Isn't absuing force persuade BAD?

[Highsis]

***No Spoilers, please! I've only started playing and don't have any knowledge***

 

 

I am playing a Jedi night, and one of my light side options were to use force persuasion on hostile people, and it yielded more light side points than a verbal persuasion attempt.

 

I don't understand this. I thought using force to manipulate others' thoughts is definitely not more light sided action than trying to persuade people to come to their senses.

 

In the particular case I brought up, I ended up fighting if I chose verbal persuasion while force persuasion resulted in a peaceful resolutions. However, regardless of the result, my actions to reason with people should be deemed more honorable and conscientious way than forcing my thoughts on others.

 

I think I read from either Kotor 1 or 2 that repeated use of force persuasion can hard the subject's mind. Furthermore, there are no black and white in most morality cases. I shouldn't force my views on others using force persuasion and get more light sided points than an honest negotiation.

 

 

 

It is indeed a trivial thing but it really disturbed me in my attempts to role play. Would you please give me insights as to why using force persuade to resolve a conflict is deemed as a more light sided action than honest persuasion, and please avoid any spoilers.

[Katahn]

If you are using it to prevent unecessary violence and suffering, and to achieve a specific good objective, then using Force Persuade is indeed a good thing to do.

 

Force Persuade to convince some panicked villagers who are about to attack you because they were manipulated into doing so to leave you alone? Good thing.

 

Force Persuade to get free drinks at the local cantina? Bad thing.

[bright_ephemera]

The game takes "Force Persuade as an alternative to bloodshed" as a good thing.

 

Because according to the Force, free will is not an entitlement. Free will can and should be overridden for your own good if that's what it takes to preserve harmony. (heh. Are you familiar with Revan's full story as brought forth in KOTOR? The Jedi Council's actions around the critical point amply demonstrate Light Side operations at work.) It's one of the most screamingly obvious ways that LS/DS diverges from modern Western morality.

[Rhadamanthine]

If you are using it to prevent unecessary violence and suffering, and to achieve a specific good objective, then using Force Persuade is indeed a good thing to do.

 

Force Persuade to convince some panicked villagers who are about to attack you because they were manipulated into doing so to leave you alone? Good thing.

 

Force Persuade to get free drinks at the local cantina? Bad thing.

 

Force Persuade to get a random thug on Nar Shadda to leave a bystander alone by jumping down a pit to get to the ground faster? Very bad thing.

[Highsis]

The game takes "Force Persuade as an alternative to bloodshed" as a good thing.

 

Because according to the Force, free will is not an entitlement. Free will can and should be overridden for your own good if that's what it takes to preserve harmony. (heh. Are you familiar with Revan's full story as brought forth in KOTOR? The Jedi Council's actions around the critical point amply demonstrate Light Side operations at work.) It's one of the most screamingly obvious ways that LS/DS diverges from modern Western morality.

 

I believe that the council did the right thing in KOTOR1, because the decision saved millions of lives. That goes without a question; nothing can be more important than sacrifices of many innocents.

 

Are fundamental human rights, like human rights to survive, supposed to be put first before individual's free will? Yes, but what gives you a right to play an arbitrator above others? Who decides such things in more uncertain situations than the case give above? Are you entitled to ignore others free will with your subjective judgement that might be wrong? Everything is grey in reality, and unless you are an all-knowing god you could always overlook something, causing more harms.

 

Isn't using force persuade only a temporary solution as those people mind tricked will come to realize they've been deceived? Wouldn't that possibly cause more troubles and harms to the innocent? I just get a feeling that using a forceful method when you have an alternative isn't a right thing to do.

Edited May 4, 2012 by Highsis

[Propecius]

I have wondered the same things. Personally, I love using Force Persuade. It's one of those movie-like-moments that makes the game fun.

 

But my companions often disapprove.

[Rhadamanthine]

I have wondered the same things. Personally, I love using Force Persuade. It's one of those movie-like-moments that makes the game fun.

 

But my companions often disapprove.

 

One of the easiest ways to get Theran to consistently disapprove of you is to Force Persuade people. He really takes exception to it.

[ScarletBlaze]

I believe that the council did the right thing in KOTOR1, because the decision saved millions of lives. That goes without a question; nothing can be more important than sacrifices of many innocents.

 

Are fundamental human rights, like human rights to survive, supposed to be put first before individual's free will? Yes, but what gives you a right to play an arbitrator above others? Who decides such things in more uncertain situations than the case give above? Are you entitled to ignore others free will with your subjective judgement that might be wrong? Everything is grey in reality, and unless you are an all-knowing god you could always overlook something, causing more harms.

 

Isn't using force persuade only a temporary solution as those people mind tricked will come to realize they've been deceived? Wouldn't that possibly cause more troubles and harms to the innocent? I just get a feeling that using a forceful method when you have an alternative isn't a right thing to do.

 

Think about this:

 

You are ask to bring in a criminal/gangster to the security force/republic. This individual may also have information that could prove vital.

 

You go to talk to this individual and before you get 3 words out he/she begins to initate violence.

 

You are then left with two choices:

 

Force persuade him to end this peacefully and therefore negating the need for violence and the possiblity of bystanders being injured and he/she turns himself in peacefully.

 

or

 

Go ahead with his/her violent action and risk the chance of bystanders being hurt/killed and also take the chance of him/her being killed and therefore any information he/she has is lost permantely.

Edited May 4, 2012 by ScarletBlaze

[bright_ephemera]

I believe that the council did the right thing in KOTOR1, because the decision saved millions of lives. That goes without a question; nothing can be more important than sacrifices of many innocents.

 

Revan's is admittedly an extreme case.

What are your options for a being that dangerous? Separate him (or her, I refuse to accept SWTOR's deterministic canon on this) from his/her power base. Then, option one, jail him/her permanently. Two, kill him/her. Three, use an overwhelming variant on Force Persuade to destroy him/her and substitute a new personality which you supposedly have the moral authority and necessary expertise to dictate.

 

So the Council, guided by the Light Side, figures the best solution is to violate you to the core of your being. Not just the person who committed crimes, but the person who was a child once, the person who loved, the person who might have helped shed light on other enemies, the person who might have learned from mistakes if the Jedi ever saw fit to give 'em a chance. Never mind that the technique isn't wholly proven. Never mind that if you ever find out what was done to you you'll be as powerful as ever and now possibly very angry. Never mind that you will never have the chance for a true first-hand understanding of and remorse for your crimes. Nothing is learned. Nothing is gained. They murder the person you were and pat themselves on the back for not killing your body. If that's because organic death lessens the Force, then basically they're keeping your shell for their bizarre religious requirements while destroying everything that made you you. They're constructing a puppet that'll wear your skin.

 

And they say it's better than killing.

 

 

Are fundamental human rights, like human rights to survive, supposed to be put first before individual's free will? Yes, but what gives you a right to play an arbitrator above others? Who decides such things in more uncertain situations than the case give above? Are you entitled to ignore others free will with your subjective judgement that might be wrong? Everything is grey in reality, and unless you are an all-knowing god you could always overlook something, causing more harms.

 

Isn't using force persuade only a temporary solution as those people mind tricked will come to realize they've been deceived? Wouldn't that possibly cause more troubles and harms to the innocent? I just get a feeling that using a forceful method when you have an alternative isn't a right thing to do.

 

Wholly agreed. That whole brief-override-of-free-will? I find it abhorrent, and that's not just the Force-shall-free-me Sith talking. Where do you draw the line? Is it okay to Persuade to stop a murder in progress? Is it okay to Persuade to get information that'll let you intercept a probable murder? Is it okay to Persuade to stop a robbery? Is it okay to Persuade to get kids to stay off drugs? Is it okay to Persuade to get somebody to tell a white lie rather than upsetting somebody else in an emotional situation? Does every Jedi really have the expertise and moral authority to say Yes, I'm righteous enough to trample over your mind?

 

The convenient thing in a game is that they can arbitrarily draw that line and make some Persuades LS and some Persuades DS depending on the situation. But, blessed or unblessed, it skeeves me out every time.

[Sithhelmet]

/waves hand "Force persuade is good. I will not be killed when I listen to the Force user. Move along, move along."

[undeadsithdread]

***No Spoilers, please! I've only started playing and don't have any knowledge***

 

 

I am playing a Jedi night, and one of my light side options were to use force persuasion on hostile people, and it yielded more light side points than a verbal persuasion attempt.

 

I don't understand this. I thought using force to manipulate others' thoughts is definitely not more light sided action than trying to persuade people to come to their senses.

 

In the particular case I brought up, I ended up fighting if I chose verbal persuasion while force persuasion resulted in a peaceful resolutions. However, regardless of the result, my actions to reason with people should be deemed more honorable and conscientious way than forcing my thoughts on others.

 

I think I read from either Kotor 1 or 2 that repeated use of force persuasion can hard the subject's mind. Furthermore, there are no black and white in most morality cases. I shouldn't force my views on others using force persuasion and get more light sided points than an honest negotiation.

 

 

 

It is indeed a trivial thing but it really disturbed me in my attempts to role play. Would you please give me insights as to why using force persuade to resolve a conflict is deemed as a more light sided action than honest persuasion, and please avoid any spoilers.

 

if you read darth plagueis novel:

 

plagueis fought some crew in ship after he defeated them one of the wounded crew assumed plagueis was jedi and called him hes disgrace to jedi for not using force persuade to stop them from fighting him.

[Guildrum]

So did Obi Wan's little "These are not the droids you are looking for" stunt in ANH give him +50 DS points?

[Captain_Zone]

Ok, here's the big difference: LS Force Persuade: "These aren't the droids you're looking for" in order to avoid having to kill them.

 

DS Force Persuade: "You wish to kneel before me and <BLEEP> my <BLANK> now." to a hot girl you really want to... "socialize" with.

[Rischardo]

Kind of surprised that no one has mentioned it. It seems that the devs adopted the consequentialism (the ends justifies the means) model for morality as far as force persuade is concerned. So, while force persuade in and of itself is questionable as far as morality is concerned, it is justifiable as it definitely produces the non-violent result.

 

What would be the most moral choice is avoiding violence without resorting to force persuade. Apparently that's not often though.

[imnotawitch]

I would agree that most people would rather be brainwashed than dead. (Very mild SW spoilers under cut.)

 

 

The spy's son in the SW class quest on Balmorra for example.

 

 

I do think that it should be reserved as a last resort though, as having some one else's will override yours is most likely not pleasant. (Hasn't happened to me, knock on wood.)

[Thebazilly]

Very interesting topic, and great discussion so far. I'm especially enjoying the discussion on Revan. The KOTOR games sort of just glossed over it (I think the morality of the decision was mentioned once, in KOTOR 2), and I was confused and a little disturbed on my first playthrough.

 

I try to avoid using Force Persuade on my Jedi Knight, since he's the kind of guy who wouldn't abuse his power. My Jedi Consular is a different story, she's very "the end justifies the means," and she'll sling around her Jedi mind tricks almost whenever she gets the option to.

[MadHobbit]

i used the persuade twice on my JC.both times to avoid a fight. if you really want to see a abuse of a Mind trick. watch the series "legend of the seeker", her mind trick was permant,or until she died.