Dueling and Imperial Nobles

[Midgardsormr]

In my games, dueling is expressly allowed. Since one of the primary functions of the Imperium is to reduce interplanetary conflict, dueling is encouraged as a way of settling conflicts between nobles that might otherwise lead to warfare. Also, it allows games in which PCs can operate at high political levels and still get the chance to get into fights. Players do love their fights.

It is my opinion that the right of accession by assassination, as it was exercised after Strephon's assassination, is an extension of the dueling traditions of the Imperium.

 

[esampson]

. . .It is my opinion that the right of accession by assassination, as it was exercised after Strephon's assassination, is an extension of the dueling traditions of the Imperium.

I was actually just re-reading my MT material concerning the rebellion. The Right of Assassination has nothing at all to do with dueling. Its origins come from the reign of Cleon the Mad. He had been approved by the Moot as Emperor before the Moot realized he was an insane tyrant. The Moot asked Porfiria to kill Cleon and as a reward for her actions elevated her to Empress, establishing the basic precedent.

The Right of Assassination was never really been codified and during the Rebellion there was argument as to whether or not what Dulinor did was legitimate as he did not have prior approval of the Moot (other Emperors in the past did ascend the throne citing the Right of Assassination without prior approval from the Moot but as they typically only lasted a few years before being killed themselves there is argument as to whether they were true legitimate successors or simple usurpers).

However, what is fairly clear from the history is that there absolutely isn't any need for it to be a 'fair fight'. There's no requirement for a warning or to give the Emperor any opportunity to fight back.

That's why it is called 'the Right of Assassination' and not something like 'the Right of Conquest'.

 

[Carlobrand]

Or the possibility of a member of the military feeling slighted by a performer and challenged to a contest of singing...

"I am the very model of a modern Major-General,
I've information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I know the knees of ... Blast it!"

"I believe you lose, milord."

 

[rancke]

It is my opinion that the right of accession by assassination, as it was exercised after Strephon's assassination, is an extension of the dueling traditions of the Imperium.

It is my opinion that by the time of the Classic Era, the Right of Assassination had been confined to the dustbins of history for 500 years. No one had invoked it since the days of the Barracks Emperors and it was thought of as much as Trial by Combat is thought of in our society. The professional paranoiacs of Strephon's protective detail from the Scouts were taken so much by surprise by Dulinor's action that not a single one of them reacted fast enough to get a shot off. What's more, Dulinor was able to rely on them being taken so completely by surprise. This means that Dulinor's action was literally unthinkable -- something that would not have been the case if he had been thought to be able to promote himself to emperor by shooting Strephon. Not to mention that all of Dulinor's preparations for the assassination went completely unnoticed by any and all of the Imperial Intelligence services, something that indicates that no one was looking for suspicious activity on Dulinor's part; if they had, they could scarcely have missed noticing.


Hans

 

[rancke]

The Right of Assassination was never really been codified and during the Rebellion there was argument as to whether or not what Dulinor did was legitimate as he did not have prior approval of the Moot (other Emperors in the past did ascend the throne citing the Right of Assassination without prior approval from the Moot but as they typically only lasted a few years before being killed themselves there is argument as to whether they were true legitimate successors or simple usurpers).

IIRC the only library data entry we know of that mentions the Right of Assassination as valid is one put out by Dulinor's information service. We don't know what the library data of the Classic Era said about it, but my guess is that it was described as a quaint historical phenomenon.


Hans

 

[aramis]

IIRC the only library data entry we know of that mentions the Right of Assassination as valid is one put out by Dulinor's information service. We don't know what the library data of the Classic Era said about it, but my guess is that it was described as a quaint historical phenomenon.


Hans

Better look at Supplement 8: Library Data A-M, page 20-21...

But there was also a cheaper, easier route open to many. The dynastic crisis of 244 had produced a precedent for the assassination of the emperor if he or she overstepped the bounds of legitimate activity. The concept was introduced to legitimize the elimination of Cleon the Mad and never intended for any other purpose. Nevertheless, in the turmoil of the Civil War, assassination was introduced and accepted, at least by those utilizing the technique, as a way of promoting a succession in government.
The line of Emperors during the Civil War came mostly from naval officers, and they are collectively called the Emperors of the Flag. Of these eighteen, seven were assassinated, ten were killed in battle, and one survived- Arbellatra.​

The validity of the 3I continuing past the 1st Civil War hinges upon the Right of Assassination's validity as a continuance of the 3I....

 

[rancke]

Better look at Supplement 8: Library Data A-M, page 20-21...

But there was also a cheaper, easier route open to many. The dynastic crisis of 244 had produced a precedent for the assassination of the emperor if he or she overstepped the bounds of legitimate activity. The concept was introduced to legitimize the elimination of Cleon the Mad and never intended for any other purpose. Nevertheless, in the turmoil of the Civil War, assassination was introduced and accepted, at least by those utilizing the technique, as a way of promoting a succession in government.
The line of Emperors during the Civil War came mostly from naval officers, and they are collectively called the Emperors of the Flag. Of these eighteen, seven were assassinated, ten were killed in battle, and one survived- Arbellatra.​

As I said, 500 year old historical arcana, not current political theory.

The validity of the 3I continuing past the 1st Civil War hinges upon the Right of Assassination's validity as a continuance of the 3I....

It most certainly does not. It rests on the Moot asking Arbellatra to become empress, one of its two constitutional functions.

(Though by the Classic Era it really rests on the Alkhalikoi line being 500 years old. Usurpers tend to become legitimate if their line go through one or two peaceful inheritances.)

EDIT: It occurred to me just now that when Arbellatra refused to take the Irridium Throne and started a search for "the legitimate heir", she was rejecting the legitimacy of all the barracks emperors preceding her, and thus, at the very least by implication, the validity of succession by Right of Assassination and by Right of Conquest (She also seems to have "overlooked" the legitimacy of those barracks emperors that were elected by the Moot :nonono. She may perfectly well have done so explicitly and Dulinor just conveniently overlooked that particular bit of history. It's interesting to speculate just how far back she went for her last legitimate emperor. Clean back to Nicholle? Be that as it may, there are probably people alive in the Classic Era who claim to be the lawful emperor based on descent from relatives of one Moot-confirmed barracks emperor or another.


Hans

 

[arbitrary.remora]

Blame ROM.

I view the prevalent duel culture as an inheritance from the Second Imperium, one of the few legacies that survived the Long Night.

Military Empires with no clear rules of succession would be rife with petty nobles getting all stabby over power and honour. This contributed to ROM's inevitable unraveling as it was more important to sword-fight the jerk on the planet next door than plan sensible economic policy (or so the Vilani scribes did record).

I allow dueling in my games and use a fairly Aslan structure to the disputes: the Issue being contended, time, place, seconds, ref, weapon, etc.

IMTU, any Imperial noble would be allowed to kill out of hand a non-Imperial challenger. Tough, but hey, running an Empire is hard work.

-Arb.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

The closest they would be allowed to get would be to challenge each other to non-lethal competitions (sparring, target shooting, and the like).

Even then, it would be unlikely to be allowed. The whole issue of chain of command gets turned upside down if folks (even just within their own rank) are allowed to duel each other.

 

[Nathan Brazil]

The big thing I think would be would the results of dueling resolve anything political or geographical to the survivor. My vote goes for deuling is allowed, but it does not make the difference in the "big picture".

For example, if there was tension then a duel between the Duke of Diaspora and the Duke of Sol. Would there be a transfer of powers or responsibilities to the survivor? After one or the other duel you have say one dead duck, er, Duke. There would be no reassignment of responsibility of the deceased's territory to the survivor. From there, where does the assignment of the new Duke flow from? The Archduke, direct transfer to family or what? Finally due to the death of a noble, is the disruption of power in the interim acceptable in the Imperium or Emperor or the Moot?

Dueling is not mentioned in the Milieu 0 Campaign book. With regards to solving anything that would not be the case. Cleon I seemed to have wanted more assignment to responsible parties in his vision of the Imperium. Dueling would take away from that due the relatively small size at the time as both were "responsible". So maybe no acceptable dueling at that point in time. That's my Cr.02 anyways.

 

[whulorigan]

Dueling is not mentioned in the Milieu 0 Campaign book. With regards to solving anything that would not be the case. Cleon I seemed to have wanted more assignment to responsible parties in his vision of the Imperium. Dueling would take away from that due the relatively small size at the time as both were "responsible". So maybe no acceptable dueling at that point in time. That's my Cr.02 anyways.

Actually, on p. 59 of the Milieu:0 Campaign Book (under the heading "Count"):

"When it was created, the Imperial Count replaced the Vilani shakkanakhu (literally “provincial governor‘), and the Sylean earls and viscounts. Vilani counts still tend to use the title shakkanakhu, especially in the area of the old Vilani “core” (primarily Vland, Lishun and parts of Corridor and Dagudashaag) and, where the title of count is used in these older sectors, shakkanakhu is commonly used as a subsidiary title-often being given to the heir to the main title when he reaches majority. In the early years of the new Imperium, former Sylean earls and viscounts tended to be very jealous of their status in relation to each other (a viscount traditionally outranked an earl), and a great many feuds and duels were caused as a result of this rationalization."

​

EDIT: Also, on p.33 of the T4 Core Rules (Noble CharGen description at top):

"The biggest danger a Noble faces is sword duels. Thus, Nobles spend a good amount of time honing their fencing skills."
​

 

[rancke]

For example, if there was tension then a duel between the Duke of Diaspora and the Duke of Sol. Would there be a transfer of powers or responsibilities to the survivor?

No. The powers and responsibilities of the loser would be transferred to his heir. And since the victim was such a high-profile person, the winner would most likely face the Emperor's extreme displeasure.

After one or the other duel you have say one dead duck, er, Duke. There would be no reassignment of responsibility of the deceased's territory to the survivor. From there, where does the assignment of the new Duke flow from? The Archduke, direct transfer to family or what?

The duke would have an acknowledged heir. Said heir would function as acting duke until his elevation was confirmed by the Emperor.

Finally due to the death of a noble, is the disruption of power in the interim acceptable in the Imperium or Emperor or the Moot?

There won't be any disruption.

Dueling is not mentioned in the Milieu 0 Campaign book. With regards to solving anything that would not be the case. Cleon I seemed to have wanted more assignment to responsible parties in his vision of the Imperium. Dueling would take away from that due the relatively small size at the time as both were "responsible". So maybe no acceptable dueling at that point in time. That's my Cr.02 anyways.

It's quite likely that duelling was non-existent in the Sylean Federation and, consequently, in the early Third Imperium. What's more difficult to imagine is how duelling gets into favor at all.

For duelling to prosper it not only has to be socially acceptable, it has to be socially unacceptable to refuse a challenge. Especially if it is illegal.


Hans

 

[rancke]

Actually, on p. 59 of the Milieu:0 Campaign Book (under the heading "Count"):

"When it was created, the Imperial Count replaced the Vilani shakkanakhu (literally “provincial governor‘), and the Sylean earls and viscounts. Vilani counts still tend to use the title shakkanakhu, especially in the area of the old Vilani “core” (primarily Vland, Lishun and parts of Corridor and Dagudashaag) and, where the title of count is used in these older sectors, shakkanakhu is commonly used as a subsidiary title-often being given to the heir to the main title when he reaches majority. In the early years of the new Imperium, former Sylean earls and viscounts tended to be very jealous of their status in relation to each other (a viscount traditionally outranked an earl), and a great many feuds and duels were caused as a result of this rationalization."

​

EDIT: Also, on p.33 of the T4 Core Rules (Noble CharGen description at top):

"The biggest danger a Noble faces is sword duels. Thus, Nobles spend a good amount of time honing their fencing skills."
​

Looks like duels do flourish in Milieu 0. As I said before, duels are a fun plot element . The logic seems to be that since nobles used to duel historically, nobles will always duel, the 20th and 21st century to the contrary notwithstandiing. Yo-ho-ho and a bottle of Chateau Arglebargle '09.


Hans

 

[Jeff M. Hopper]

So, a bit of an expansion question. If sword dueling is considered socially acceptable and it considered unacceptable to refuse a duel, does this mean that popular media will have more works with duels in them? Would Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet or Hamlet make a comeback?

 

[rancke]

So, a bit of an expansion question. If sword dueling is considered socially acceptable and it considered unacceptable to refuse a duel, does this mean that popular media will have more works with duels in them? Would Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet or Hamlet make a comeback?

I'm sure there are plenty of duels in Celestine Floridore's The Three Guardsmen.


Hans

 

[McPerth]

And never forget there are also Aslans living in the Imperium, ans I guess they honor their duelling rules, something they could not if duelling was forbiden by imperial law...

 

[whulorigan]

Milieu:0 Nobles

Cleon I seemed to have wanted more assignment to responsible parties in his vision of the Imperium. Dueling would take away from that due the relatively small size at the time as both were "responsible". So maybe no acceptable dueling at that point in time. That's my Cr.02 anyways.

This is probably true regarding Cleon's appointment of "new" Nobles (mostly of Baronial or Knightly rank at the time, though probably including a few Counts), but some of the Noble appointments were made (as the Milieu: 0 quote I made points out) in order to soften potential grievances of already entrenched Noble families of the Sylean Federation, who would otherwise have been disenfranchised from the power they had possessed until then (and who most certainly would have caused significant, if not fatal, consequences to the fledgling Empire had they not been appeased).

Thus the situation of the early Third Imperium was a mix of "old money" (in the form of "converted" old Nobility who jealously maintained their prerogatives as Nobles, particularly between themselves), and the new and vibrant young Nobles, promoted for their ability, competence, and loyalty (who would nevertheless be looked down upon by the old Nobility as upstarts, human nature being what it is).

Thus, there was likely significant intrigue and political maneuvering in such an environment, which could (potentially) lead to conflicts of honor which could not be resolved through back-room politicking.

The question would be how the Throne views the issue. Duels may be something that is practiced for and honed skillwise, but yet not occur all that often in reality (perhaps only when one thought they could get away with it without incurring the displeasure of the Iridium Throne, or when the offense was too grave to resort to other means of social/political/economic conflict).

 

[whulorigan]

And never forget there are also Aslans living in the Imperium, ans I guess they honor their duelling rules, something they could not if duelling was forbiden by imperial law...

It might be interesting to explore how the Aslan dueling culture may have been influenced by or "changed" among Imperial Aslan due to Imperial Noble Culture and dueling codes.

For that matter, might human dueling codes have been influenced somewhat by the Aslan along the Imperial/Aslan border?

 

[Reban]

[/I][/INDENT]EDIT: Also, on p.33 of the T4 Core Rules (Noble CharGen description at top):

"The biggest danger a Noble faces is sword duels. Thus, Nobles spend a good amount of time honing their fencing skills."
​

Interesting. Sword duels don't actually have to be fatal either. First blood duels could be more socially acceptable than dueling to the death. Dueling scars could go in and out of fashion.


Something future duelist might have to contend with is the paparazzi. If there is a code duello in the Imperium it might include a secrecy or confidentiality rule, or it could be swords and bucklers Thunderdome style

 

[whulorigan]

Interesting. Sword duels don't actually have to be fatal either. First blood duels could be more socially acceptable than dueling to the death. Dueling scars could go in and out of fashion.

My guess would be that the Emperor would not be at all pleased with his Peerage killing one another off over their petty differences. I would think that any "acceptable" code of dueling would be one that discourages issuing a challenge unless absolutely no other honorable recourse was available, and were that the case, that the duel would be mandated to be non-lethal in intent (otherwise risking displeasure from the Throne).