Messages

This has made me very happy :D Redspan was my first ever realm in BM all those many years ago. I think I might have to re-kindle my religious views.

This brings back memories of my time in RedSpan :) That was a great RP realm...I did not know I could love a goat so much :D

This is where we should go for the brawn method and try and cut each other up with sharp swords and pointy things. That is a much more fun, and Noble way :P

What Tybalt supporters?

You mean that green knight you tried to appoint as judge and that old grumpy tarajist? The amount of effort I had to do to kick you out was even less then to kick out amaury, which says a lot about tybalt...

Well considering you only had 8 out of 21 nobles protesting, that means there was at least 13 that wasn't.

Tybalt was constantly insulted during the invasion of Pian but I didn't see him demanding satisfaction. Seriously, what a double standard.

There is a slight difference here. You never called Tybalt a coward directly, and any insults/satisfaction was dealt with on the Battlefield. Jeffery tried to insult Tybalt, but he lost his region to Luria Nova. No need for any duels as it could all be dealt with on the battlefield.

If Fulco had launched an armed rebellion instead of a protest campaign, then there would be no need to duel, as any supporters of Tybalt could have joined in and any supporters of Fulco could have joined in. In the protest, only Fulco's supporters could help him out. Any of Tybalts supporters could just sit and watch the protest without being able to do anything.

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.

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.

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)

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?

There is this also.

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

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.

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.

Is this serious? He lied SO much during the entire decline of PeL fiasco. He lied to his realm, he lied to other realms and rulers.

That's just the only case I know of.

Really? What was the lie to the other rulers? He didnt say...Its all right Koli, I like you and are not going to attack you.....*backs turned* wham!"

There was justifications for the war, as has been said many numerous times before hand, and I shall not repeat now.

Fulco took the smart method of protesting him out of office. Its guaranteed to work with enough support, and less risk. Shoot, protesting is half of the reason that Alanna won the civil war a while back.

Indeed, but not a very honourable one. The one being protested cannot even fight back. For example. Realm A has 50 nobles. 15 of them protest, the Ruler is thrown out. 35 do not (supporters of the ruler) They can do nothing to help the ruler. Where as in a proper battle then support is required. This way only a small groups of nobles need to be willing to protest. Not the whole realm. And there is nothing the victims (ruler/supporters) can do about it. Plus you look at it in a SMA, where in the history of a monarchy did you ever see a King get protested out of office, with out an armed conflict of some sort? I cant think of one. especially in the time frame that we are playing in.

Did you really not notice that Fulco was far from the only one protesting you?

It's not like Alanna is some kind of lackey of Fulco's. Yeah, maybe some of the people who protested did so because Fulco asked them to, but I very much doubt he could have swung enough to get you out of office all by himself.

Indeed I did, but look at the numbers who protested. They were very few, they just protested often.

If you think that this is purely Tybalt vs Fulco, you're deluding yourself.

Well as Fulco was the main instigator of the who thing, and the fact that you didn't even give Tybalt a chance to fight back (who can fight back against a protest? Any supporters on my side could do nada). The duel is the only way to fight back. Which Fulco is refusing as he only does things in a cowardly way, where there is no chance of loosing. There has been a lot of bad blood between Tybalt and Fulco, this is the catalyst in their relationship. It was Fulco that announced to the realm to start protesting to get Tybalt out fo office, and was his main adversary the entire time he was in power.

You may wish to be included in all this but Tybalt doesnt care about the others. He is hell bent on revenge and will focus all his efforts at discrediting Fulco as much as he can.