bromdenlong
SOC-12
This is all good stuff, but I thought that traditionally the challenged party got to pick the weapons. It would save the bother of having to invoke the authorities to get a change in weaponry.
Coda Duello (long)
- Thread starter gardclan
- Start date
bromdenlong
SOC-12
This minimizes the risk of being bullied into a duel by pro. Just don't hit him or call him a liar, and he can't call you out. </font>[/QUOTE]This effectively lets any challenged person get out of a duel with honor - simply say, "Sir/Madam, you are mistaken." rather than "You are lying." I like this, because then only two willing parties will enter a duel. This does make it hard for an injured party to get any redress or apology by challenging the injurer - the injurer has an easy out.
Nah... that sort of thing kinda needs to be defined ahead of time if anybody expects the players to adhere to it.
And I quite concur... the roleplay was very good.
I can't recall ever having been in a campaign where dueling was a factor where it was also well defined... Which was one of the reasons I posted originally... to get some reactions to what I was trying to put together.
The more I dig into this, and the more its discussed here... the more complex the issue becomes. It seems that there is a reason that 18th century dueling codes were as complex as they were!
I'm also beginning to think that the only way to define a dueling code properly is in the context of the culture that spawned it. "Polite Society" today is nothing of the sort that it was when duels were common. Its one of those things that you kinda have to position halfway between "playability" and "plausability".
You guys have given me a good bit to think on.
I've got the pistol side of that covered under the Kerensikov protocol (above)... there's only one pistol allowed... a 10mm masterwork revolver, six shot cylinder, double action, and equipped with a remote safety system.
Blades are different. For that, the poor saps are pretty much on their own. I had considered allowing only identical blades for the duel (rapier, cutlass or katana) as selected by whomever got to select the protocol. I may still go that way, as allowing any old blade into a duel seems a bit disorganized.
Jame,
A skilled swordsdman with a longsword against a Ganger with a longsword might be even more uneven... the Ganger knows how to use a knife (T20-wise, might have Weapon Focus (Blade), Weapon Spec (Blade) and Improved Critical (Blade); CTwise might have Blade-5 and no Cutlass skill, possibly even with a negative St modifier if forced to use sword or cutlass).
But duelling isn't really about fairness (the better swordsman/marksman will likely win, no matter the justice of the case), it's about legitimising attempted murder and reducing the incidence of blood feuds. It's a way of letting rakehells blow off steam in a manner which won't decimate the ranks of youth. Sometimes it gets too bound up in a culture, though.
For an interesting treatment of the duel as legal instrument (non-SF) try Colours in the Steel by K.J. Parker (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...103-2018372-8992637?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 )
A skilled swordsdman with a longsword against a Ganger with a longsword might be even more uneven... the Ganger knows how to use a knife (T20-wise, might have Weapon Focus (Blade), Weapon Spec (Blade) and Improved Critical (Blade); CTwise might have Blade-5 and no Cutlass skill, possibly even with a negative St modifier if forced to use sword or cutlass).
But duelling isn't really about fairness (the better swordsman/marksman will likely win, no matter the justice of the case), it's about legitimising attempted murder and reducing the incidence of blood feuds. It's a way of letting rakehells blow off steam in a manner which won't decimate the ranks of youth. Sometimes it gets too bound up in a culture, though.
For an interesting treatment of the duel as legal instrument (non-SF) try Colours in the Steel by K.J. Parker (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...103-2018372-8992637?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 )
Giving the challenged party choice of weapons is deliberately one sided. I remind you of Jim Bowie's duel in a darkened room with knives, and that Samuel Clemens accepted a challenge and chose shotguns in a locked room.
In the 19th century, identical weapons were provided by the challenged party, with first choice going to the challenger, after the weapons were inspected by the seconds.
(They sometimes missed things. A museum curator recently found the secret "hair-trigger" on the pistols provided by Alexander Hamilton for his duel with Aaron Burr.)
In the 19th century, identical weapons were provided by the challenged party, with first choice going to the challenger, after the weapons were inspected by the seconds.
(They sometimes missed things. A museum curator recently found the secret "hair-trigger" on the pistols provided by Alexander Hamilton for his duel with Aaron Burr.)
Liam Devlin
SOC-14 5K
Nice show. Wish it had been a longer one, or part of a series!
Surely the only people allowed to duel are nobles and gentlement (i.e. CT/MT A+). To allow commoners the right to duel would i) be vulgar and ii) would permit those brought up from lesser backgrounds to abuse the system for personal revenge. Cant the riff raff shooting each other every payday can we?
christopher.boote
SOC-12
Actually, Sam Clemens / Mark Twain WROTE about a duel
from A Tramp Abroad
A baker's apprentice might be a bit difficult to wield properly... too much flailing of the arms. 
Seriously though. Here's what I was after with the coda:
1. A codified (yet simple if possible) set of rules for dueling which can serve the courts system in the same way that mercenaries serve in stead of the military. This means that IMTU anyone can challenge anybody if their charge is severe enough.
2. Checks and balances to prevent the dueling from getting out of hand, but not so severe that nobody tries it. This also means that there must be a way out for the accused.
3. Provision for dueling with a small selection of weapons. (A few types of swords, and one specific regulation pistol.)
4. A way for the government to regulate the practice, again to prevent it from getting out of hand.
This is more of a setting consistency thing than anything else. There are a few things that will by necessity change from history. For example: severity of offense was historically increased in magnitude for offenses toward a lady. Given that IMTU there is parity of rights between the genders this sort of thing makes no sense (since women can challenge and duel).
Somehow I figured this was the right place to get feedback!
Thanks for the help.
Seriously though. Here's what I was after with the coda:
1. A codified (yet simple if possible) set of rules for dueling which can serve the courts system in the same way that mercenaries serve in stead of the military. This means that IMTU anyone can challenge anybody if their charge is severe enough.
2. Checks and balances to prevent the dueling from getting out of hand, but not so severe that nobody tries it. This also means that there must be a way out for the accused.
3. Provision for dueling with a small selection of weapons. (A few types of swords, and one specific regulation pistol.)
4. A way for the government to regulate the practice, again to prevent it from getting out of hand.
This is more of a setting consistency thing than anything else. There are a few things that will by necessity change from history. For example: severity of offense was historically increased in magnitude for offenses toward a lady. Given that IMTU there is parity of rights between the genders this sort of thing makes no sense (since women can challenge and duel).
Somehow I figured this was the right place to get feedback!
Thanks for the help.
What are the legal issues around dueling on an Imperial Naval vessel? One would think the Navy would frown on this practise. Since the noble classes see the navy as their stepping stone to greater status, ships are bound to be littered with the the weasly buggers.
Why work harder to become XO, when you just set up the current one, challenge and kill him in a duel.
Liam Devlin
SOC-14 5K
What are the legal issues around dueling on an Imperial Naval vessel? One would think the Navy would frown on this practise. Since the noble classes see the navy as their stepping stone to greater status, ships are bound to be littered with the the weasly buggers.
Why work harder to become XO, when you just set up the current one, challenge and kill him in a duel. </font>[/QUOTE]++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
IMTU, (borrowing heavily from UK Terran wet Navy 18th century + earlier rules), such things were comported off the ship, for much the same reasons as stated above.
To be 100% honest, this is the second duel I have seen in play, between two Players in Traveller. AdnD, well, those could fill a book!
Your point is well taken.
Given the prevalence of "the weasels" in the system, My opinion is the Imperium would severely punish those engaging in such personal matters abaord ship. Service in the Imperial navy is *supposed* to promote tolerance, etc etal.
IF one MUST duel/ or is compelled, etc by insult/ injury, and BOTH members are in Uniform, it has to be done off ship/ installation/ etc.
Unit cohesion thus suffers, if done in front of the troops/crew...
The French dueling code addressed this very matter. In duels between servicemen, the Maitre d'Armes was requied to be present to officiate the duel, and was required to be armed and to parry illegal blows. I'm still a bit unclear as to what constituted a "legal blow" however. But it does appear as though it was permitted.
I'd imagine that in a dueling culture there must be some regulation in place to govern duels between servicemen... wether to move the duel off the ship as Liam suggests, or to bring in an official of at least equal rank to the superior officer involved to officiate. I would also think that a junior officer (or noncom) whom succeeded in killing a superior should NEVER be able to remain in the ship's company or assume the promotion.
Perhaps dueling might be allowed OUTSIDE a given chain of command, but not within one?
I'd imagine that in a dueling culture there must be some regulation in place to govern duels between servicemen... wether to move the duel off the ship as Liam suggests, or to bring in an official of at least equal rank to the superior officer involved to officiate. I would also think that a junior officer (or noncom) whom succeeded in killing a superior should NEVER be able to remain in the ship's company or assume the promotion.
Perhaps dueling might be allowed OUTSIDE a given chain of command, but not within one?
Similar threads
