Jediphile

Whether Atris lived or died, possibly killing herself, is probably one of those things that will be left for the indvidual player to decide for him or herself, I think. The simple reason for that is similar to that of Vandar's fate - at the end of the game you may or may not have killed Atris, so the easiest way to deal with her is probably to write her out of the story and just assume that she is dead, since that will upset the fans the least. Sad, though, since I'd like to see Atris again... Personally I didn't get the feeling that she killed herself after I left her alive on Telos in the LS ending. You basically convince her that she can resist the DS only by giving up the force itself, and so she vows to leave all her jedi teachings behind. I like to think that she settled down and gave up the force pursuing less dangerous lore... But then I may just be a old softie

Yes, I thought so too after someone mentioned the "chosen one" clich

No need to apologize. I didn't post that to slash you down, but more to correct wrong information. After all, I like Vandar too, and wouldn't have minded if he had been the Exile's master. The only problem is that he wasn't...

The thing with Bao-Dur is that he only responds to your actions - not your talk. You can talk to him all you like - it won't build any influence. He is generally good, which means you have to do LS things with him in the group to gain influence. Though it's full of spoilers, I suggest getting the Influence Guide to see where you can get influence with him, because those times are indeed limited... Also remember that you can usually gain access with only one character during a specific encounter, so if three would possibly gain from one result in a certain situation, you'll have to choose which one you want to gain influence with and throw the rest out of the group, or the game will determine (randomly?) who influence is gained with...

One thing about that navicomputer (and yes, the others are right - you can't unlock it) is just who voice-locked it. I've seen a lot of people say that it was Kreia, but I don't think it's ever actually revealed - she just says on Peragus that she has the only means to unlock the navicomputer, not that she can unlock it herself. I always got the impression that the only one who can "unlock" the navicomputer (in the sense that he can override the lockout) is T3-M4, and HK-47's comments even suggest that at one point, I think. My conclusion is that it was actually Revan who voicelocked the computer. Therefore only T3 can navigate the Ebon Hawk, and nobody can uncover where the ship went unless T3 allows it, which he never does (except perhaps after the game ends...). If Revan locked the navicomputer, it might also tell us why he apparently deactivated HK-47 and wiped his memory core - he knew he couldn't trust HK-47 to follow his order to not reveal anything, and so he wiped his core to prevent him from mimicing his voice.

No, no... If only it were so, but the conversation you refer to does not support that idea. Since you obviously didn't look at page 4 of this topic where I quoted the conversation, let me just repeat it: Now, note that Vrook says "his master refuses to properly discipline..." right to Vander's face. That more than suggests that whoever the Exile's master was, it was not Vandar - it would be pretty weird to talk to someone in the third person in a conversation with only too participants, even for Vrook...

Only once did I add to a character's background. I did it after talking to the player and getting his acceptance for it. But then I guess I prompt it up front by encouraging my players to tell me of their backgrounds, such as what family they have, old friends and enemies, former love interests and allies met on other adventures, etc. I've used that information as a basis for plots in my campaig numerous times, and I've yet to hear a player complain about how I characterized someone from their past, though they haven't always like how that character fared... especially not if he or she died, but then that's to be expected - if they didn't mind seeing their old comrades die, then there really would be no point, would there? True enough, but while as a player I may do this myself, I find that it's usually just a matter of time before I begin filling in the blanks of my character's history, especially if it's a character I really like (and they usually are, since otherwise I stop playing them...). Besides, even ten lines of backstory can be a goldmine for the GM, and that's not much to ask for. Indeed, I find it helps define the character, since it helps you understand who he or she is, and this makes it easier for you to role-play the character. And even if a plyaer really couldn't be bothered to establish a background, I can usually shed some light on it as a GM by asking a little about it. This is especially true if you suggest something for the character's background that the player doesn't like - they you'll hear it immediately

Suddenly the Disciple too is hit by stasis: Kreia: "No, I think not..." Exile: "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!"

Because the jedi were complacent and just sat around doing nothing - the masters wanted them all to be pacifists and let the Mandalorians kill billions. It's said several times that the Republic would have fallen if Revan had not gone to war, so where does that leave the jed warriors protecting the Republic? Even Zez-Kai Ell admits that Revan and Malak and those who followed them were not entirely to blame for the situation, since masters were just too strict and arrogant in their decisions. Revan wasn't content to just sith around with the jedi masters sipping tea while the Republic died, so he decided to go out there and save the Republic instead of sitting around waiting for "some greater danger"... Revan may have turned into a monster from that decision, but at least he left a Republic for the jedi order to defend later, which is one Republic more than there would have been if he had done nothing... And when the time came, it made the jedi get out of their comfortable chairs and do something. Again, you're looking at the game, reaching a conclusion and then assigned that as a fact. Just because you think it's logical does not make it so. The fact remains that we just don't know what sort of regime that Revan would have left, because he never got the change to create it. And just where did Revan destroy worlds? He didn't. Malak and Saul decided to destroy Taris and Telos. And where did I say that Revan would have set up another democratic regime? You misrepresent me by inferring that, since I didn't. I only said that we do not know what Revan would have done. Judging by GOTO's analysis, I'd speculate that Revan would have created a society focused on powerful military build-up in preparation for the next conflict with the true Sith. No, not a regime I would have liked to live under, but you cannot deny that the worlds of the Republic most likely would have survived the war with the true Sith better under those circumstances. Instead things now look pretty bleak for the Republic at the end of KotOR2... Well, I have them all on DVD, except RotS, but then I've seen that thrice... And your point was that Sidious did not destroy worlds to conquer the Republic. He only assumed the position of Emperor in RotS, but note that he does not remove the senate until Episode IV... Tarkin: "The imperial senate will no longer be of any concern to us. I have just received word that the Emperor has dissolved the council permanently - the last rudiments of the old republic have been swept away..." Officer: "That's impossible! How will the Emperor maintain control without the bureaucracy?" Tarkin: "Regional governors now have direct control over their territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line - fear of this battle station!" Thereafter Tarkin and Vader promptly use the Death Star to destroy Alderaan as a demonstration of their power... If you don't believe me, the scene is about 35-36 minutes into the film... Still think I haven't seen the films? Maybe you should see them... Maybe I should - persuasive argumentation like that is not quite in my league, I'll admit... While we're on the topic of reading what other people say in their post, I might suggest you do the same... Those historians you refer also did not know the historic figures they speculate about... But now I'm just repeating myself... My bad :"> He has access to the knowledge and power of the exchange, and I dare say an advanced interstellar civilization like the Republic has historic records and theses at least as good as those we can produce in the real world today. Add to this that GOTO was a droid built by the Republic to save the Republic and that he has been studying jedi for that sake, since he realises the important function they serve as figureheads in the Republic, and you have an exceedinly good basis for thinking GOTO may indeed know an awful lot about the subject. They may have become Sith, but it would be a pretty big oversight not to look at the reasons why they left the order it the first place. Those jedi weren't just "corrupted" by some Deux-ex-machina outside force. Their defiance and split from the jedi order is still at the core of the conflict even if they are not strictly jedi five years later. Also, look at the commoner perspective - the jedi masters decided to sit at home and do nothing while the innocents died, while Revan and the other defiant jedi joined the army and saved the Republic - they were heroes to the common people, the jedi who had responded to their plight and saved them. Who does that make the real jedi in the eyes of the common man? The jedi who defied the order to save the innocent or the jedi who decided to sit in their temples because of some mysterious jedi reason? Revan and Malak were the hero jedi during the Mandalorian Wars. A few years later they were suddenly the enemy, and the mysterious jedi who wouldn't fight before are now the hero jedi? It's really no wonder that the common people think this is some odd, internal jedi conflict... Well, that much is certainly true - the masters we see seemed to do preciously little, after all... " That's my impression from her comments about Revan understanding the difference between a fall and a sacrifice and the comment about Revan knowing that the true war was not against the Republic... Doesn't mean that I'm right, but it isn't any better or worse than your speculation either, since we really don't know either way...

What I don't get is that when the jedi council does something underhanded and manipulative, then it's all okay and justified and "no other way", but when it's suggested that Revan might have had similar motives, then it's "no, cannot be" - impossible and just bad storytelling... I thought you just established in your last post that we don't know what Revan's motives were... In fact, I know you did: 1. Jedi did fight in the war. 2. It was former jedi against current jedi. Or 2a. Dark jedi vs. jedi 3. Most people don't distinguish much between jedi and sith, so... 4. The jedi that turned sith were the former jedi students that the jedi masters had forbidden to go to war against the Mandalorians and so forced them to either submit totally to the masters orders and deny their training to protect the innocent or else to rebel against their masters. No outside Sith influence there - the masters created the conflict themselves, so it's fair to assign it internally to the jedi order. You seem to like the idea that just because the jedi that followed Revan and Malak because Sith, that suddenly means that they were never jedi or that the masters did not share responsibility for what became of them. This is a view not even shared by all the masters... Zez-Kai Ell: "No, no - they were not to blame, but many of the Order did so - it was a difficult time, a time of strong emotion.Perhaps the Council, perhaps the Order itself had grown arrogant in their teachings. It is easy to cast blame, but it is perhaps time the Order accepted responsibility for their teachings, and their arrogance, and come to recognize that perhaps we are flawed.Not once did I hear one of the Council claim responsibility for Revan, for Exar Kun, for Ulic, for Malak... or for you."

So he sacrificed the Republic's defenders to save the Republic itself. Somehow that doesn't look much worse to me than using Revan to destroy the Sith... Besides, what would the jedi defend if the Republic fell? As GoA said before - he turned the pacifistic jedi into warriors... The reason seems rather obvious to me. This is pure conjecture - we have no knowledge of what sort of regime Revan would have set up in the Republic's place. Sidious didn't destoy any worlds... *cough* Alderaan *cough*... Sorry, really got to do something about that cyber-throat Still to suggest that Sidious didn't destroy the Republic is a pretty big stretch to me - Sidious *annihilated* the Republic. And how did you say yourself above - "But this is still effectively destroying the Jedi. The Jedi were one of the defining characteristics of the Republic." Great - you just contradicted yourself in one post " How does historians today know what Napoleon's motives were - or Hiltler's or Stalin's for that matter - they didn't associate with any of them... GOTO analyzes the situation and makes conclusions. As a droid he has several advantages when he does so. For one, as a droid he has no emotional attachments to "Revan having to be evil for attacking this or that world" or "Revan must be good, since he destroyed the StarForge and overthrew Malak". GOTO is a cold anc calculating machine with all the humanity or compassion of rock, but that and his cold intelligence also means that his analysis is very objective. I wouldn't cast it aside so easily.

Of course it's all speculation, and I have never said otherwise. When I restated the bit you quoted, it was because I had, by then, quoted GOTO thrice without Mothman acknowledging the point that Revan might - note, *might* - have made a conscious sacrifice to embrance the dark side to save the Republic from the true Sith. I didn't not say, however, that this was a fact. Because you're right so far - we don't know what Revan's motives were. We still don't. But that's also the point - nor do we know that he just fell to the dark side because he was corrupted. We don't know that either. Now, when we discuss these things, how do we go about doing it? Am I not permitted in using quotes from the game to support my conclusions because they are speculative? If not, then what am I to base my conclusions on? Instead we can have have a poll where everybody just says what they think happened or will happen. I do not find that to be a very positive thing, since it won't lead us to any conclusions, as far as I can tell. YMMV... I have quoted Kreia, HK-47, and GOTO all echoing (you know you love that word, eh? ) similar thoughts on the subject. As you say, the Disciple does too. Am I not to include this in my analysis because it's speculative? In that case there can be no analysis or conclusion, because the game communicates to us only through what the characters say. It does not make my points true, no, but it is more convincing to quote three or four characters for making suggestions that support a conclusion than it is to have one or none. I do fail to see, though, how I suggest that the Disciple's word is gospel. He says what he says, and I will consider that. I do not find him to be as untruthful as Kreia often is, so I will be more skeptical of what she says, like when I doubt her for saying that Arren Kae was exiled for having a child... But what do you base that assumption on? We really have no idea when Revan learned this, and some of Kreia's comments suggested to me that he knew before this. But no, we don't know that. We also don't know that he didn't, though. Yes, I'd tend to agree more with that. Revan showed little restraint in his conquests. He did leave the potential behind for the later stand against the true Sith, but we don't know if that was to save the Republic - which I doubt - or to protect his new empire. I even consider it possible that he wanted his own powerful empire in time for the stand, so that he could himself conquer the true Sith empire and add it to his own, learn its secrets for himself, and grow even more powerful. As I've said elsewhere, the meeting where they sentence the Exile is hurt by bad writing, because they don't explain the matter well. Their decision is actually quite understandable, but they don't give you time, as a player, to absorb the validity of the point they make, and so the masters come off as incredibly unfair and judgmental. But I must say that apart from the last meeting, I liked the masters, apart from Atris and Vrook. I liked Zez-Kai Ell best, because he demonstrates true introspection and regret over some of their choices. I think I would have really liked Vash too, from what we know or can find out about her. Kavar is more of a warrior type, but I find he has some very redeeming qualities that humanize him. Atris is just a b**** topped only by Kreia, and Vrook is simply a grumpy old fool, though... If only the meeting with the masters hadn't been so rushed... Did we? I thought they only mentioned Vrook and Zhar in K2, suggesting that Dorak might have died in Malak's attack. But I don't really remember... Simple - because we, as players, care more about masters we met in K1 than some generic faceless master we hear about having died in K2. They probably didn't kill Vrook because it would just have been cheered by too many - sort of it Lucas had killed Jar-Jar on screen in the movies Personally I liked them. Except Atris... and Vrook. Well, I guess it's partly to underscore the idea that contentment is dangerous, because you risk being obvious to the dangers around you. Besides, if the masters did everything right, there should be no need for your own character to grow powerful and save (or conquer) the galaxy, so there are strong plot reasons for it too.

The masters are meeting on Dantooine... Zez-Kai Ell: "So, we're resolved to cut the Exile off from the force?" Vrook: "Of course - there is no other way!" Kavar: "I just hope he won't take it too hard and try to stop us..." Zez-Kai Ell: "Well, he does have unique powers, and he might not go along with our decision. You sure we shouldn't keep that shuttle handy in case..." Vrook [interrupting]: "Evacuate?!? In our moment of triumph?!? I think you overestimate his chances!!!"

From the dialog.tlk file - this happens during the meetings with the masters on Dantooine. I don't recall who says what, but it doesn't matter... "It is not the strength of a Jedi you feel." " He's right. It's... all the death you've caused to get here. You feed on it, and you grow stronger. You're like Malachor... it's in you, it's what you are now. You must have noticed as you've fought across all these planets, killing hundreds - only to become more and more powerful. Why do you think that was?" "But what's worse, is that bonding you have - it hasn't gone away. It's gotten stronger, and the more attachments you form, the more you draw others to you.And that is why you are a threat to us all.What if other Jedi went to war as you did, suffered the same events, and emerged as you did. What if there was a crucible that trained such Jedi to consume and kill? For you, Malachor was that crucible." "What's worse, is these Sith that we face... I fear that they have learned the lesson of Malachor all too well. It is what allows them to prey on Force users, to become stronger when Force Sensitives are near. {Accusing}Somehow, they have learned their hunger from you. And so you have brought about the end of the Jedi, and perhaps all the knowledge of the Force." EDIT: Let me add this, which comes just a bit later: "There was a gathering of Jedi on the planet - when we realized that something was attacking us, we resolved to meet secretly to attempt to find this threat.Then... Katarr was no more.When we felt Katarr die, there is something we felt, something we'd felt once before. An echo in the Force.We'd felt it before when you stood before us. Whatever this threat, whatever this hunger is, it is something tied to you, something you have experienced directly."

Atris is way older than the exile. Look at her hair. It's white. I'd say 10 yrs. apart or so. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I really don't get the impression that Atris' hair is white due to age. If it were, shouldn't it have been less white during the Exile's trial a decade before? In truth, I think the fact that Atris was already on the council while the Exile was still only a padawan is a much better argument for her being older. However, given Vandar's comment that the Exile is an "average student of the force", it may not be a relevant point...

What do you mean, exactly? And you obviously don't remember the bad guys taking over in Episode III. " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Only for a time, and they didn't even get all the jedi. Besides, there were holes in the plot IMHO. I mean, if the Sith are so dangerous and they know they are separated (since Anakin went to Mustafar), then why do Yoda and Obi-Wan promptly go, "hey, this looks dangerous - let's split up" - Palpatine is now alone on Coruscant, so you both go get him! Then you can worry about Anakin later together. But I digress... As for alternate ways to fight Malak, they are certainly there. Note how the Kolto on Manaan is said to be of vital importance to the war effort for both sides, yet when you get there, you never meet a single jedi, but there are plenty of dark jedi around... Am I the only one to find that odd? A jedi consular might have made a difference in the stand-off (in fact, one - Jolee - did in the murder case), so why hasn't the council sent someone? If Manaan had sided with the Republic, then it would have been a severe blow to the Sith war effort, yet there is not even a single jedi there to try and expose the plotting that it is painfully obvious that the Sith will try... Or Korriban. Here is an academy training dark jedi to be used in the war effort against the Republic. So why not go there in a preemptive strike to stop that source? Sent some jedi masters and wipe the place clean. But no... "Only a Sith deals in absolutes" - just because I point fingers at the jedi council does not automatically that I side with the Sith. I don't, because I can't - their acts are immoral and I would not defend them even if I wanted to. But you're missing the point that the Sith are not at the discussion here - we know that they are not nice people. That doesn't make the jedi good by default, however, nor does it mean that the jedi cannot or do not do wrong things. As I recall, even Zez-Kai Ell admits that the masters cannot fault the students who followed Revan for their choice. I do see the black and white. If I did not, then I could scarcely argue that the masters are also at fault morally. My point that they are equally to blame if they embrace the same sort of tactics as the sith seems to be lost on you, however. To me this underscores the point that you seem unable to look at the matter objectively. Why? Because the masters were actually more justified in that choice than in the one they made for Revan. In the first you have Revan, and you can (or perhaps must, but that's still an open question) use him to save the Republic. But whether you do or not, the people will live on, even were it under sith rule and with the jedi in hiding. In K2, however,you have the Exile, a being with the power to destroy the force and perhaps all life itself. He doesn't even realize it, he has set incredibly destructive forces free against the galaxy, he leeches the lifeforce away from others, and he doesn't seem to have any sort of control over his ability. At any time, his ability could mean utter death to all life everywhere for all we know, so what to do? We cut him off from the force so that he will no longer hurt others with his uncontrolled ability. Now, in both cases you have a situation where you sacrifice the individual for the greater good, except that in the second the "punishment" is much less severe - losing the ability to use the force is nothing next to being forced into unwitting slavery to serve your enemies and then used against your own - and the danger is also much greater - destruction to the force and perhaps all life everywhere as opposed to the "mere" fall of the Republic... Clearly the sentence is harsher for Revan in a situation where "only" the Republic is at stake, whereas the Exile will merely lose his connection to the force for the greater good of preserving all life and the force. The argument that Revan deserves it for his crimes is invalid since you have taken away his personality and his memory of it all - he has become a new person now and so cannot be held accountable for former crimes. You cannot sentence or punish a man for what he might do. By that reasoning, we should all be punished for the potential crimes we might commit, since we may all turn to violent crime under extreme circumstances. You can ask any lawyer or judge and get the same answer (I should hope...). As I said before, if Revan was leaning toward DS on his arrival to Dantooine, then I might be likely to agree, but playing LS has no bearing, and so it's a moot point. Ah, but to use your own reasoning, Revan was only level 2 when he met Carth, so that would be relevant. It does not apply to Bastila, however, since you had long since passed level 4 when she joins Is the jedi council on Dantooine? No, it's on Coruscant. The masters on Dantooine even admit that to Revan. And besides, you talked about generals and warleaders. Whereas the jedi do command the Republic fleets or their movements during war... No, I said "diversion". Okay, Bastila and Revan go to find the starmaps so the StarForge can be located. None of the masters go with them because that will make it more likely that Malak will detect them and stop them. So instead the masters can: Option 1: Sit around sipping tea on Dantooine until Malak finds his prey (Bastila and Revan) or attacks the masters on Dantooine Option 2: Go to Alderaan, Onderon, Corellia, or wherever the frontlines are, so that Malak will be drawn to their presence there instead of being drawn to Revan and Bastila. Besides, on the frontlines they might even serve to save some of those Republic lives they claim to be so concerned about... So, which did the masters choose...? "

Of course there was another way - the good guys always win, after all Besides, I already said that Bastila was clearly a threat to the Sith's plans, or Malak wounldn't have bothered to hunt her down, so I've already given one. Ah, but to the Sith accumulating power is religious doctrine, and if you place your own standards above their's, then you have to accept that others may do the same to you. I don't think any of us would want to try that less traveled road. And why exactly do I not acknowledge that there is no black and white? Obi-Wan himself said, that only the Sith deal in absolutes, so I fail to see my skepticism as proof of my own alleged inability to not see the difference between right and wrong (or black and white, as it were). Instead you seem to argue that the jedi council's decision cannot be questioned because they are the good guys and therefore above suspicion. But I think nobody is above the law and that blind faith is the crutch of fools... YMMV. 3. So you wouldn't call killing thousands (or in the game, millions) of innocent people a crime? Wow. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sorry for the length here, but I quoted myself so that you or anyone else can tell me just where exactly in the above I said that killing thousands of innocent people wasn't a crime ... I would have studied him and evaluated him based on the choices of the new personality. And if I found him to be an ethical person, then I would have told him the truth and *asked* for his assistance. It speaks volumes to me that the masters never do this no matter how LS you've played Revan up to that point. Revan was generally around level 6 or 7 when Bastila joined the group, and yet she was only level 4... Not a mere question of game mechanics - Jolee and Juhani were both level 6, for example. And at the risk of repeating myself, "Even the masters say that she is young and inexperienced." Maybe I should not have replied to this post, since your tones doesn't suggest to me that you're willing to discuss this... As for planning, I don't see what jedi masters can bring to the table that generals cannot - leave the strategy of the war to people like Dodonna. The jedi masters are far more effective in the war effort if they actually get out there and try to stop the Sith themselves. This is even more relevant if they cannot go with Bastila (and yes, surprised though you may be, I do listen to the game " ), since Malak then won't be hunting for Bastila and instead has to stand against the masters who kill his jedi followers. Even Aragorn and Legolas knew this - it's called diversion.

I find that in many an RPG, you eventually run into the difference between role-playing and roll-playing. Some people actually like the latter, and I don't mean to sound judgmental when I say that - it's quite fine that they do, just as long as they'll accept that I don't. I find that role-playing is better the deeper it gets, and I can feel just fine playing several sessions as a player without ever having to roll my dice (though few RPGs lend themselves well to that...). As a GM I definitely place most focus on the role-playing aspect, even when I play AD&D Mystara - I try to cut down on the boring (IMHO) battles and instead place the PCs in what I hope are interesting situations, where their immediate choices might have a lot of consequence. But even among deep role-players there are a lot of differences between the styles. I, for one, always try to use the backgrounds that my players have detailed for their characters as a basis for putting them right in the middle of things by the way of family, old friends, past experiences, etc. Some GMs prefer to keep away from that, however, and embrace a more generic approach, where the backgrounds of the PCs really doesn't matter that much. The advantage to such plots is that they can be used over and over, because the identities of the PCs are a non-factor. But I think that takes a bit away from the game. I like to "chain" my plots together so that the players get involved in the next story because of something they did or didn't do in the last one, or they could become involved because the character has not done something for a long time, such as seeing to family duties while he or she was off adventuring in some foreign place. How do people out there see this? What sort of approach do you take? Is the PCs' background important or are they non-factors in your games? And much continuity do you place in your game - how much does the outcome of one plot affect your gameworld and subsequent plots?

I don't want to not have a choice regarding my character's race. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A double negation... Don't see too many of those. "What's the bleeding point? You can't have any - you haven't got a womb. Where's the fetus going to gestate - you're going to keep it in a box?!?" Seriously - don't get me started. Seriously!!

To quote the Babylon 5 episode "Point of No Return": "There is always choice. We say there is no choice only to comfort ourselves with a decision we have already made". Let's look at the other way around - the Sith capture a jedi, reprogram his mind and then use him to destroy the Republic and the jedi order, all under the pretense that he is one of the apprentices of the great sith lords. Is this cruel? It can only be so if one assumes a narrow perspective of black-and-white, where the good guys are always right and the bad guys are always wrong, and so you don't have to look at the annoying inconvenience of actually subjecting the choices of both sides to moral and ethical standards. Now, I know that Star Wars is *very* black-and-white to say the least, but it's not like that in the real world. I don't mind that this was done - it makes Star Wars richer that they dare let the masters pull a dirty little secret, but if it quacks like a duck... It's so much that the masters decided to do it, it's that they try to suggest that they are not responsible for it with comments of how it was necessary and how it was the only choice... No, it wasn't, and they're not fit to be masters if they won't accept the responsibility of their choice! The fact alone that Malak is hellbent on getting rid of Bastila tells us that the Republic is still alive and kicking - if the Republic was doomed, then Malak really wouldn't see her as a potential threat. The problem with "crimes against humanity" is who gets to decide that they are crimes? I knew I shouldn't have mentioned Saddam Hussein (at least *I* didn't bring Bin Laden into this...). What you're suggesting is that if had a method of forcing Saddam Hussein into revealing things about his own people and even using him as a soldier against them, then that is quite alright to do. But who gets to make that choice and on what moral basis? Taking away the rights of the individual is one of the worst things you can do to someone, and most people would rather kill than have it done to them. But not only did they do it to Revan, they also wouldn't entrust him with the truth even *after* he had saved Bastila, helped find the first starmap, etc. Even if you play him as strict LS (which I did the first time), they still won't trust him with the truth. Instead Revan discovers the truth as he travels the galaxy. Now tell me, which is the better time for Revan to discover this - at the enclave where the masters are still present to explain and defend their choice or when Revan is standing right face to face with Malak? I'd say the latter is far more dangerous given the situation. They let Revan go knowing that his past might resurface (since that is what he is using to find the starmaps) and they still won't tell him the truth? If discovered during the quest - as it was - the danger grows much greater that Revan will slip back to the DS of out pure defiance and revenge against their manipulation. So it's not just morally questionable for the masters to do - it's also strategically stupid. She joined as a 4th level jedi sentinel... Even the masters say that she is young and inexperienced. There are always alternatives. And it would have been a more compelling argument for the masters to claim there was no other choice if they didn't themselves just sent Revan and Bastila off and then promptly returned to sitting around on Dantooine waiting for Malak to destroy them...

Yes, agreed. I was thinking of it when I wrote my own story plot. Basically you would still have a core group of say four or five companions, but at every new planet you travel to, you meet one or two characters who will also join because you share interests on the planet, but only there, and who leave the group when you leave the planet. For example, I had the idea of letting the party run into Mission and Zaalbar (assuming Revan is LS) on Myrkr, where Czerka has a secret base with lots of wookiee slaves. But some wookiees have rebelled and fled to the forests, and now you must choose to help either Mission and Zaalbar (LS) or else side with Czerka (DS). If you do the former, Mission and Zaalbar join the group, but if you leave the planet or finish the quest, they both leave the group again, because their quest to free the wookiees on Myrkr still remains. Had a similar idea for Jolee (again, assuming Revan is LS) on Sleheyron...

Being forced into being a puppet soldier is a more cruel than downright execution. If that is why the masters did it, then they are truly inhuman and their claims of morality and ethics is just hypocrisy of the worst form. Precisely - you don't just return the favor. And by hiding the truth from Revan, they pretty much admitted that they didn't believe in rehabilitation. If they don't, then they should just condemn him and have him executed. That would be more merciful and ethical. I'm not certain she was the leader of that strike team - I always thought she was just part of it. I could be wrong, though. Either way, I don't think that's the reason they sent her along. As she says herself, they didn't have any other choice - Bastila had already formed the bond with Revan, and that was their one way to to find the StarForge. If they were going to use it to their advantage, then they would have to keep the two together. And they didn't send any masters along because they would have been sensed to easily by the Sith.

You can generally assume that if you talk to Kreia about it and she doesn't offer to upgrade the crystal, then it's already working as well as you can get it to work at the moment.

I don't know if you can generalize it that much... Surely you should be able to finish the game no matter which combination of classes you chose. Still, you may be right that the tactics you would have to embrace should have varied more depending on your choice. For example, while the guardian/weaponmaster would need to jump in there and hack things up, that should perhaps have been impossible for a consular/jedimaster, who would have been torn to pieces and instead should have had to plan his attack with careful use of extensive force powers.

Discovered, yes. But there is little doubt that whatever created him, it was tied to the Exile (the masters pretty much say so indirectly, and that's just because they don't know Nihilus) and it happened on Malachor V at the end of the Mandalorian Wars.