Bounty Hunter Archive

I have posted this here because this seems to be the place where much of those who advance the cause of the "jedi problem" congregate.

I would like to take a moment and delve into the logic of those who bemoan the existence of jedi or their population. I do not share that view, and struggle to rationalize it beyond emotional positions. From my perspective, I group the objections in variations or combinations of what follows:

“There should be no jedi for player characters.” - this position seems to fall into two broad categories:

“Jedi should be rare and/or exhibit certain characteristics, and permitting players to assume these roles would violate one or both of these.” – This is the mantra of the fan of the movies who view jedi as the principle characters of an epic struggle, and therefore jedi need to be defined much as they were in the films. However, this is a massively multiplayer online role playing game (MMORPG), where there are no central characters and you can not easily compel players to play their characters in any particular way. As a result, people holding this view conclude that jedi should be the purview of non-player characters.

I take exception to the premise that forms these conclusions. If it was to be that our circumstances are to mirror those of the movies, it removes much of the purpose of us playing our characters. If one can not influence the course of events of the environment in any meaningful way, what is the motive of playing? If the outcome is preordained, why not skip ahead to the conclusion, blow up the Death Star, kill the emperor, and proclaim Luke the hero of the day. Indeed, why not just shut off the computer and fire up the DVD player?

Clearly there can not be 10,000 Lukes running around SWG at the center of the plot, each independently controlling their own destiny. However, one of the defining characteristics of a MMORPG is that there is no central character nor preordained conclusion, and to lesser or greater extents, each player changes the world. By building a world with the factions and environment based upon a milieu, but leaving the course of events as an open question, those of us playing are empowered to feel ownership, and this is the attraction of this kind of game over a single player offering.

Lucas tells the tale of a few characters in an epic struggle, and heightens the drama by setting into motion of course of events whereby the choices of a very select few will impact the entire galaxy. It is seemingly always the last of the jedi fighting the last of the sith, the only surviving X-wing with its last torpedo, etc… This makes for good movie drama, but is not reasonable for a community of thousands each wanting to feel some level of ownership.

For this reason in SWG the force is not the exclusive domain of a nearly extinct sect, and exploration of other Star Wars books validates this. Since the force is everywhere, it is only reasonable that there are other factions aside from the jedi and sith who have learned to harness it, as witnessed the Nightsisters on Dathomir. It might be more appropriate terminology to call the characters “force wielders” rather than “jedi”, a term referring to a rank of a particular faction, but it does not alter the premise that if such power exists everywhere, more than just a handful of users will materialize.

While those of us who are fans of the movies are drawn to this game for our love of the characters and the dramas they faced, its plot limitations can not form the basis of a MMORPG that will attract and retain people wanting to make their own way in such a world. While our stories share some similar setting characteristics to those in the movies, our destinies lie along a different path.

“Jedi are too powerful, too unbalancing to the game” is the other common objection to the existence of jedi player characters. This objection is centered upon the game mechanics and the question of “fairness”. Fair, as they say, is a four letter word, but let’s delve into the logic of this objection. In order to make the assertion, one has to operate from the premise that all things should be equal, a socialized perspective of the game. While nobody can argue that fairness in terms of a game’s mechanics is a necessary component to prevent alienation of those treated “unfairly”, the difference of opinion is how to define “fair.”

Should all characters have equal power? If so, then you have removed many of the motives for the game. Why accumulate wealth or experience? If you are guaranteed to have equal power, what good are such things? And if you need not accumulate wealth or experience to have equal power, then you have removed the underpinnings of the economy and the reason for many of the quests. Your guaranteed equal power would give you all you need to do anything in the game, leaving only the thinnest shell of plot and prestige as motives. The game at that point may as well be a first person shooter or single player fantasy game.

MMORPGs give you a sense of entitlement based upon effort. The experience you earn and the wealth you amass give you leverage to improve yourself, thus opening even more avenues to explore. The fairness offered is not one of power, but opportunity. That bears repeating. Fairness exists in SWG in that all players have equal opportunity to achieve. There are no doors that are closed, and everyone has the ability to do whatever anyone else may do provided they exert similar levels of effort. This is one of the main attractions of the MMORPG, and to try to change it would be ruinous.

When pressed, the pretext for this objection is often not that player’s characters should not vary in power, but usually that said power should never significantly exceed the person objecting. This centric view is hinged upon the somewhat hypocritical stance that those voicing the objection are certainly entitled to whatever advantages they currently hold as well earned, but those with more power somehow have not earned it, or at the very least, have the advantage of significantly more free time to invest in earning their reward.

This game is unique from other MMORPG’s in that it is not predicated on a table-top game like Dungeons and Dragons. You would not likely hear a “fairness” objection of a level 20 mage being more powerful than a level 7 mage. However, those making the jedi objection based upon the “balance” question seem to be trying to make such a claim, as few can rationally argue that jedi characters with more power then their conventional counterparts have not invested significantly more effort to earn their increased power. Just as a level 80 combat character non-jedi has powers that give him access to opportunities not yet available to a level 10 novice marksman, so too does jedi have advantages over others, and a knight beyond that.

If there are to be variances in power, then there are going to be those with significantly more power. Provided that there is opportunity for all to earn such powers, and that all levels of characters have material available to them to enjoy the game, then the position of unfairness is hard to defend.

The other group of those offering objection are those who acknowledge the availability of jedi characters to players, but object to how it is currently implemented, and often fall into categories similar to those above:

“There are too many jedi / it is too easy to become a jedi” – this objection draws upon the some of the same premises as the “Jedi should be rare” group above, but differ in that they wish to leave an avenue open for some select subset of players to be jedi. They cite many of the same specifics of the movie plot/timeline as the “Jedi should be rare” group, and therefore I’ll refer back to similar logic to refute it. The reason I put this group in separately is because it is worthwhile to explore how they come to a different conclusion than those advocating an outright prohibition.

The logic twist of leaving an avenue open but in some way making it more rare becomes more telling when you discover if they themselves are or wish to be a jedi. I liken this line of thinking to “the traffic problems in this area would be solved if everyone else would simply stay off the road so I can get to where I am going.” The allure of the prestige of being one of the few, or putting yourself in the hero or villains shoes, is very compelling.

But in a MMORPG, you have to consider that a community needs equal opportunity, and there are not very many attractive ways to ration the number of jedi that does not lead to inequality of opportunity. Also, you need to leave the goal in tact, even if some never can put in enough effort to attain it. Though many may not make the full journey, it may be rewarding enough for many to travel some of the road. Taking away the destination, or limiting it to some circumstance of luck, removes motive for many to keep striving forward.

The other reality that comes into play here is time. You can make the journey as long as you like, but as time goes on, more and more will reach the end. The number of characters attaining any level, including jedi, is going to grow with the passing of time, if only as a result of it being one of the last avenues for veteran players in which to invest. Any artificial limitations on the jedi population will have to account for the fact that with time more are going to qualify no matter how high you set the bar, and if there is to be relative rarity of jedi, something will have to artificially limit or systematically remove jedi. Such measure would also lead to inequality of opportunity.

An interesting counter-question to this objection is “how does this impact your ability to play your character? If you woke up tomorrow and the whole server was jedi except you, could you still go out and play?” The answer to such a question is really telling about the underlying objection. In terms of PVE, there is no impact of course, and the number and power of the NPC’s is constant. Indeed, if anything, this development would be beneficial, as anyone in your party would be very helpful in meeting your goals. In terms of PVP, there would be disadvantages in terms of opponents, and advantages in terms of allies. Then of course in JTL, there are no advantages to being a jedi. The honest answer to this is that the population of jedi, be it large or small, has little to do with the gaming experience except the emotional elements of status and ego. Pride aside, the rational arguments do not meet with the reality of the game.

“Jedis should not be more powerful than any other player.” This mirrors the pretext of the “jedis would be unbalancing” crowd, but differs in its conclusion, deciding instead of precluding them as a player character, simply make them equal to any other high level character. The logic behind this objection is a parallel to the one above, so again I’ll offer the same counter, but would like to explore the difference in conclusion.

This group is clearly on the bandwagon of there being a “jedi problem”, but is diametrically opposite of the movie purists in terms of the rarity of Jedi. For one would have to reasonably conclude that if a jedi is to be no more or less powerful than a master rifleman for instance, then there should be no different requirement in terms of attaining jedi than that of the any other master combat class. To that end, there would be as many jedi as there would any other class, more perhaps accounting for prestige.

Indeed, there would also have to be a serious redesign of the purpose of the bounty hunter, of which the primary game mechanic is to add some difficulty to the attainment of jedi. But if there is not going to be any more power to jedi, and therefore the road need not be any harder to get it, then there is no need for bounty hunters to hunt them. One has to muse about how many of the people holding this position are bounty hunters who have not thought their position all the way to its conclusion. I also ponder how many of the movie purists and nerf the jedi crowd know they are in the same “jedi problem” camp but wanting conclusions that are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

Those are the main groups of objections I have witnessed to the so-called “jedi problem”. I understand them, and on some emotional levels even identify with a bit of the sentiment that is expressed within them. But rationally thinking about the overall welfare of the community, I do not subscribe to the premises that form those conclusions.

SWG is a MMORPG, and therefore can not parallel the “handful of heroes saving the galaxy opposed by a handful of ultra powerful villains” that forms plot line of the movies. Rather this game needs to offer its community equal opportunity to experience all levels of adventure, rewards supporting the level of effort, and the sense of ownership that being able to effect the environment in some meaningful way gives. By definition, this means that SWG will differ from the movies and single player adventure games with the small population character focus, and first person shooter games and its equality of power. There are games like Knights of the Old Republic and Star Wars Battlefront which offer those kinds of experiences set in the Star Wars milieu.

SWG is different. You can effect this world, even if only in a small way. There is no preordained conclusion. It is a community, and no one player or subset of players can nor should be the focus of the plot. You have equal opportunity to attain what others do, and your efforts are met with meaningful and lasting rewards, economically, politically, and in prowess. Jedi are a part of that formulation, and with good reason.

MMORPG are an incredible investment in time, and many of the frustrations in making that investment result in emotional rhetoric. I ask those of you who feel there is a Jedi problem to read this carefully what I have offered, and divorce the emotional arguments to distill the rational ones. Put aside your own current situation, and think about the thousands of other who have come to this game to experience their own brand of adventure, and the needs of the community as a whole. If you view this openly and fairly, you may come to understand the so-called “jedi problem” in a different way.

I myself have been playing this game just short of a year. When I learned what it took to become a jedi, then to amass any level of power with it, and the setbacks that bounty hunters give, I resigned very early on that I likely would never be a jedi. I knew that those who make it have either been at it for much longer than I or have much more free time to invest in the game. In either case, I don’t begrudge them for having something I don’t. Indeed, I have to give them some measure of respect for being so devoted and enduring what they had to do.

I took the time to write this because I have grown weary of thehyperbole and hatredwith only the thinnest of ration to them. We have to remember that this is not a contest, and there are no winners and no prizes. We have come together in a community to share a virtual experience in a setting we all find compelling, and that we all have much more in common than is different. With that in mind, I hope those who read here find moment to pause and reflect upon why we have gathered and our collective obligation to one another to foster our community.

Thank you for your attention.

-Daeges

---

ShaikeRamjet wrote:
Too damn long... I skipped reading this just because of its length.

---

---

Daeges wrote:

I flat guarantee that if somewhere encrypted in my message was the secret to a PVP trick or the location of some rare loot that every word of my message would be analyzed, and those claiming to have a short attention span would suddenly find reason to read it in great tedium. I find it to be inconsistent to invest hundreds of hours in game and not have a few minutes to reflect it; to come to these forums to exchange ideas but select only those which can fit on a bumper sticker; to proclaim this community's doom based upon the so-called "jedi problem" yet censor any message to the contrary. Were I in the position of being ready to cancel my account and throw away all that invested time in a game I love, I'd be scouring the forums for anything that I could find that might give me another point of view.

I have laid the gauntlet at the feet of those who advance the notion of a Jedi problem. Are there none with the faculties to answer the call? I am humble enough to know that I don't own a monopoly on ideas and other perspectives can be equally valid, and am eager to hear any voice of reason.

---

Still too long. Skipped this one too

Vezek