I have less of a problem with the range of /say than I do with the fact that emotes have a longer range than /say. Still, 1.2 addressed a number of my concerns, otherwise.

Since when is BST equal to GMT+3? It's 5.01 GMT (6.01 BST if your clocks have changed). Or 13.22 GST, if you enjoy that sort of thing.

Come to The Progenitor. We have cookies.

We've almost reached a consensus, then. Not quite, but almost. Nobody is saying that an overt illicit romance (if such a thing is possible) between Jedi can pass without in-universe censure. I believe everyone agrees that is unrealistic. The point of dispute is who finally acts as arbiter of whether it is "good" or "bad" RP, and what we do about it. And the only reasonable answer, as mature adults, is "ignore it and don't let it ruin your Pretendy Fun-Time Games". You cannot say "they must behave thus and so". You cannot do more than say "I find your portrayal unrealistic and immersion-breaking, here's why, good day to you". That is IT. Nobody gets to say "the rules are this and that for RP". If someone having Pretendy Fun-Time Games is "ruining" your Pretendy Fun-Time Games by pretending to do something you don't agree with, tough luck. You only have control of your own (and your characters') actions. Go have Pretendy Fun-Times somewhere else.

Then you and I are on the same page, I believe.

To the OP - I agree with some of what you say. To everyone that disagrees with the OP - I agree with some of what you say. Here's where I'm at with regards to this discussion: ICA = ICC, but you can only control your own character. That is the sole standard of "reasonable behaviour" we can expect from ourselves and others when roleplaying. If we take the OP's word on the events that happened (with clarification and confirmation from other witnesses), then it appears (important word) that the players of the Padawans in question have decided to ignore "consequences" (outcomes, which is a better word, may be more appropriate, but the saying uses consequences) and just act as they wish, without regard to in-universe logic. Whether that is true or not we may never know. To say "no Padawan would EVER do this" is incorrect. Any action a player chooses to have their character make is reasonable, provided that it does not infringe on another player. The measure of whether it is "good" or "bad" RP is solely predicated on whether the players involved accept that their IC actions can and should have reasonable IC outcomes. What the characters choose to believe is a whole different ball game. If the players had responded to the OP OOC to the effect that there are no possible consequences for their behaviour, then I would wholeheartedly join in with agreeing that they were RPing "badly". As it stands, though, all of the interactions seem to be IC, and we are here examining the aftermath of the OP's emotional response, which seems to be "it is unreasonable for the characters to believe there are no consequences", which is not true. It is UTTERLY reasonable for the characters to think they can get away with it. But at no point have we heard what the players believed. We can make all sorts of assumptions (as the OP has) that the players agree with their characters' beliefs, but they are ONLY assumptions, and I am not prepared to lambast another player for an assumption based on an account by a third party. Now, before this looks like I'm bashing the OP, is there any person here who reasonably believes (and can rationally explain) why a player might take the stance that there CANNOT be any consequences for their actions? Because while he failed to take a step back, the OP is examining this as if that is what the players believe. To the OP, my question is this: do you have the right to tell me how my character should behave and react? Because that is actually what you're asking of everyone here. To everyone who disagrees with the OP: do roleplayers have a right to expect reasonable outcomes/consequences from RP based on the setting? Because some of you have flat-out said "no". This whole thing could have been avoided through careful OOC communication, but I'm going to give the OP the benefit of the doubt: when the text is flying, sometimes you just have to write what comes out, you can't take forever to formulate a response, and OOC chatter will interfere with the flow of the RP. So you act IC, and hash it out later. Say... On the forums.

I think /say and emotes should have exactly the same range, and somewhere in the region of 100-200 feet is good. Large enough to cover a good-sized area, but not so intrusive that it's impossible to get away from.

The point being that this isn't an IC forum, and your thread doesn't suggest that this is an IC request, so actually, it just comes across as slightly creepy and stalkerish to be looking for someone.

Generally speaking, the second digit of the graphics card is the important one to look at with Radeons (this is a very sweeping generalisation, and applies to older nVidia cards, too - but I haven't kept up with current card specs, so I'm not sure if it still holds true). If the number is over 5, then it is suitable for gaming, with higher numbers being better for gaming. If the number is below 5 then it can probably still do the job, just not as well. So, looking at my desktop, I have a Radeon 5850. Since the second digit is an 8, I can pretty much say "yay, game on!" My laptop, on the other hand has an nVidia 240M. Second digit is a 4. It can play TOR, but my fps is poor. Your Radeon 4200 series is not designed for gaming. But it can probably run the game, but won't like having all the bells and whistles active. As for advice on what to do, I have no idea, someone else will have to help there.

Minor physics fail: many particles do indeed have mass. Just not much. So the mass of a lightsaber blade would be pretty negligible compared to the handle. Every documentary I've seen where people refer to the stage direction Lucas gave in the original trilogy suggests that the wielders were instructed to act as though it required effort to control the blades, rather than explicitly stating that they were "heavy". And yes, it takes a lot of energy to swing a kilogram mass around for ten minutes.

Ah, ye olde "X vs Y" discussion. How I have missed thee. There are so many schools of thought surrounding this that it's almost impossible to cover all of them, but one thing that most RPers will agree on is that "story is king". Translated: go for whatever you mutually agree will make for the more interesting story. For random conflicts (the bar brawl that keeps being mentioned, for example), the relative uncertainty of actual PvP makes for an interesting choice, all else being equal. For something plot related, it's probably best if it's all agreed beforehand. Just because the outcome is assured, that doesn't mean that the journey to get there has to be boring (for example, we all knew before Episode 3 that Obi Wan was going to beat Anakin and basically dump him in magma, but the thing of interest was how it happened, not that it did). The next important thing I said above is "all else being equal". A level 50 throwing down against a level 15 is going to win. We all know it. If the level 15 character is RPd well, though, the outcome should not necessarily be as assured as the raw numbers suggest. So for such a disparity, I'd suggest prior discussion. It becomes complicated, though, when someone brings out their "level 12 bounty hunter who is Force Sensitive and more powerful than the entire Jedi Council combined". Okay, that's an extreme example, but we've all seen the type. Most of the time people will stop RPing with such a player. But sometimes that player is actually a good RPer, but has stacked "flange" abilities (not represented in-game, but reasonable to assume for RP purposes) to the extent of making them overpowered. In those cases, I would always suggest going for text-emote RP, provided that it is agreed up front that the person running the plot gets to pick the outcome to help the story. If not, well, the character can't back up the cheques the players fingers are writing. So, there is a time and palace for both options, and as mature roleplayers, which we should all be trying to be, we can generally agree which option suits the circumstances.

To all those people raging at Stephen, I'd just like to say a few things. Firstly, he's not a developer. He's not 100% up on all of the technical details involved. So he's trying to make sure that his response gets the okay from people who DO understand those details before he posts. Two, he's fundamentally honest. While I doubt many people here have met him and gone out to dinner with him, it is unfair to ascribe malicious motives on the basis of our own fears. Yes, he has to toe the corporate line, but I trust his personal integrity enough to know that he would not LIE to us. Thirdly, his job is essentially to make us, the players, happy. Or as happy as possible, even in the face of bad news. He is well aware that this means he has to provide us with accurate information that is as up-to-date as possible, so that if the news IS bad, he can explain what is being done to resolve it. So, please, don't shoot the messenger for trying his damnedest to give us what we want and need to make an informed decision about our feelings towards this game and the company that develops it. Give the man a break. He's one of the good guys.