[Discuss] Duels Adventurer vs. Noble

[Christopher Subich]

Jonathon Taylor wrote:
> We shouldn't encourage it so much that dueling adventurers is the norm, 
> but we shouldn't take away the fun for having a character who is 
> completely batty or has a reason to want to kill all adventurers.

This is nonsensical.  Consider:
"But we shouldn't take away the fun for having a character who is an 
invisible pink unicorn."

Roleplaying is playing a role /in context/.  The context here is that of 
a noble in a quasi-medieval society.  Sometimes, the context gets 
changed for gameplay-fun reasons, but the one thing that is necessary to 
the setting is the classic nobles' focus on honour, nobility, and station.

We don't do as good of a job as we can with it, sure.  That's part of 
the thinking behind the allegiance system changes.  But that's no excuse 
to deliberately encourage breaking the honour rules.  A medieval noble 
/would not/ duel a commoner; indeed historical duelling was specifically 
prohibited of commoners.  Since preventing this is such a simple game 
mechanic change, there is no reason not to.


-- 
Unsubscribing and other list options:
http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss