally light. I also tried to take into account the game role that a "tank" class plays, which is to say, he draws enemy fire and enemy ire. He shields and protects allies. Why would a completely selfish, evil monster, protect anyone else? In my mind, it was only logical he might form attachments to the people he was protecting in battle, even become friends with some of them. And, of course, if anyone dared hurt his friends and allies, they would find an unstoppable freight train coming down on them... Whereas a Jedi would have a more philosophical approach, I figured a Sith would be much more of an avenger.

In summary, a flawed human being, a warrior of his people. A true Sith that serves his Emperor and that wants to actually inspire his men, not just make them fear him. He's also the guy in the scary mask with the lightsaber and a penchant for destroying his enemies.

My second Empire character is an alien (Chiss) bounty hunter. For a refreshing change, I made up my mind in advance that this character is quite simply a psychopath, a murderer, an outsider of her people and that's why she's a freelance gun for hire in the first place. She always takes the dark path, especially if it means money, power, and shooting people she finds weak and annoying for fun. Genuinely evil. The BW writing team did a great job with how much you can be a comic villain, full of "moustachio-twirling evil" choices a la classic Disney villains. Frankly it's a blast and quite funny because she's so over the top you can't take her seriously.

My third Empire character is an Imperial Agent (operative) that almost always tends to take the light side choice, not shoot people unless necessary, capture the prisoner, etc. He does his duty, makes the occasional James Bond-esque wisecrack. and flirts with women. I'm only at the beginning of his journey, but I frequently find myself laughing at the humor written into the story. For him, I went with the idea that he grew up on an Imperial colony planet and was inspired by the tales of the founding of the Empire (a la the Journal entries in the holonet). The Republic is his enemy for the same reason that the Russians were James Bond's enemies in the classic movies and novels. They're just the guys on the other side, therefore, "Live and Let Die" as the song goes. All around him he sees Imperial conscripts that need help from a brave soul (i.e, the neverending side quests bailing out Imperial troops everywhere he goes) and they're not really evil either. It's entertaining as I said.

tausser's Avatar

09.06.2012 , 01:16 PM | #20
I play total LS even on my Imp alts; thought that would be tricky but quickly saw they always give you an out (LS option) on what otherwise seem some pretty morally questionable quests, though sometimes what passes for a LS choice on the Imp side might initally leave you scratching your head although, if you think about them, they do kind of make sense from an Imp stand point.

What I've found interesting, however, is seeing some of the same situations from both side's perspectives. I'm thinking particularly of the one on Belsavis involving some Rep officials doing <blah blah blah>. Playing LS Rep, you find the situation repugnant. On the Imp side, they merely discuss this incident in passing but express condemnation for the Rep's actions. I'm unsure if the Imps are actually expressing moral outrage over something (imagine that!) or are simply presenting it as anti-Rep propoganda.

Of course, there are venal Reps as well as decent Imps, so a lot of ambiguity to ponder over.
It's hard work to tell which is Old Harry when everybody's got boots on.