[Discuss] Duels Adventurer vs. Noble

[Rob Croson]

On 5 Mar 2007 at 20:52, Lyman Stone wrote:

> >
> > "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.
> 
> No, but he/she might kill a commoner. I would agree that there are  
> virtually no circumstances under which there would be a formal  
> duel... but is the dueling option so confined that it can only  
> represent a formal duel?

Yes.

> Why not just a means to express, say, an  
> RPed bar fight?

The duelling system cannot be used to simulate such an eventuality. 
The aplicability and use of the duelling system has been debating at 
length. Check the archives. The duelling system in battlemaster has a 
specific and well-defined purpose: To resolve points of honor between 
nobles in a well-defined and honorable manner. It is not used to 
simulate bar fights, friendly sparring matches between nobles, or 
impromptu games of tiddly-winks. Such misuses of the deulling sytem 
are what led to the removal of the First Blood option.

> Are you telling me nobles never got into bar fights  
> in which commoners were involved?

That is not the issue. A noble wouldn't get involved in a on-on-one 
bar fight with commoners. He would have attendant guards to ensure 
that the commoners were dealt with appropriately.


Playing a commoner is NOT the same game as playing a noble. I would 
put forth that quite a few people just don't get what it means to 
play a commoner. Unfortunately, we as nobles do not have to tools to 
treat them as we should. I understand the limitations of the game 
mechanics that force this upon us. However, the nobles need to do 
better at enforcing the separation between nobles and commoners, and 
ensuring the proper treatment of each.

--
Rob
On a mining ship, three million years into deep space,
can someone explain to me where the smeg I got this traffic cone?
-- Lister, Red Dwarf




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