Regarding corruption: check out Urban Shadows (here and on google+). They've done some nice things with it.

Concept-wise: you could have the PCs be renegades from the Jedi order. Give them some reason to think its been corrupted from the top town, that there's some major badness coming and they feel compelled to do something about it. Start the game with questions about the who what where when why. Heck, maybe bake it into the character sheet.

Alternately: the could be padawans cut off from the order and their mentors. Perhaps, even, they're undercover infiltrating a sith cult or something like that, smelling where they might need to embrace the dark side to fit in.

Amen, brother. PREACH!

Any ranger move is legit, core or advanced (though she can't take the level 6-10 ones until she qualifies).

If you haven't already, give this hack (and if you have time, the whole thread) a read. It's going a similar direction.

http://www.story-games.com/forums/discussion/17665/apocalypse-world-a-more-descriptivevisceral-approach-to-harm/p1

I dislike Fates.  I realize I am in the minority.

My initial thoughts were very positive.  I still find them very evocative, and I really like the elegance of "cross one off for every harm you suffer; the top one that's uncrossed is currently true." 

I very much like the lists used for NPCs, Groups, and Monsters.  I could quibble about the wording and the ranking a little, but I think they're a great way to sum up the combination of physical harm and morale.  The problem is, none of the choices on those lists are fates.  They are descriptions of the current state.  Status, maybe.   

As for the PC Fate, I feel that it fails to live up to a promise, or at least its potential. When I first saw the Fates list and the fact that you crossed options off, I was really excited.  I thought to myself "oh, cool, if you ever take harm, then you'll never live to be 100!"  I assumed that crossing off Fates meant that those fates were closed to you, forever.  And that's cool and tragic and hardcore.

But that's not how it works.  The Fates are, when it comes down to it, hit points.  This fine Summer morning, I wake up and I will live to be 100.  I don my helm and armor, heft my shield and sword, and go into battle.  I suffer 3 harm, indicating that I will not live to be 100, nor will I live to advanced old age.  I don't even have more to do before I die.  But I will yet survive this.  So that's cool.

Then some time passes. Let's be generous and say it's a season or so.  The first three heal themselves.  So by the end of Autumn, maybe, I will live to be 100 again. 

What?

If they come back with time and/or medical care, then those fates weren't lost to me.  I'd argue that they aren't even fates at all.  And while they are evocative, they don't actually help me, the player or MC, determine right now what is going on in the fiction.  Not the way the NPC, Group, and Monster lists do.

Vincent mentioned in another post that disease will also eat away at Fates, and that's cool.  Maybe it will address some of my concerns.  But right now, as written, the rows of PC Fates seem to be no more than hit points with labels.

So, what would I suggest instead?  Some or all of the following, perhaps?

1) Rename the current lists of NPCs, Groups, and Monsters to something else.  State, Status, Condition, Plight, Health, whatever.

2) Give PCs a similar track.  For example:
I…
 - am strong, sure, and whole
 - bear the marks of violence or duress
 - struggle to fight on
 - seek only to survive this
 - can threaten no one
 - lay on my deathbed

3) I'd give PCs a set of actual Fates, things they are owed by the fiction.  Maybe the list is generic to all playbooks, maybe playbook-specific.  Maybe some of each.  Examples:
 - I will live to a ripe old age
 - I will see my children happy and wed
 - I will see the Dragon rise
 - I will reclaim what is mine by birth
 - I will die peacefully in my bed
 - I will die a hero
A player gets a certain number of these, maybe 3-6?   Maybe there's a list, and you pick your fates?

4) You can cross these fates off as plot armor, much like taking a debility in AW.  Like, you can cross of "I will live to a ripe old age" to negate an instance of harm.  You don't suffer the harm (or maybe you don't die?) but you are no longer going to live to a ripe old age. 

Ideally, there'd be other things to spend these fates on than just avoiding harm.  Like, you can burn one to turn a roll into a 12+? 

When or if you retire your character to safety, his Fates apply.  If he will live to see his children happy and wed, then the children are off limits for the GM as well as the retired PC.  At least until they are married and the retired PC sees them happy, that is.

If you like your answers all official-like, see page 167, 2nd paragraph:  "Note that “deal damage” is a move, but other moves may include damage as well. When an ogre flings you against a wall you take damage as surely as if he had smashed you with his fists."

Expanding on that: lots of moves subsume other moves.  And you'll often find yourself making a soft move as an immediate follow-up to a hard move.  It's far from clear cut. 

Like, I agree you shouldn't be like "the troll grabs you, smashes you against the wall--take 1d10 damage--then knocks your sword away from and then flings you across the room. What do you do?"  But if you choose to make the move "deal damage" and the troll's damage is forceful (and it probably is), the fictional effects of forceful is part of you dealing damage.  Likewise, if you use a monster's move (like the troll's hurl someone or something) and it would naturally result in damage, then damage is dealth.  (Forceful damage, in this case).

So: "You got a 4? Mark XP, Phinnigan. As you leap towards the troll, he spins and swats you out of the air with a backhand. The force knocks you clear across the room. Take 1d10 damage!  Ooh... 9?  Yeah, the wind got knocked clean out of you!  Ovid, you see Phin go flying and collapse in a heap and the troll turns and lumbers towards him.  What do you do?"

You could argue that I'm separating them, that I'm turning their move back on them, that I'm dealing damage, and/or that I'm using a monster/dungeon/location move.  Who cares which one I made?  I made my one hard move, beginning and ending it with the fiction.  Then, to reflect the fictional fact that Phin got the wind knocked out of him, I shift focus to Ovid via a soft move, the troll lumbering toward a dazed Phin. You could argue that's me showing signs of an approaching threat or offering an opportunity to Ovid or even putting someone in a spot. But again, who really cares which one it is?

I don't remember where, but I remember someone saying that the list of moves are only there to give you ideas for cool things to say when it's your turn to say something.  Lots of folks report ignoring the moves until they're stumped, otherwise just following the fiction. 

So, yeah, make your move. But as long as it begins and ends with the fiction, don't stress out over which move you're making.

How are finding the harm rules work? I'm very interested in whether the various injuries types are compelling enough.

Also, how does enemy armor or shields play out, or other force disparities? As written, I don't see anything that would account for that. I seem to be just as likely to "take out" a heavily armored foe with a stick as I am to take out a nekked dude with a las cannon.