i have a major gripe with the morality system in swtor . the morality is so binary its either good or evil , kill the innocent slave or walk away this is worse as i dont consider not mindlessly slaughtering someone as a light side choice in real life if your murder someone you did a favor for you would be sent to prison and you wouldnt be rewarded for just walking away . i can either be a shining beacon of hope or a sadistic muderer lusting for power . i would rather have a more complex system than a straight path to good or evil . for example have more options rather than having a single darkside option have different types of evil such as greed or sadism . i think this would add to the story telling and character development . after all swtor is a role playing game this should mean you can mould your character to your will . you should be able to develop a personality like one of your companions . for example gault rennow who is a greedy son of a hutt but will draw the line at violence even if there is a large sum of credits on the table . thanks for reading this and id love to hear your opinions

i have a major gripe with the morality system in swtor . the morality is so binary its either good or evil...

 

Well the movies were pretty much based on a very binary Good vs Evil plot line. The black and white nature of Star Wars is pretty well known and documented.

 

Light side vs Dark side, with no real gray area in between.

 

So it's fitting that they keep up with that theme in SWTOR. Other bioware games like say Dragons Age is much more nuanced and allows a lot of shades of gray.

Edited April 5, 2012 by VanorDM

No the morality system isn't bad. There is only so much you can do with 3 choices anyway, especially with the the limited storytelling branches the game has to offer.

 

Besides Light and Dark side is very black and white as it has been in most star wars games.

The morality system fits for Star Wars, and it fits well, so I don't think it's by any means bad. But I do acknowledge that there are some rough spots and arbitrary choices to be found.

 

There are quite a few quests, for example, that do their best to be morally grey. They set up both involved parties as neither particularly evil (or good, as the case may be), and they ask the player to resolve the conflict in a single way. All a very good setup, but it's eventually undone by then assigning an arbitrary Light or Dark value to an action that could be considered fair and just from -ahem- "A certain point of view".

 

Take the Ord Mantell quest revolving around stolen medicine: There is a clear darkside choice (threatening the kid), but if that option (which paints the player in a bad light, not either of the involved parties) is not taken, then the quest remains rather gray. The refugees need the medicine because they're pressed for supplies, the soldiers need the medicine to continue to fight and presumably continue to protect the refugees. Then, the end of the quest throws a rather jarring choice of good vs. bad at the player with giving the medicine to the refugees becoming the "good" outcome while giving the medicine to the soldiers becomes the "bad" choice.

 

Now, I can understand having a binary Light/Dark morality for Jedi and Sith, as they're much more in tune with the Force and therefore their moral choices influence how they percieve the Force and such, but for the rest of the classes (non-Force-Sensetive Govenment employees and freelancers), such a binary morality makes less sense. Tracking Idealism (or some similar value) vs. Cynicism/Pragmatism (or similar values) might work better, but I don't think that such a clear-cut "Good vs. Bad" system fits for the "Normal" Classes (especially the Agents, Smugglers, and Bounty Hunters, who's very professions are morally ambiguous and of questionable legality to begin with. Troopers, at the very least, presumably have some military code of conduct that they're supposed to adhere to).

Edited April 5, 2012 by BlueSouthPike

There are very few truly Grey characters in Star Wars, and none of them are in G-Canon.

 

Even the "Grey Jedi" as far as G-Canon (and now C-Canon) goes aren't even really grey. They're lightsiders who just happen to disagree with the Jedi Council.

 

Back when Jolee Bindo and Kyle Katarn really were grey characters, things were better, imo. Now, according to George Lucas, Good is good and evil is evil, and there is no middle ground. Even at the expense of common sense. The Force forbid anyone like Jolee Bindo, Kyle Katarn, or Revan could come along and actually USE both sides of the Force equally and still make rational decisions! Nope! Can't have that now! That would make waaaayyyy too much sense!

 

But hey, it's His IP, and if he says it, it's Law. *shrugs*

There are very few truly Grey characters in Star Wars, and none of them are in G-Canon.

 

Even the "Grey Jedi" as far as G-Canon (and now C-Canon) goes aren't even really grey. They're lightsiders who just happen to disagree with the Jedi Council.

 

Back when Jolee Bindo and Kyle Katarn really were grey characters, things were better, imo. Now, according to George Lucas, Good is good and evil is evil, and there is no middle ground. Even at the expense of common sense. The Force forbid anyone like Jolee Bindo, Kyle Katarn, or Revan could come along and actually USE both sides of the Force equally and still make rational decisions! Nope! Can't have that now! That would make waaaayyyy too much sense!

 

But hey, it's His IP, and if he says it, it's Law. *shrugs*

 

The "Good is Good, Bad is Bad" idea makes sense for Force-users, but to apply that to everyone else is not a good idea, as far as I'm concerned. Think about G-Canon; Han Solo started off as being motivated purely by fame and fortune, Boba Fett was just a man doing a job (to put it simply, there's plenty of other reasons behind his actions, but money was a big motivation for him), Lando had to screw over his friend for the good of his city, a lot of Imperials are just normal people working for a bad regime, etc. There are several grey characters in G-Canon (or characters that start out grey), but none of them are into the Force. So, why do our characters, who are supposed to follow similar archetypes, affected by binary Force morality, even though they shouldn't be?

The "Good is Good, Bad is Bad" idea makes sense for Force-users, but to apply that to everyone else is not a good idea, as far as I'm concerned. Think about G-Canon; Han Solo started off as being motivated purely by fame and fortune, Boba Fett was just a man doing a job (to put it simply, there's plenty of other reasons behind his actions, but money was a big motivation for him), Lando had to screw over his friend for the good of his city, a lot of Imperials are just normal people working for a bad regime, etc. There are several grey characters in G-Canon (or characters that start out grey), but none of them are into the Force. So, why do our characters, who are supposed to follow similar archetypes, affected by binary Force morality, even though they shouldn't be?

 

Good points, but... and you knew there was a but coming... I have run my Agent and BH as grey, since they make the most logical decision based on what motivates them more. My BH had Creds on the brain for my entire playthrough on him. My Agent does what's best for the Empire, and to make a quick buck. So yeah, he's Light I and holding steady. He makes the practical choice based on "What's best for the Empire?" and "How can I make some Creds from this situation?"

 

Some of the practical decisions are Light Side, and some are Dark Side. All depends on the situation at hand.

Light and Dark side points shouldn't affect non-forcers users at all imo. They should have an alternate morality system, as the force doesn't directly affect them like it does Jedi and Sith.

Light and Dark side points shouldn't affect non-forcers users at all imo. They should have an alternate morality system, as the force doesn't directly affect them like it does Jedi and Sith.

 

For every decision, a consequence. I love that BioWare does this in their games, but yes, you're right. Now, I do toggle off the DS Corruption effects on my non-Force using characters. That's pretty much as good as it's going to get for now, though.

The LS/DS morality system, as it is canonically present, makes sense to use as a standard, even for non force users and because philosophically the force flows through everyone. It just can't be manipulated by non force users.

 

I do think it's a bit odd that, unless you turn it off, the dark side shows on people who don't draw on it, however immoral their choices.

 

But I don't see a problem with applying the same moral system to all characters, regardless of their beliefs. It's not necessary to rigorously follow it, unless that's what that particular character believes.

I know that light/dark and that really strict binary system is true to Star Wars lore but for the most part, it's executed very poorly. Sure you have the standard if you save them you are good and if you kill them you are bad, which is tolerable, but then they throw you into situations that are clearly NOT black and white and yet still try to keep to that system.

 

For example, as a Jedi Knight, one mission has you trying to stop a Senator from going behind the backs of the Senate to cut ties to the Jedi and align with the Empire. That's obviously a horrible situation. To stop him, all you have to do is intercept a file and bring it back to the quest giver. But if you go through with it, you get dark side points because you had to break the law to do it. If you bring back a false document, you are lying to someone who trusted you and letting a Senator scheme against the Republic...and that's the light side path?

 

I'm sorry but no, that is horrendous.

No the morality system isn't bad. There is only so much you can do with 3 choices anyway, especially with the the limited storytelling branches the game has to offer.

 

The branches in SWTOR are so few I can easily say they don't exist. Very few missions have any repercussions beyond the particular storyline that they are part of. And even in that case it will usually mean just different cutscene and everything back to status quo after that. The only exception I can think of right now is Jaesa Willsaam..

 

I don't think Bioware did a very good job with what was supposed to be one of the main ideas behind SWTOR.

Edited March 29, 2014 by Karkais

For example, as a Jedi Knight, one mission has you trying to stop a Senator from going behind the backs of the Senate to cut ties to the Jedi and align with the Empire. That's obviously a horrible situation. To stop him, all you have to do is intercept a file and bring it back to the quest giver. But if you go through with it, you get dark side points because you had to break the law to do it. If you bring back a false document, you are lying to someone who trusted you and letting a Senator scheme against the Republic...and that's the light side path?

 

Actually, the problem here is (if I can recall the quest correctly) that the Senator isn't doing it behind the Senate's back. He's being open about it and suggesting it to the Senate, but the questgiver thinks that he isn't a reprasentive of the "true" Republic, thanks to his ideas. So you are using illegal means to sabotage a politician who's using his legal rights to propose things that would be hurtful to your order. Sounds pretty dark side to me.

Actually, the problem here is (if I can recall the quest correctly) that the Senator isn't doing it behind the Senate's back. He's being open about it and suggesting it to the Senate, but the questgiver thinks that he isn't a reprasentive of the "true" Republic, thanks to his ideas. So you are using illegal means to sabotage a politician who's using his legal rights to propose things that would be hurtful to your order. Sounds pretty dark side to me.

If he was being open about it, stealing his documents in order to expose his plans wouldn't accomplish anything. After all, everyone would know about them already.

 

My main problem with the morality system - other than it being arbitrarily binary, often annoyingly restrictive in terms of the choices it offers you (just because I don't want to shoot my prisoners as a Republic trooper doesn't mean I want to let them go either) and making assumptions of the intent behind many actions being malicious or merciful when often it could be argued they aren't - is that choices presented generally fit for the situation at hand, but not as part of any kind of consistent whole. Playing a fully light or dark character tends to make you an inconsistent, garbled mess of ideals.

Edited March 29, 2014 by Bleeters

If he was being open about it, stealing his documents in order to expose his plans wouldn't accomplish anything. After all, everyone would know about them already.

 

I just did the quest with my vanguard to refresh my memory. It seems that the Senator isn't actually even proposing anything, merely trying to get allies behind his idea (possibly in order to have enough support when he finally does bring up his idea to the whole senate). He isn't doing anything illegal. At no point it is said that he would be i.e. working to the Imperials. He's just a person who has unpopular opinions and the people you're working for are planning to give him some bad publicity with the evidence you're about to steal.

 

In the other hand, these people protecting the "true" Republic seem to have some sort of idea what Republic is and they are willing to commit crimes against people they feel don't fit their ideals. In other words, they want to dictate who is allowed to use his freedom of speech and who's not and think that their ends justify their means.

I do agree in some instances that this system is a little iffy, however, nothing says you have to follow only dark, or only light. My commando for instance, I'm playing that all she cares about is that the job gets done correctly, and is best for the republic. This leaves imo mostly darkside choices. So I'm running mostly darkside, but if I like the lightside choice better, I pick it. Granted, it's gonna take some work to get rid of that light at the end (as I plan to finish pure darkside) but I at least play the way I want. I also am running diplomacy on this toon so that I can work on ridding myself of any lightside eventually. Also only run darkside missions right now, and I'm leveling just fine, almost to dark IV and at about level 36 atm. There are tools in the game that allow you to play how you truly want, just have to know what to do. If the current system truly bothers you, make strides to make it better, not complain on a forum. Besides, only thing that is really important about light and dark that I've seen is relics from the light/dark vendors. Really not that big of a deal.

Light and Dark side points shouldn't affect non-forcers users at all imo. They should have an alternate morality system, as the force doesn't directly affect them like it does Jedi and Sith.

 

Their paragon/renegade system would've worked pretty well; neither side is "good" or "evil" per se, since both sides would share the same goal, with the difference being how you'd go about it. That system would've been especially appropriate for the Agent and Trooper stories.

 

So you are using illegal means to sabotage a politician who's using his legal rights to propose things that would be hurtful to your order. Sounds pretty dark side to me.

 

So we get DS points for doing what Mace tried to do in Episode III, minus the attempted assassination?

My main problem with the morality system - other than it being arbitrarily binary, often annoyingly restrictive in terms of the choices it offers you (just because I don't want to shoot my prisoners as a Republic trooper doesn't mean I want to let them go either) and making assumptions of the intent behind many actions being malicious or merciful when often it could be argued they aren't - is that choices presented generally fit for the situation at hand, but not as part of any kind of consistent whole. Playing a fully light or dark character tends to make you an inconsistent, garbled mess of ideals.

 

This is my problem with it as well.

 

I was on my Jedi Guardian...running the planetside mission on Quesh. The ending where you confront Major Treeg.

 

The guy betrays you all...and kills all his troops. Then at the end, you have the choice to either let him die or save him.

 

Now my Jedi isn't a cold hearted basterd...and he has what's needed to save Treeg. So I picked the option to save him. In my mind...it was a, doing the right thing...sort of deal...even though you felt no sympathy for the guy. Then the dialogue for the choice comes in. "You'll face a court marshal, you know?". Said in a soft voice where it seems like your character feels bad for the guy. I never wanted to take back a lightside choice more than that one.

 

A better option would have been to save his life with the serum...and then knock him out...like the lightside option for Bengal Morr on Tython.

Edited March 31, 2014 by VitalityPrime

So we get DS points for doing what Mace tried to do in Episode III, minus the attempted assassination?

 

Sidious was a Sith Lord who was manipulationg the whole war and actually an enemy of the Republic. This guy is a normal person, who has no connections to the Empire that we know of, but just doesn't happen to like the Jedi Order for some reason. In democracy, even people who oppose the current way of ruling have the right to speak up their minds, and using illegal means to sabotage someone simply because you don't like their ideas is okay only if you feel that they also have the right to commit a crime to sabotage you simply because they don't like your ideas.

 

Though, the morality system of this game in questions like this is based on the idea that democracy = always light side, even if the consequences of it are bad.

They should've just ditched the system entirely along with the companion affection stuff too.

 

Both separately and combined I feel like push players in a direction. For instance seeing the red filter + DS symbol makes you feel like you did something "bad" not in that it made you feel bad but in that it was the evil choice to make, but not only that but you see you got -8 (or whatever) affection from your companion. There might as well be a message saying "you're playing the game wrong" because a lot of people will redo cutscenes just so they don't lose companion affection at which point it becomes a numbers game or a mechanic rather than you making your own decision. Basically it causes players to game the system just so they can get the best results out of it.

 

It's also pointless to add affection meters and tie the level of affection to companion conversations when the conversations are tied into story progression. You get into instances where you'll potentially have one companion's affection at max and as result blow through all their conversations in a single chunk or you don't get one of your companion's affection maxed until long after you complete Chapter 3 and start going through their convos realizing that they're certain events in the story that you finished long ago as if they just happened. The convos should've unlocked for all companions as the story progressed. You shouldn't have to sink thousands of credits into getting gifts to raise the affection of a character who is already part of your crew and has decided to stick with you through thick and thin.

 

Back to the LS/DS stuff though. The system also hampers a number of gear pieces in the game namely lightsabers and relics. Oh you have to be Dark 4 to use this relic/lightsaber. Why though? It already as a level requirement and it's not like PVP/PVE gear where you have to make a dedicated investment to earn it. Not to mention the LS/DS vendors who don't really serve a purpose in the game. What if you're playing a grey character? You basically out of luck when it comes to relics unless you've grinded some type of content that allows you non alignment relics.

Im fine with there being light side and dark side. I am all dark side myself >:-) Problems:

 

- Dialog decisions that cause DS/LS are unbelievably cut-and-dry. Other than few exceptions,there is no invention used in creating the situations that cause LS/DS gain. Kill=DS, let live=LS.

 

- The system rewards only maxed LS or DS. At least they added alignment neutral relics to the game afterwards but these are only endgame rewards iirc. There should be more subtle and non-subtle things in the game that react to characters aligment. Ideally NPCs would talk to you different way. There is very little of this already in the game in certain storylines. Something is better than nothing I guess. There could be more LS/DS vendor stuff for one. Maybe clothing options or something that wouldnt give non-neutral characters the edge.

 

Theres a ton of potential for creating flavorful things involving DS/LS if the devs would just do it. Example: small headache episodes(mini-stuns) for lightside characters when they enter the dark temple on dromund kaas (or other similar DS-infested place). DS characters might get mini debuff for entering the jedi temple ruins in Coruscant etc.

Edited April 4, 2014 by Karkais