Forums » Role Playing
Not all conflicts are honorable duels, nor are they intended to be. This treaty is specifically for combat intended to be considered an honorable duel.
For a given conflict to qualify as a duel, all parties involved must agree to the duel, and the methods employed during the duel should not exceed the original agreement.
It is not uncommon for duelers to employ some form of shorthand in the negotiation of a duel. It can often be summed up by it's minimal parts: A challenge, an acceptance of challenge, and the combat itself.
Some duelers go so far as to abbreviate even these minimums, with the challenge and acceptance both often being represented by no more than a hail and counter hail, or some other form of abbreviated challenge/answer protocol, followed immediately or imminently by the combat itself.
Minimalistic agreements of this type generically assume some preset standard of terms. "Standard" terms often include the most common or widely accepted terms, or a set of terms the duelers involved have previously arraigned or come to understand.
One example of a common term:
Interruption or interference by an outside party is grounds for an automatic draw, and in the case of continued or imminent interference, all duelers involved are to break from the duel, in order to allow any and/or all duelers to escape from, or otherwise deal with, the source of interference.
The previous example, is a common term, but not ironclad. Standard terms should be assumed to apply, unless the parties involved agree otherwise.
It should be noted, that if you challenge or answer an opponent that you know to be less than honorable in matters of dueling, you should still be bound by the dueler's code, until your opponent violates that code, in that duel.
You are never required to accept a duel, no matter what the terms. Any combat that results from your lack of response to, or refusal of, a challenge, is outside the scope of dueling.
For a given conflict to qualify as a duel, all parties involved must agree to the duel, and the methods employed during the duel should not exceed the original agreement.
It is not uncommon for duelers to employ some form of shorthand in the negotiation of a duel. It can often be summed up by it's minimal parts: A challenge, an acceptance of challenge, and the combat itself.
Some duelers go so far as to abbreviate even these minimums, with the challenge and acceptance both often being represented by no more than a hail and counter hail, or some other form of abbreviated challenge/answer protocol, followed immediately or imminently by the combat itself.
Minimalistic agreements of this type generically assume some preset standard of terms. "Standard" terms often include the most common or widely accepted terms, or a set of terms the duelers involved have previously arraigned or come to understand.
One example of a common term:
Interruption or interference by an outside party is grounds for an automatic draw, and in the case of continued or imminent interference, all duelers involved are to break from the duel, in order to allow any and/or all duelers to escape from, or otherwise deal with, the source of interference.
The previous example, is a common term, but not ironclad. Standard terms should be assumed to apply, unless the parties involved agree otherwise.
It should be noted, that if you challenge or answer an opponent that you know to be less than honorable in matters of dueling, you should still be bound by the dueler's code, until your opponent violates that code, in that duel.
You are never required to accept a duel, no matter what the terms. Any combat that results from your lack of response to, or refusal of, a challenge, is outside the scope of dueling.
It's folly to think that duels have some sort of "common" rules to them. If you don't take the time to detail the rules before hand, then you have no claim to bother your opponent on imaginary rules based on your personal interpretation of what's "common". Especially when dealing with the many diverse cultures in this universe, that's a recipe for disaster. You can't simply expect your opponent to understand you, unless you speak clearly, literally, and interpret each word to it's fullest meaning.
A duelist should have the right to fight with everything he has in the confines of the agreed upon rules. Using energy to worry about what your opponent may or may not expect in a fight not only limits one's options, but can seriously detract from the attention needed to dance a dance where the slightest delay can mean death. Between the beginning of the duel, and the end, it is perfectly acceptable for a duelist to seek every advantage, honorable or not, that he can. I would expect no less from my opponent.
-Mynt
A duelist should have the right to fight with everything he has in the confines of the agreed upon rules. Using energy to worry about what your opponent may or may not expect in a fight not only limits one's options, but can seriously detract from the attention needed to dance a dance where the slightest delay can mean death. Between the beginning of the duel, and the end, it is perfectly acceptable for a duelist to seek every advantage, honorable or not, that he can. I would expect no less from my opponent.
-Mynt
Well said, Mynt
Roda[RR] isn't far off the mark, actually. Duels aren't any different, really, from contracts. W/R/T contracts, if both (or all) parties start acting like a contract exists between them without having expressly agreed to a term for handing a particular eventuality, then the court will enforce what are called 'default terms'.
Default terms are what two rational parties--absent some showing to the contrary based on a factual wrinkle in the situation at hand--would have wanted to have selected as their term for that eventuality, assuming they'd bargained over it. In selecting default terms, you're aiming for what's the most efficient way of handling the occurrence of the eventuality in the interaction between the majority of parties.
For dueling, the assembly of such a set of default terms is arguably pointless. There's no objective third party enforcement mechanism (judicial system) in VO. However, there's a strong extra-legal sanction system available in community approval/disapproval.
Creating a default set of terms to which one would agree by accepting a basic challenge, without an express reservation, could be an amusing activity; the example given of outside interference equating to a draw agreement is a good choice. If A approached it ex ante, before C stole 80% of B's hull during A v. B duel, A would want a draw upon the interference of C since it is just as likely that A would be disadvantaged as advantaged by interference, and it also lowers A's return on his invested risk, since he hasn't actually defeated B in a duel if C helps him out.
More rules to be likewise justified?
Default terms are what two rational parties--absent some showing to the contrary based on a factual wrinkle in the situation at hand--would have wanted to have selected as their term for that eventuality, assuming they'd bargained over it. In selecting default terms, you're aiming for what's the most efficient way of handling the occurrence of the eventuality in the interaction between the majority of parties.
For dueling, the assembly of such a set of default terms is arguably pointless. There's no objective third party enforcement mechanism (judicial system) in VO. However, there's a strong extra-legal sanction system available in community approval/disapproval.
Creating a default set of terms to which one would agree by accepting a basic challenge, without an express reservation, could be an amusing activity; the example given of outside interference equating to a draw agreement is a good choice. If A approached it ex ante, before C stole 80% of B's hull during A v. B duel, A would want a draw upon the interference of C since it is just as likely that A would be disadvantaged as advantaged by interference, and it also lowers A's return on his invested risk, since he hasn't actually defeated B in a duel if C helps him out.
More rules to be likewise justified?
In my experience, dueling codes exist only in individual capacities. Some pilots' codes are the same and some are different and they will always vary with the quality and/or respectability of your opponent. And by quality I don't mean piloting skill.
Basically, what lecter said.
Basically, what lecter said.
why dont yall get over it and fight each other?
I would like to point out, that Latos H-2 is NOT a damn dueling sector, if I see you there and hail you, I'm not waiting for a friggen counter hail, you either do what my hail says, or i'll attack you, you want a friggen duel? Do it in empty space.
I fell off my chair giggling when I read the first post. Ironic, Roda posting about a duelers code!
Bartender! Another Rhonda Rant, please!
True, Sedina B-8 and Latos H-2 are probably NOT good dueling sectors.
If you agree to a /duel there, you get what you deserve.
And, the concept of "honor" varies widely in this game, and in the vain attempt to prevent this thread from being another "HONOR" thread, let's just leave it at that, OK?
If you agree to a /duel there, you get what you deserve.
And, the concept of "honor" varies widely in this game, and in the vain attempt to prevent this thread from being another "HONOR" thread, let's just leave it at that, OK?
And the rest of the confusion and hot air in the thread will result from general misunderstanding. Unless I completely misinterpret recent events and conversations, what Roda refers to in his first post has absolutely nothing to do with a Duel invoked with the /duel commands.
"I am the smartest individual in the game and people ganked me because they can't fight 1v1.
Instead of disagreeing with my neoconservative viewpoints regarding sociopolitical issues they should put the game before real life."
Instead of disagreeing with my neoconservative viewpoints regarding sociopolitical issues they should put the game before real life."
I think Roda did a good thing by putting this this code into writing. A lot is assumed by the /duel Challenge command and it works well to a point. I think most people use it to fight people of their own race but I'm probably wrong.
LJ
LJ
The /duel command is one method of initiating a duel. But not all duels are initiated in this way. Even so, the protocol demonstrated by the /duel command is a classic example of how a duel is negotiated. Many duelist prefer a more abbreviated or less formal protocol, and thus skip the /duel command completely.
The good Dr. has comprehended my meaning about presumed terms, and has himself presented an insightful analysis.
I am disappointed that Pointsman retracted his post. To summarize his point in my own words: One of the most common purposes of duels is to demonstrate the relative skill of the duelist involved, and anything that taints the measurement of that skill, as relative to the duelist involved, undermines that purpose.
Just because duelist uses a given protocol, does not grant them a monopoly to that protocol. A hail could be an invitation to duel, but it could also indicate many other things. I am not trying to say that all hails are a request for a duel. I am saying that a duel does have certain minimums, most notable is that an answer or agreement is required for it to qualify as a duel.
What sectors or systems are appropriate for dueling is perhaps an issue for another thread. Or better yet, simply discuss it with your local duelist in person. Many duelist would be more than happy to present you with a candid evaluation of your views. I recommend that you be well armed for this form of review.
The good Dr. has comprehended my meaning about presumed terms, and has himself presented an insightful analysis.
I am disappointed that Pointsman retracted his post. To summarize his point in my own words: One of the most common purposes of duels is to demonstrate the relative skill of the duelist involved, and anything that taints the measurement of that skill, as relative to the duelist involved, undermines that purpose.
Just because duelist uses a given protocol, does not grant them a monopoly to that protocol. A hail could be an invitation to duel, but it could also indicate many other things. I am not trying to say that all hails are a request for a duel. I am saying that a duel does have certain minimums, most notable is that an answer or agreement is required for it to qualify as a duel.
What sectors or systems are appropriate for dueling is perhaps an issue for another thread. Or better yet, simply discuss it with your local duelist in person. Many duelist would be more than happy to present you with a candid evaluation of your views. I recommend that you be well armed for this form of review.
Most people won't interupt a duel when the /duel command is used. But I think if you want to have an informal duel you shouldn't do it in Sedina B-8 and Latos H-2. No one knows you are dueling and thats the place where most pvp goes on.
There is no doubt that general rules of dueling etiquette exist, but they are by no means set in stone. Such rules differ based on the background and mindset of the pilot, and what may be considered a breach in code to one person may be permissible to the code of another. Even pirates have some level of code, albeit is far more loose, and pertains mostly to 'don't shoot the trader who paid you' more than anything else.
Consensual combat usually entails the compliance of certain honor rules, most typically those of one-on-one combat and the aversion from seeker weapons, but these are not always the case. The matter is often very much context-sensitive.
Non-consensual combat, such as schisms along the Serco-Itani border, contain no such rules beyond those set by superior powers (that is, to say, the various governments, factions, and guilds).
This means that in such cases, pilots may spam missiles, or gang-kill as they please; other pilots may not like it, but unless some method of reprimand is in place, all they can do (besides complain) is to themselves oust the offender as to discourage the behavior. Some would argue that such breaches of etiquette are grounds for escalation; each breach constituting the right to retaliate with similar force. Again, this is dependent on context and individual opinion.
I would suggest that each major nationality draft their own general ruleset, so that a common denominator could be derived for inter-national consensual duels. A universal ruleset, as Mr. Slane suggests, however, is simply impractical.
Consensual combat usually entails the compliance of certain honor rules, most typically those of one-on-one combat and the aversion from seeker weapons, but these are not always the case. The matter is often very much context-sensitive.
Non-consensual combat, such as schisms along the Serco-Itani border, contain no such rules beyond those set by superior powers (that is, to say, the various governments, factions, and guilds).
This means that in such cases, pilots may spam missiles, or gang-kill as they please; other pilots may not like it, but unless some method of reprimand is in place, all they can do (besides complain) is to themselves oust the offender as to discourage the behavior. Some would argue that such breaches of etiquette are grounds for escalation; each breach constituting the right to retaliate with similar force. Again, this is dependent on context and individual opinion.
I would suggest that each major nationality draft their own general ruleset, so that a common denominator could be derived for inter-national consensual duels. A universal ruleset, as Mr. Slane suggests, however, is simply impractical.
i just wish that people would be considerate enough to decline your challenge and not just ignore it.
I wish people would stop paying me when I find em in an XC and just die.
You'll never find me in an XC, and I'll never pay a pirate.
That said, I perceive all this talk about a so-called 'dueler's code' to be humbug. Sure, you can enumerate all the little things you, personally, think are the one and only code, only to find about as many differing opinions as there are players.
Just shut up and play, already.
That said, I perceive all this talk about a so-called 'dueler's code' to be humbug. Sure, you can enumerate all the little things you, personally, think are the one and only code, only to find about as many differing opinions as there are players.
Just shut up and play, already.
Ok, it makes sense if you do not include someone demanding you to do something, and I guess if someone interfears it makes the fight null and void in any case.