BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Development => Topic started by: Penchant on March 18, 2012, 05:51:11 PM
-
Well this is a feature request but I know Tom wants to have discussions to take place here and I don't quite have everything required for the format so I think to help duels be done accepted more when challenged and for being realistic too when someone challenges you to a duel if you don't accept duel you should lose some honor not just in the roleplaying but for the actual stat too. One thing that would need to be discussed is for which stat since I know that the stats are being redone and I am not sure if the honor stat is being kept.
-
No. Aside from the fact that Honour appears to be getting a makeover, virtually the only people who go round challenging are those who've spent ages in the Academy wanting duels with those who haven't. It's bad enough without them being able to grief people by forcing them to lose Honour over it, or risk death.
-
Hmm, maybe have it give the winner honor I was thinking since thats what the duel should be over so who ever wins gains honor from it too? And if you don't want a master swordsman to challenge you to a duel then don't piss them off, it works the same for everything else. If you dont want a realm way bigger than you to declare war dont give them reason to.
-
eh... isn't that just giving incentive for someone to go around initiating duels for no reason.. and hoping some sucker accepts?
-
Well on one side people with high sword skill deserve to get a good benefit, on the same time that is an issue of it being exploited and people doing duels for no reason. Perhaps have it where the person being challenged can decide to change a duel to only to first blood when asked for a death duel.
-
benefit? you have higher skill, you have higher chance of winning.. what more is needed?
-
My point of benefit is that they should actually have times where they get to duel people that arent always master swordsman because everyone else is too chicken and has nothing to lose from not accepting. So to encourage duels to be accepted, honor is gave to the winner of the duel and if you dont accept a duel then you lose honor because thats what duels are supposed to be about (you insult me so I want a duel until first blood for example). To also encourage duels, death duels can be changed to first blood duels. To stop people from exploiting it perhaps have a max amount of honor that can be gained or a timer of once a month or some other number that they actually get honor from duels.
-
I'm positive that this will be rejected. Dueling should be treated as a very serious affair--someone has slighted your characters' honor, and your character demands satisfaction. It should be an RP event, not something that you can use to win to command more cavalry or whatever.
-
The issue I hear with dueling is though with the roleplaying is someone has a great reason for a duel but the other person is worried they will die and get no benefit so they dont accept. No one treats the person who didnt accept as a coward and everything keeps going the way it was before. This is what I have heard from many. So to solve the issue if you give reasons why someone should actually accept a duel then they will happen instead of nobles getting to insult and do other things worthy of a duel but the player is too afraid of losing their character. I am not trying to make a new way to "get more calvary" but to make duels happen more often when they should instead of cowards who get no punishment for the way they act.
-
If the complaint and duel is just, it's up to his fellow Nobles to object to rejecting it. He should lose standing in the Realm, but that is up to the players to do. I don't think we can construct a system where the game can tell which duels have a justified reason behind them and which ones make no sense and/or can be rejected for a good reason ('afraid to lose character' doesn't have to be the only reason for Nobles reject duels after all). Unless you have some sort of Vulgarity System, but even that might be difficult without players having the whole story behind it.
First Blood Duels were removed because they were used for the wrong reasons. They have been replaced by Training Matches (on Testing for now). If there is a good reason to duel but it's not worth your life, you can duel till surrender.
-
I don't like any of these ideas myself. Let's leave duels the way they are now. Any kind of mechanical assignment of bonuses/penalties will only make things awkward.
-
Ok unless anyone has a different idea related to this that people might like, feel free to lock it since it seems most aren't a fan of changing the duel setup.
-
Thank you for your contribution. Let's simply move on to other discussions. :)
-
What about keeping a record of the duels rejected (or rather the nobles who challenged the noble, and the noble rejected them, for the amount of challenges is irrelevant)? Not sure if it would actually be positive for the game somehow...
Amount of duels won it is something many people would rather not be made public.
-
Hmm, that actually seems like a good idea because if they reject a lot of duels they do start seem like quite a coward, where if you have only declined once or twice even if you were being a coward you aren't causing much anger from other people. Also if it said who they rejected it would then it prevent if its just some one challenging the person just to make them look like a coward since it would be one person they rejected often not 10 different people.
-
If worth discussing, probably worth a new thread. :)
-
I think we should discuss this after Tom is done with the new Honour and Prestige system. Feels pretty meaningless to discuss this any further at this point.
-
I would support a new feature request (in a new thread) that adds a listing of duels offered, rejected/ignored, won, and lost, to the family history.
-
This has been rejected at least 20 times before. Way too easy to game the system. Want to have someone lose a lot of honour? Repeatedly challenge him with a few skilled swordfighters.
No way.
-
The only case I'd consider honor cost being justified is if someone accepts a duel challenge, but then moves away, because 1) it's cowardly and 2) he accepted the challenge himself, it was not imposed upon him by the game or another.
Otherwise, as for honor loss for not accepting, that just opens the door for a lot of griefing.
-
This is a problem I have seen myself. On Dwilight, even though it is SMA, people are not treating duels with the seriousness as they should do. Especially legitimate duels (ie, ones with valid reasons/RP)
Im sure that back in the middle ages, someone who was called a Coward, was looked down upon by his fellows and was not trusted by his men. Especially as we are playing a game called "battle"master, we need to encourage people to play like nobles in the middle ages.
The way I see it is that people are afraid of losing their positions/chars/titles especially with a duel to the death. Im not sure how common death happens, but the last two duels my char has been in have resulted in tow serious wounds for the other guys.
I think that it is a bit gamey by those who refuse duels due to that reason. Sometimes, it is the only way to get that entrenched Duke out of his city. Yet, if he keeps refusing to duel (again their has to be good reasons/RP) then he is gaming the system, as he will not affect him in respect to the game. Players have short/selective memories sometimes, and will not remember every duel that he refused.
I know people have mentioned and will mention about the balance between someone abusing it by challenging and those who abuse it by refusing, and that is a problem.
How about having a referral option? A bit like the vulgarity option.
I shall explain. Noble A has just lost his throne because Duke B has organised the rebellion. Noble A wants revenge, so challenges Duke B to a duel to the Death. Throw in a lot of heated discussion that every realm has when these things happen. Lets say Noble A has a legitimate reason for duelling. He writes out the reasons in the box provided as normal. The offer is sent.
If Duke B accepts: then there is a duel, and an outcome.
If Duke B refuses: then Noble A can refer it to his peers to be judged. They will be randomly selected by the game, and asked to decide whether the challenge is valid or not. If they say yes it is a valid challenge, the Duke B loses honour/prestige. If they say no, it was not valid (spam etc) then Noble A will lose honour/prestige.
This will hopefully stop spamming (and losing stats due to refusing) but it would also stop the defender from gaming the system, by not having any penalty for refusing a valid challenge.
-
This is a problem I have seen myself. On Dwilight, even though it is SMA, people are not treating duels with the seriousness as they should do. Especially legitimate duels (ie, ones with valid reasons/RP)
You mean that you want people to duel you, and they won't.
There will be no cost to a refused duel.
You lost your throne, and now you want to kill the person you feel is responsible because you know you have a higher swordskill than him. It doesn't work that way. You don't get to bleed people for honour or kill them just because you spent ages training at the academy.
-
This is my absolute final word on this topic, please link any further requests to this answer:
There will NEVER be a game-mechanics penalty for refusing duel challenges.
Refusing a legitimate challenge can and should have social consequences, those are entirely left to the players to decide and play out.
-
You mean that you want people to duel you, and they won't.
There will be no cost to a refused duel.
You lost your throne, and now you want to kill the person you feel is responsible because you know you have a higher swordskill than him. It doesn't work that way. .
Have you read this topic? I am not the only one that has come across this? If we are playing on a SMA atmosphere then lets play as SMA. Do you really think back in the middle ages you could just refuse a duel to the death with a real, valid reason?
You don't get to bleed people for honour or kill them just because you spent ages training at the academy
Then why do we even have the academy? I just used my experiences as an example. I am trying to stop people gaming the system that are entrenched into powerful positions with no way of getting them out. You can remove a ruler quite easily, but not that of a Duke, or even a lord. Allowing it the way I put forward, allow the players to able to contribute to the game. If they think it is a valid reason, let them have that say.
People are too scared to lose their Chars, and ignore real RP reasons. That is gamey. Everyone moans about people spamming, but we never moan about those who play the system to their advantage such as in this case. A noble in the middle ages would never have let someone else call them a coward. They would have done something about it. We can do that, called Duels, but those who want to keep their cushy positions will always refuse a duel for fear of losing it. Not very noble.
-
Do you really think back in the middle ages you could just refuse a duel to the death with a real, valid reason?
Wikipedia has a list of "famous duels":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_duels
Among those, I count only three that were in the middle ages. Duelling was really mostly an 18th century thing.
I am certain there was duelling among the young nobility looking to make a name for themselves, but Dukes were never expected to accept duels.
-
Maybe because they are not recorded?
However, search for the history fo Duels:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duel)
-
There is this also.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_duel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_duel)
-
Maybe because they are not recorded?
However, search for the history fo Duels:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duel)
I'm not denying that there were duels in the lower nobility, for example (from wikipedia):
According to Ariel Roth, during the reign of Henry IV, over 4,000 French aristocrats were killed in duels "in an eighteen-year period" whilst a twenty-year period of Louis XIII's reign saw some eight thousand pardons for "murders associated with duels".
However, if Dukes were killed in such duels, it would certainly have been recorded. Not necessarily in that list, but somewhere.
As for trial by combat, they are a completely different phenomenon. They are a judicial means to establish guilt, and not a personal mean to defend your honour. In BM, the best equivalent would be for the Judge of the realm to require a duel to settle a dispute, and to threaten with a ban or fine anyone who refuses such duels. No change in mechanic is required for that; depending on the case, a change in judge may be in order. ;D
-
Taken from the Duels page.
The duel was based on a code of honour. Duels were fought not so much to kill the opponent as to gain "satisfaction", that is, to restore one's honour by demonstrating a willingness to risk one's life for it, and as such the tradition of duelling was reserved for the male members of nobility,
This is what most players don't do (except Heros in battle), Is to risk their life. Especially when their honour has been insulted. Yet, if you read the articles, the nobles did fight to restore their honour. Most likely they did not die from the direct duel, possibly form infection, but not from the duel itself. Only in the 18th century and the availability of firearms do we get serious deaths from duelling.
Which Is why there need to be some way to enforce Duels especially on SMA worlds. Having it social and RP is fine, but then there needs to be some sort of record of what duels were refused and why. A history of refusing to participate in a duel (where there are valid reasons) should be known to all. If there was a duel between King Richard and Prince John in the middle ages, then the entire country would know about it. What ever happened would become public knowledge as soon as the news could travel.
If Prince John had refused to duel his brother (as John had tried to take the throne) the Prince John would lose respect of his fellow nobles and that of the peasants.
This is just a made up example, but it has relevance to battlemaster. Do you think John could have gone about his daily business if he had of refused?
-
Crusader, Tom has stated flat-out that there will be no such game-mechanic consequences, no matter what you say.
If you don't like it, you're free to play on non-SMA islands.
-
Which Is why there need to be some way to enforce Duels especially on SMA worlds. Having it social and RP is fine, but then there needs to be some sort of record of what duels were refused and why. A history of refusing to participate in a duel (where there are valid reasons) should be known to all. If there was a duel between King Richard and Prince John in the middle ages, then the entire country would know about it. What ever happened would become public knowledge as soon as the news could travel.
First, I don't think any mechanic such as this would be added, so this is mostly a philosophical discussion.
Second, any such system would also need to account for the stupid duel challenges as well. The idiots who challenge someone to a duel to the death for insignificant reasons. Like... "How dare you not buy my food for 32/100, and then buy *his* food for 33/100? Defend your financial ineptitude with your life, dog!"
Which is a major reason why the mechanics you are requesting won't be added. Who gets to decide if the reason is valid or not? The challenger? The challenged? The challenger's buddies? You keep saying you want to punish people for refusing duels that have "valid reasons/RP". But who decides? Obviously the person you are challenging doesn't think you have "valid reasons/RP". A vulgarity-like system wouldn't work. How would it be reported? *What* would you report, and how would you convey all the background behind it? You'd end up with the challenger saying he had a good reason, and if the challenged gets to respond as well, they would say the challenger's reason is bad.
Also:
I am trying to stop people gaming the system that are entrenched into powerful positions with no way of getting them out.
Removing characters from positions is not the intention or purpose of the dueling system. Using it for that purpose could even be considered an abuse of the system.
-
kings won't mind duelling..
as long as they can hire npc duellers as champions with 100% sword fighting. (dukes 90% XD)
-
Anaris,
We are expected to play SMA, it is moderated to ensure that we are. Yet why do we not enforce all areas of it? My last post did not say anything about losing honour/prestige as Tom has already said that. What I siad was that there should be a way of making sure that the SMA is followed correctly.
People will jump down some ones throat when they do not call them "my lord" Yet they will not enforce a legitimate duel? When there are valid IG reasons?
If people are too scared to accept a Duel to the Death, why not remove the feature? Unless you actually start claiming down on a breach of SMA then people will always flout the rules. What's the point of playing as a noble with a code of honour, that when someone else slights you, you are just going to shrug it off as nothing? Nobles would not do that in the correct circumstances (I.e a valid reason)
-
Anaris,
We are expected to play SMA, it is moderated to ensure that we are. Yet why do we not enforce all areas of it? My last post did not say anything about losing honour/prestige as Tom has already said that. What I siad was that there should be a way of making sure that the SMA is followed correctly.
People will jump down some ones throat when they do not call them "my lord" Yet they will not enforce a legitimate duel? When there are valid IG reasons?
If people are too scared to accept a Duel to the Death, why not remove the feature? Unless you actually start claiming down on a breach of SMA then people will always flout the rules. What's the point of playing as a noble with a code of honour, that when someone else slights you, you are just going to shrug it off as nothing? Nobles would not do that in the correct circumstances (I.e a valid reason)
The game mechanics cannot do anything about this.
If you think someone is breaching SMA, in this or any other way, then use the SMA Report option under Messages. That's what it's there for.
-
A vulgarity-like system wouldn't work. How would it be reported? *What* would you report, and how would you convey all the background behind it? You'd end up with the challenger saying he had a good reason, and if the challenged gets to respond as well, they would say the challenger's reason is bad.
The way I had imagined it that the reason box, that you have to fill in as a challenger, would be sent to the deciders. So the emphasis is upon the challenger to present his case in that box. If the person refuses the challenge, the challenger has the option to choose to allow peers to decide on whether it was right/wrong for the defendant to refuse such challenge.
Lets say that three random nobles form across the continent are chosen. If your example was in the reason box, they could say yes, this is a valid reason, or no, thats a stupid reason.
If it was a well thought out, RP'd reason (Im sure most spammers would not put much time into it), they could say this is a valid reason, the decision is then told to the two participants, with the option to have a duel. If the defendant refuses again, then he is publicly shamed (in line with Toms rule of leave it to the players/social to deal with). Whether this is just in the realm, or continent wide, I dont know.
But it would not result in any loss of honour/prestige but it would provide RP ammo against that person.
-
Honour and Prestige are meaningless, beyond a certain point. No one respects Noble A more than Noble B because the latter has 120 Honour and the former 125. And Prestige has no real in-game effect on how famous or infamous a particular noble is. Respect and fame are decided by what a character does, not what his H/P scores are, and a noble that is known for continually refusing legitimate duels will become known for it, with the commensurate loss of respect from other characters.
-
If people are too scared to accept a Duel to the Death, why not remove the feature?
Duels to the death do happen, which is reason enough to keep the feature.
-
The way I had imagined it that the reason box, that you have to fill in as a challenger, would be sent to the deciders. So the emphasis is upon the challenger to present his case in that box. If the person refuses the challenge, the challenger has the option to choose to allow peers to decide on whether it was right/wrong for the defendant to refuse such challenge.
So, the challenger could lie, make up whatever he wants, misrepresent the entire situation, or do whatever they want. And the challenged noble doesn't get to respond at all with their side. And the results get permanently attached to that character? No thanks.
-
So, the challenger could lie, make up whatever he wants, misrepresent the entire situation, or do whatever they want. And the challenged noble doesn't get to respond at all with their side. And the results get permanently attached to that character? No thanks.
Why not put in a box that say reasons Duel refused?
So you have both sides of the story.
-
Thank you for your inputs, everyone. As Tom has plainly stated, there will be no game mechanics consequences to refusing a duel. Game mechanics vs SMA is not within the scope of this thread.
-
but Dukes were never expected to accept duels.
Also, there were often champions - trained fighters who fought on behalf of their lords.