Successor game rules, draft one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TinCow

The only KotR civil war system was the Cataclysm, and that took so much time to implement that I had to promise my wife I would never do it again. Just a warning to anyone considering running that kind of thing. :laugh4:

---

Well lets strike that from the list of options then. :beam:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

4) MTW/Risk-style system. Similar to phased movement, but players submit orders to move based on province proximity. For instance, any player can move their army up to two (or one, or three, or whatever) consecutive provinces per phased turn. When players enter a province with a hostile force, a battle occurs. Battles are treated as they are in MTW, namely that if one army is moving into a province with the enemy, but the enemy was stationary that turn, the moving army is the attacker and the stationary army is the defender and may get a terrain/settlement advantage. If both armies were moving, it is a meeting engagement and occurs on an open battlefield without one side getting a terrain advantage. This is even faster than (2) and (3) and very likely to result in a battle, since people don't need to move close to each other in a province, they just need to be in the same province. However, this doesn't allow for the same level of strategic detail as (1) through (3) and generally limits people to deciding whether to attack or defend. This also will make the neutrals sit around watching for a while, though for not as long as (2).

This seems like a simple yet flexible system. If the player does not specify the umpire will assume they are taking the most direct route. However, the player can also specify tactical moves to end their movement on a hill, hidden in forests, and etc. The presence of a spy in an army should allow it to avoid ambushes, choose favorable terrain, and etc.

Maybe I’m thinking of a merger between (1) and (4). A hostile army shouldn’t be able to move freely through a hostile province. Simple turn-based movement doesn’t account for the use of watchtowers, spies, and scout reports that allow the defending army to react to the threat in real time. The defender should have the advantage, say, in a weighted dice role with the above sensors figured in.

Concerning the RGBs, I am in agreement, although I thought having a choice was nice.

As for the Civil War system I like option 4 the best. It seems to be a good compromise between strategy and efficiency.

I remember that at the beginning of LOTR Tincow had the swell idea of having the players vote on what type of PVP battle would be fought, with the idea of keeping things moving. Could we do something like this here?

At the start of each PVP war, there could be a poll of the choices Tincow listed, minus whatever Zim doesn't want to do. Perhaps restrict the voting just to the combatants, since they'd presumably want to get it done quickly while still caring deeply about the outcome. Zim could cast the tiebraker.

This could allow for a trial-and-error process to see which of the five systems work best, and would also allow us to adjust to the fact that some wars are more suited to the more interactive methods due to closer proximity. For example, a war between Bohemia and Austria would be resolved fairly quickly even in option one since Prague and Vienna are so close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cecil XIX

I remember that at the beginning of LOTR Tincow had the swell idea of having the players vote on what type of PVP battle would be fought, with the idea of keeping things moving. Could we do something like this here?

At the start of each PVP war, there could be a poll of the choice Tincow listed, minus whatever Zim doesn't want to do. Perhaps restrict the voting just to the combatants, since they'd presumably want to get it done quickly while still caring deeply about the outcome? Zim could cast the tiebraker.

This could allow for a trial-and-error process to see which of the five systems work best, as well as the fact that some wars are more suited to the more interactive methods due to closer proximity. For example, a war between Bohemia and Austria would be resolved fairly quickly in option one since Prague and Vienna are so close.

---

That actually seems like wonderful compromise, and I'll support it! I also like 1 and 4 from the list, but 4 only if we can have the ability to specify strategic movement.

Can independent knights be given forts at strategic locations to simulate the feudal system? Successful defense of those areas should allow the knight to gain status or join a house.

I'm not sure about giving them special legal status but it would be nice to see forts being used. Does LTC add the stone forts from Kingdoms or two free upkeep slots?

I think I'll have the rules done tonight.

I like TinCow's idea about a respawn rate for RGBs and only 1 at a time being recruited.

I assume for the start of the game we're recruiting enough RGBs to go around? Should this happen before or after Council session number 1?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zim

I assume for the start of the game we're recruiting enough RGBs to go around? Should this happen before or after Council session number 1?

---

IIRC, the first turn in LotR (1080) was used specifically to recruit all the RBGs, so it would be easier to RP and such for the initial Magnaura session, which happened the turn after. Your call, but if we are doing an RBG blitz then it would probably be best to get it out of the way ASAP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zim

I'm not sure about giving them special legal status but it would be nice to see forts being used. Does LTC add the stone forts from Kingdoms or two free upkeep slots?

I think I'll have the rules done tonight.

I like TinCow's idea about a respawn rate for RGBs and only 1 at a time being recruited.

I assume for the start of the game we're recruiting enough RGBs to go around? Should this happen before or after Council session number 1?

---

I see no reason we can't do the same for this game as we did for LotR: spawn a large number of RBGs and then put them up with the pre-existing family members for selection by lottery. Even if we choose not to allow selection from multiple RBGs later, this is just the easiest method of distributing a large number at once. It does require that the game be advanced one turn before we start though, so that the RBGs can be spawned.

One idea that might be worth considering is developing a system for resolving "duels" between characters. There are some situations in which verbal blows escalate to the point where some physical combat is fitting, but a full blown "civil war" is not - mainly because it is a matter of personal "honor" rather than rebellion per se. In KotR, I remember the Arnold/Jan feud raising this kind of issue - also I think Lothar made some duel type challenge at one point.

Duels would require mutual consent (I don't think we want to go down the road of allowing our characters to murder others). To resolve a duel, I think I could put together some kind of quick umpired system. To make it involving, players could give the umpire some kind of basic order each "round" and the outcome be resolved depending on chance and relevant character stats, traits and experience etc. The possible outcomes could involve death, wounding and new traits (dread for killers, chivalry for merciful victors etc).

Ideally, I would base it on some workable existing skirmish type rule set. (Anyone want to recommend one?) If not, I daresay I could come up with some passable system - e.g. based on some rock-paper-scissors gameplay. Move orders could perhaps include posture: defensive/cautious attack/all out attack; perhaps direction (strike left/right/high/low); and perhaps some "special moves" - e.g. disarm, immobilise.

While in real life, duels might depend heavily on personal skill, in game, I'd be inclined to make it fairly random (you lose either because you rolled low or because you played paper to your opponent's scissors) as the character stats are not focused on physical attributes and anyway the game would suffer if one player emerged as an uber duellist who could slay all others STW geisha style.

I'd also be inclined to allow champions to be nominated as combatants - either NPCs or players - although the rewards would be reduced in line with the risks and players may take a dim view of knights hiding behind their NPC champions. The quality of the NPC champion could vary with rank - it would be a bold man who duelled the king's champion (and an equally bold king who personally duelled rather than relied on such a champion).

Any interest?

We don't need to sort this out in advance of the game as hopefully no one will emerge newborn with a deadly vendetta. Indeed like the table top battle rules, the duel system need not be part of the core rules anyway. But it should not take too long to devise and would be useful to get finalised before any particular duel arises (so the system is not biased towards a particular combatant).

While I'd like for such a system to exist, I fear there's too little in MIITW for a basis, and since duels are decided more by physicality than battles I'm not sure any system would recognize who is the best duelist.

Nevertheless, just having the option would be a great boon to roleplaying. I don't know if you've read about it yet econ, but Tincow came up with a marvelous system for simulating chariot races for LotR. I think if it can be done for one, it can be done for the other. I'd say it's definitely worth a try. To iron out kinks, how about the first few duels in the game can't be to the death, and/or we do some test duels first?

That could certainly be fun. In LotR I developed a rule set to run chariot races with random results but with enough detail to produce interesting and unique outcomes each time. I posted the rules here. A similar system could be used for dueling if you do it in a 'fencing' system, a lot like boarding ships in Sid Meier's Pirates (if you ever played that). The basic idea being that you've got a game board of 7 squares in a single row. Both duelists start in the middle, on square 4. Die rolls are used to determine what happens. For instance, on a roll of 1, duelist A pushes his oppenent back a square, or on a roll of 6, duelist B pushes his oppenent back 2 squares. For flavor, there can be other effects, like an injury which reduces someone's chances in future rolls, or perhaps someone owns an excellent sword which gives them an advantage on a roll once or twice in a duel. When a person is pushed off their last square, they lose. There is then a roll to determine whether they were injured or killed in the process.

Tincow's use of the word 'fencing' made me wonder: How exactly did duels work in the middle ages, particularly the 11th-13th centuries that will likely make up most, if not all of KotF. Does anybody know what weapons, equipment etc. were used. I wouldn't want realism to detract from the fun and functionality of the dueling system, but I'd rather avoid us fighting with rapiers and epees and smallswords.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by econ21

One idea that might be worth considering is developing a system for resolving "duels" between characters. There are some situations in which verbal blows escalate to the point where some physical combat is fitting, but a full blown "civil war" is not - mainly because it is a matter of personal "honor" rather than rebellion per se. In KotR, I remember the Arnold/Jan feud raising this kind of issue - also I think Lothar made some duel type challenge at one point.

---

Seconded - my first character Iakovos in LotR tried to get this done multiple times with at least Elite Ferrets character.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by econ21

would require mutual consent (I don't think we want to go down the road of allowing our characters to murder others). To resolve a duel, I think I could put together some kind of quick umpired system. To make it involving, players could give the umpire some kind of basic order each "round" and the outcome be resolved depending on chance and relevant character stats, traits and experience etc. The possible outcomes could involve death, wounding and new traits (dread for killers, chivalry for merciful victors etc).


Ideally, I would base it on some workable existing skirmish type rule set. (Anyone want to recommend one?) If not, I daresay I could come up with some passable system - e.g. based on some rock-paper-scissors gameplay. Move orders could perhaps include posture: defensive/cautious attack/all out attack; perhaps direction (strike left/right/high/low); and perhaps some "special moves" - e.g. disarm, immobilise.

---

Brainstorm - we could resolve it similarly to Swords in the Moon, using Command as a rating for their duel score, with other stats such as chivalry, dread, and piety coming into factor.

Command - Basic stat? Command could be both number of hitpoints, with each turn could be alternating rounds of offense and defense, and represent number of dice rolled - 1 die for every 2 command stars, minimum 1 maximum 5.
Chivalry - defense bonuses? So whoever has higher chivalry gets a +1 bonus when defending from an attack.
Dread - offense bonuses? So whoever has higher dread gets a +1 bonus when attacking?
Piety - increase die size? Who ever has the most piety gets a bump in their die size, from a standard 1d6 to a 1d8?
Loyalty - Comes into play only when one is a champion? Gives a +1 offense and defense bonus, if the champions loyalty is higher?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by econ21

While in real life, duels might depend heavily on personal skill, in game, I'd be inclined to make it fairly random (you lose either because you rolled low or because you played paper to your opponent's scissors) as the character stats are not focused on physical attributes and anyway the game would suffer if one player emerged as an uber duellist who could slay all others STW geisha style.

I'd also be inclined to allow champions to be nominated as combatants - either NPCs or players - although the rewards would be reduced in line with the risks and players may take a dim view of knights hiding behind their NPC champions. The quality of the NPC champion could vary with rank - it would be a bold man who duelled the king's champion (and an equally bold king who personally duelled rather than relied on such a champion).

Any interest?

We don't need to sort this out in advance of the game as hopefully no one will emerge newborn with a deadly vendetta. Indeed like the table top battle rules, the duel system need not be part of the core rules anyway. But it should not take too long to devise and would be useful to get finalised before any particular duel arises (so the system is not biased towards a particular combatant).

---

Aye!

I don't know a whole lot about medieval duels, but they definitely were not like fencing. I just used that term because it has a similar physical setup, with both fighters starting in the middle, and people spar forward and backward without variation to either side. That's easy to keep track of in a numerical system.

An alternative to dueling that might get used a bit more would be drinking challenges. Have an argument? Settle it by drinking your opponent under the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YLC

Brainstorm - we could resolve it similarly to Swords in the Moon, using Command as a rating for their duel score, with other stats such as chivalry, dread, and piety coming into factor.

Command - Basic stat? Command could be both number of hitpoints, with each turn could be alternating rounds of offense and defense, and represent number of dice rolled - 1 die for every 2 command stars, minimum 1 maximum 5.
Chivalry - defense bonuses? So whoever has higher chivalry gets a +1 bonus when defending from an attack.
Dread - offense bonuses? So whoever has higher dread gets a +1 bonus when attacking?
Piety - increase die size? Who ever has the most piety gets a bump in their die size, from a standard 1d6 to a 1d8?
Loyalty - Comes into play only when one is a champion? Gives a +1 offense and defense bonus, if the champions loyalty is higher?

---

I like most of these, and would definitely prefer to see our character sheets matter as much as possible so the duel seems more 'real'. I'm not sure if it makes much sense for command to give a bonus to duels, wouldn't valor be better? I also can't see any logic in having piety affect battles, except maybe morale? One thing to consider is traits that give a bonus to hitpoints, that translates from battles to duels the easiest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by econ21

While in real life, duels might depend heavily on personal skill, in game, I'd be inclined to make it fairly random (you lose either because you rolled low or because you played paper to your opponent's scissors) as the character stats are not focused on physical attributes and anyway the game would suffer if one player emerged as an uber duellist who could slay all others STW geisha style.

---

I would prefer the opposite. Unlike the geisha (shudder), you can simply choose not to engage in a duel. I also don't think it would get used much, who'd be willing to risk their character/empower their opponent by placing things mostly in the hands of fate? Characters would need to be largely in control, like they are in the tabletop battles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cecil XIX

I like most of these, and would definitely prefer to see our character sheets matter as much as possible so the duel seems more 'real'. I'm not sure if it makes much sense for command to give a bonus to duels, wouldn't valor be better? I also can't see any logic in having piety affect battles, except maybe morale? One thing to consider is traits that give a bonus to hitpoints, that translates from battles to duels the easiest.



I would prefer the opposite. Unlike the geisha (shudder), you can simply choose not to engage in a duel. I also don't think it would get used much, who'd be willing to risk their character/empower their opponent by placing things mostly in the hands of fate? Characters would need to be largely in control, like they are in the tabletop battles.

---

Makes sense - Valor then, with every 3 Valor giving a single die, from 1-4 dice.

Piety is a representation of intellect as well in M2TW, so expanding on that idea, an intelligent persons ability to quickly think would open up a greater chance for them to react to new situations - but would not guarantee any hard advantage, hence why the die is still entirely random. This would also only apply for one die.

I think I'll make a list of a all traits that would be relevant in a duel from the vnv.text and post it with it's ingame modifier and possible duel modifier, should be fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YLC

Piety is a representation of intellect as well in M2TW, so expanding on that idea, an intelligent persons ability to quickly think would open up a greater chance for them to react to new situations - but would not guarantee any hard advantage, hence why the die is still entirely random. This would also only apply for one die.

I think I'll make a list of a all traits that would be relevant in a duel from the vnv.text and post it with it's ingame modifier and possible duel modifier, should be fun.

---

Is it? Not to get into a philosophical debate of course, I just haven't noticed that. If anything I remember traits that suggest the opposite, although maybe that was only in the first MTW. Regardless, I like your explanation very much and would gladly read your report on the relevancy of the traits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cecil XIX

Is it? Not to get into a philosophical debate of course, I just haven't noticed that. If anything I remember traits that suggest the opposite, although maybe that was only in the first MTW. Regardless, I like your explanation very much and would gladly read your report on the relevancy of the traits.

---

Ingame, an increase in piety equivilates into an increase in the ability to generate tax revenue, and it appears the two via stats are not mutually exclusive ingame.

Getting on that report, give me an hour or 2

In Lady Frog's story, there was a part where the Scottish king held a tournament between Fulk and some random noble. Basically, each side hand picked ten knights and then they fought a mini-skirmish with blunted weapons. If a knight got captured he had to pay off a set "ransom price" to whoever captured him. The skirmish was fought until one side captured all the knights on the other side. This could also give the chance for other players to get involved to increase their own standing by fighting in the tournament for one of the two fighting parties.

Or else we could just do jousting. Everybody likes jousting.

Edit: I'd be totally happy with the other ideas discussed so far. I'm just throwing in my :2cents:

Trait list, and my take on them. Warning - very long.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

GoodCommander/BadCommander

Traits that effect command shouldn't be added - why? Because command is far different then actually fighting. Not everyone who was a brilliant commander was a brillaint fighter, and not all brilliant fighters were good commanders - in short, it's far to situational to give any defintive ground as to why it gives a bonus.

Drinker

It's possible this one could give a penalty - fighting drunk is likely to get you killed, and alcohol thins the blood, meaning you will bleed more easily.

Feck

Besides the humor interjected in a fight description, I am not sure how well smack talk translated during a duel, so...

Arse

Definitive penalty to combat, possibly increasing the chance of failing an attack or defense

Girls

I honestly can't see this becoming involved in a duel at all...

Sobriety

A Bonus to dueling, for keeping a clear and level head?

GoodAmbusher/BadAmbusher

This may or may not give some form of slight of hand bonus, enabling you to "cheat" in a duel, or suffer from not understanding how to cheat in the case of badambusher.

Disciplinarian/BadDisciplinarian

Could possibly give an excellent bonus to insure that your actions almost never fail, since the character has trained very, very hard. An opposite effect for being a bad one.

Good/Bad Seiger

Same issue with the GoodCommander/BadCommander traits

Brave/Coward

Bonus/penalty to attack, or simply a similar bonus to Disciplinarian? Nonetheless, an important trait in a duel.

Slothful/Energetic

Changes in priority when attacking and defending, possibly allowing energetic avatars to be able to reroll a die, with slothful being forced to reroll their highest die. It could also translate into a loss of a die or an increase in number of dice. powerful, and usually rare trait.

Berserker

Definite bonus to attack and penalty to defense

Xenophobia/Xenophilia

No effect in a duel, except some smack talk...

PublicFaith/Atheism

I'm not sure this would ever factor into a duel, besides how the avatar ended up in it.

Good/BadAdministrator

Unless it's a duel to see who can transcribe the bible faster...no bonus or penalty.

Inspiring/BoringSpeaker

A possibility for morale, if it's involved - otherwise, no effect

RhetoricSkill

Bonus only if we can bore our opponent to death

StrategicSkill

Possibly a larger die size as a benefit.

TacticalSkill

Allows you to reroll those dice if they are not to your liking - limited by your level in this trait. Possibly being able to reroll one die per round, per level in the trait.

MathematicsSkill

Again, no effect in a duel

PoliticsSkill

Isn't that why we are fighting the first place? Because you have none?

LogisticalSkill

No effect

Rabblerouser

Great way to get the crowd on yourside, otherwise not sure this would help.

VictorVirtue

Same as Rabblerouser, although it may give some kind of intimidation factor

Epicurean/Stoic

Have no clue how this would work out, both only effecting loyalty and the ability to be bribed.

Austere/Aesthetic

Similar issue to Epicurean/Stoic

Ignorance

Lower success rates, but with a bonus to morale?

Gambling

Reroll everything, but only once per duel

SpyMaster

No foreseeable benefit, except for trying to cheat or be able to negate cheats

AssassinMaster

Understanding how to kill someone is of a great benefit - possible attack bonus, or ability to ignore your opponent highest die roll.

CounterSpy

This would probably work better for being able to catch cheaters then SpyMaster

AssassinCatcher

Possible defense bonuses with the ability to ignore your opponents highest attack roll?

High/LaxPersonalSecurity

Defensive penalty/bonus?

Trusting/Paranoia

Same as above

Liar

Increased ability to "cheat"?

Embezzler

This isn't so much a good trait for dueling, as a good way to end up dueling

DeceiverVirtue

High potential to be a good "cheat" trait

Upright

Good anti-cheat trait potential

Corrupt

Another good cheating trait, although this one could have the possibility of backfiring compared to DecieverVirtue

Authoritarian/Nonauthoritarian

I don't see this coming into play ina duel very much as a deciding factor

Disloyal/Loyal

Again, not sure

Cuckhold

Your not fighting with THAT sword...so, no effect

GoodFarmer

Trimming a plant is a bit different then trimming a bush - no effect

GoodMiner

No idea how on earth this could help...

Good/BadEngineer

Catapults and Seige Towers are bit of a no go in dueling...

Good/BadTrader

This would never come into play in a duel

Just/Unjust

No bonus beyond what each trait gives, although this may count if we also include regular jousting for a morale bonus

Harsh/LenientJustice

Same as above

Harsh/KindRuler

Same as above

Good/BadBuilder

Not important during a duel, unless you designed the arena in which your fighting

Generous/Miserly

If we involve a crowd, this is a definite morale bonus

Noctophobia/philia

A time of day bonus/penalty? only if your opponent is foolish enough to challenge you when you have advantage

Perverted

This, should, never come up. If it does, then...I think we will have far greater issues then deciding who is the winner of the duel...

Scout

Gives an opening duel bonus to attack and defense

BattleScarred

Possibly a trait which reduces the randomness of your own rolls? And adds a Hp bonus?

Good/BadInfantryGeneral

You understand the dynamics of an infantryman and the tactics inherent in dismounted combat in the medieval era - I say a signifigant dueling bonus, or penalty

Good/BadCavalryGeneral

Same as above, but only for Jousting.

Fears and Hates "InsertFaction"

No effect

Inbred

Your momma jokes may be taken to a whole new level, but your comabt skills won't be - no effect.

Handsome

A pretty face isn't going to duel for you, but may get the crowd on your side

Ugly

If you have a third arm or second head, this may help. otherwise, I see no effect

Fertile

Nope, not going there...

Infertile

No effect in dueling

Good/BadTaxman

No effect

Divorced

Lots of openings for humor, little openings for actually effecting who is going to win - no effect

Good/BadRiskyAttacker

Should give a hefty bonus/penalty to attacking, with the penalty of making it more random.

Good/BadRiskyDefender

Same as above, but gives a bonus/penalty to defense, and a morale bonus/penalty instead of making it more random

Pragmatic/Superstitious

Not sure what this would do...

ExpensiveTastes/Cheapskate

Same as above...

Hypochondriac/HaleAndHearty

Modifies Hp? and Morale?

TouchedByTheGods

No clue

Sane/Insane

Not sure

Deranged

This is probably one to leave alone, since it's very subjective

Bloodthirsty

Attack Bonus?

Haemophobic

Attack Penalty?

Anger

This could grant a bonus to damage - where once you did only 1 damage (to morale or HP) per success, you now do 2, at the cost of making your attacks and defenses more erratic.

Lewd

No effect

Prim

Anti-cheating effect?

IndecisiveAttacker

Attack penalty?

Intelligent

A small, but general bonus to everything

Despoiler

Unless your fighting a Venetian or playing American Football, there really is no need to sack your opponent...

Genocide

This shouldn't effect the outcome of a duel

NaturalMilitarySkill

Unsure, but possibly a similar effect to having "Intelligent"

ForcedReligious

No effect

CrusaderHistory

Hmmm...a morale bonus?

BattleDread

Enhanced ability to cheat? Ability to reduce your opponents morale?

BattleChivalry

Exact opposite of BattleDread?

StrategyDread/Chivalry

Same as above?

CaptorDread/Chivalry

Same as above, or not involved at all?

RansomChivalry/Dread

Same as above?

Good/BadArtilleryCommander

Again with the catapults! No means no!

Good/BadGunpowderCommander

Cannons included!

Cursed

The dice usually decide this anyway, so - no effect

StrickenSilly/Serious

Possibly allowing you to use a Champion with no penalty?

Gregarious/Introvert

Another crowd pleasing trait, possible morale bonus

Dis/ContentGeneral

No effect

WifeIs "etc"

No effect

FactionKiller

No effect

Good/Bad Diplomacy

Obviously didn't work before you ended up in a duel...

Legacy traits

No effect

TourneyKnight

Good for Jousting, and for morale

AcademyTrained

Maybe reduce the randomness of your dice?

GloriousFool

Unsure - most likely no effect

TooOldtoFight

Ability to use a champion without penalty

Senile

Same as above

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YLC

Trait list, and my take on them. Warning - very long.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

GoodCommander/BadCommander

Traits that effect command shouldn't be added - why? Because command is far different then actually fighting. Not everyone who was a brilliant commander was a brillaint fighter, and not all brilliant fighters were good commanders - in short, it's far to situational to give any defintive ground as to why it gives a bonus.

Drinker

It's possible this one could give a penalty - fighting drunk is likely to get you killed, and alcohol thins the blood, meaning you will bleed more easily.

Feck

Besides the humor interjected in a fight description, I am not sure how well smack talk translated during a duel, so...

Arse

Definitive penalty to combat, possibly increasing the chance of failing an attack or defense

Girls

I honestly can't see this becoming involved in a duel at all...

Sobriety

A Bonus to dueling, for keeping a clear and level head?

GoodAmbusher/BadAmbusher

This may or may not give some form of slight of hand bonus, enabling you to "cheat" in a duel, or suffer from not understanding how to cheat in the case of badambusher.

Disciplinarian/BadDisciplinarian

Could possibly give an excellent bonus to insure that your actions almost never fail, since the character has trained very, very hard. An opposite effect for being a bad one.

Good/Bad Seiger

Same issue with the GoodCommander/BadCommander traits

Brave/Coward

Bonus/penalty to attack, or simply a similar bonus to Disciplinarian? Nonetheless, an important trait in a duel.

Slothful/Energetic

Changes in priority when attacking and defending, possibly allowing energetic avatars to be able to reroll a die, with slothful being forced to reroll their highest die. It could also translate into a loss of a die or an increase in number of dice. powerful, and usually rare trait.

Berserker

Definite bonus to attack and penalty to defense

Xenophobia/Xenophilia

No effect in a duel, except some smack talk...

PublicFaith/Atheism

I'm not sure this would ever factor into a duel, besides how the avatar ended up in it.

Good/BadAdministrator

Unless it's a duel to see who can transcribe the bible faster...no bonus or penalty.

Inspiring/BoringSpeaker

A possibility for morale, if it's involved - otherwise, no effect

RhetoricSkill

Bonus only if we can bore our opponent to death

StrategicSkill

Possibly a larger die size as a benefit.

TacticalSkill

Allows you to reroll those dice if they are not to your liking - limited by your level in this trait. Possibly being able to reroll one die per round, per level in the trait.

MathematicsSkill

Again, no effect in a duel

PoliticsSkill

Isn't that why we are fighting the first place? Because you have none?

LogisticalSkill

No effect

Rabblerouser

Great way to get the crowd on yourside, otherwise not sure this would help.

VictorVirtue

Same as Rabblerouser, although it may give some kind of intimidation factor

Epicurean/Stoic

Have no clue how this would work out, both only effecting loyalty and the ability to be bribed.

Austere/Aesthetic

Similar issue to Epicurean/Stoic

Ignorance

Lower success rates, but with a bonus to morale?

Gambling

Reroll everything, but only once per duel

SpyMaster

No foreseeable benefit, except for trying to cheat or be able to negate cheats

AssassinMaster

Understanding how to kill someone is of a great benefit - possible attack bonus, or ability to ignore your opponent highest die roll.

CounterSpy

This would probably work better for being able to catch cheaters then SpyMaster

AssassinCatcher

Possible defense bonuses with the ability to ignore your opponents highest attack roll?

High/LaxPersonalSecurity

Defensive penalty/bonus?

Trusting/Paranoia

Same as above

Liar

Increased ability to "cheat"?

Embezzler

This isn't so much a good trait for dueling, as a good way to end up dueling

DeceiverVirtue

High potential to be a good "cheat" trait

Upright

Good anti-cheat trait potential

Corrupt

Another good cheating trait, although this one could have the possibility of backfiring compared to DecieverVirtue

Authoritarian/Nonauthoritarian

I don't see this coming into play ina duel very much as a deciding factor

Disloyal/Loyal

Again, not sure

Cuckhold

Your not fighting with THAT sword...so, no effect

GoodFarmer

Trimming a plant is a bit different then trimming a bush - no effect

GoodMiner

No idea how on earth this could help...

Good/BadEngineer

Catapults and Seige Towers are bit of a no go in dueling...

Good/BadTrader

This would never come into play in a duel

Just/Unjust

No bonus beyond what each trait gives, although this may count if we also include regular jousting for a morale bonus

Harsh/LenientJustice

Same as above

Harsh/KindRuler

Same as above

Good/BadBuilder

Not important during a duel, unless you designed the arena in which your fighting

Generous/Miserly

If we involve a crowd, this is a definite morale bonus

Noctophobia/philia

A time of day bonus/penalty? only if your opponent is foolish enough to challenge you when you have advantage

Perverted

This, should, never come up. If it does, then...I think we will have far greater issues then deciding who is the winner of the duel...

Scout

Gives an opening duel bonus to attack and defense

BattleScarred

Possibly a trait which reduces the randomness of your own rolls? And adds a Hp bonus?

Good/BadInfantryGeneral

You understand the dynamics of an infantryman and the tactics inherent in dismounted combat in the medieval era - I say a signifigant dueling bonus, or penalty

Good/BadCavalryGeneral

Same as above, but only for Jousting.

Fears and Hates "InsertFaction"

No effect

Inbred

Your momma jokes may be taken to a whole new level, but your comabt skills won't be - no effect.

Handsome

A pretty face isn't going to duel for you, but may get the crowd on your side

Ugly

If you have a third arm or second head, this may help. otherwise, I see no effect

Fertile

Nope, not going there...

Infertile

No effect in dueling

Good/BadTaxman

No effect

Divorced

Lots of openings for humor, little openings for actually effecting who is going to win - no effect

Good/BadRiskyAttacker

Should give a hefty bonus/penalty to attacking, with the penalty of making it more random.

Good/BadRiskyDefender

Same as above, but gives a bonus/penalty to defense, and a morale bonus/penalty instead of making it more random

Pragmatic/Superstitious

Not sure what this would do...

ExpensiveTastes/Cheapskate

Same as above...

Hypochondriac/HaleAndHearty

Modifies Hp? and Morale?

TouchedByTheGods

No clue

Sane/Insane

Not sure

Deranged

This is probably one to leave alone, since it's very subjective

Bloodthirsty

Attack Bonus?

Haemophobic

Attack Penalty?

Anger

This could grant a bonus to damage - where once you did only 1 damage (to morale or HP) per success, you now do 2, at the cost of making your attacks and defenses more erratic.

Lewd

No effect

Prim

Anti-cheating effect?

IndecisiveAttacker

Attack penalty?

Intelligent

A small, but general bonus to everything

Despoiler

Unless your fighting a Venetian or playing American Football, there really is no need to sack your opponent...

Genocide

This shouldn't effect the outcome of a duel

NaturalMilitarySkill

Unsure, but possibly a similar effect to having "Intelligent"

ForcedReligious

No effect

CrusaderHistory

Hmmm...a morale bonus?

BattleDread

Enhanced ability to cheat? Ability to reduce your opponents morale?

BattleChivalry

Exact opposite of BattleDread?

StrategyDread/Chivalry

Same as above?

CaptorDread/Chivalry

Same as above, or not involved at all?

RansomChivalry/Dread

Same as above?

Good/BadArtilleryCommander

Again with the catapults! No means no!

Good/BadGunpowderCommander

Cannons included!

Cursed

The dice usually decide this anyway, so - no effect

StrickenSilly/Serious

Possibly allowing you to use a Champion with no penalty?

Gregarious/Introvert

Another crowd pleasing trait, possible morale bonus

Dis/ContentGeneral

No effect

WifeIs "etc"

No effect

FactionKiller

No effect

Good/Bad Diplomacy

Obviously didn't work before you ended up in a duel...

Legacy traits

No effect

TourneyKnight

Good for Jousting, and for morale

AcademyTrained

Maybe reduce the randomness of your dice?

GloriousFool

Unsure - most likely no effect

TooOldtoFight

Ability to use a champion without penalty

Senile

Same as above

---

Generally speaking, I agree with your comments. It's very helpful to have all these traits compiled.

I think haleandhearty/hypochondriac should definitely be included, since hp is the one stat the translates directly into dueling. I think it would be best if characters in duels had the same HP that they did in battles, since continuity between in-game mechanics and PBEM rules is usually for the best.

EDIT: I think I'll do the file for ancillaries myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cecil XIX

Generally speaking, I agree with your comments. It's very helpful to have all these traits compiled.

I think haleandhearty/hypochondriac should definitely be included, since hp is the one stat the translates directly into dueling. I think it would be best if characters in duels had the same HP that they did in battles, since continuity between in-game mechanics and PBEM rules is usually for the best.

---

Hence, never challenge the guy with Hale and Hearty, Battle Scarred, and Fine Plate Armor to a duel - ever.

Personally, I would rather see a system like econ proposed, detached from M2TW and with tactical options during the fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YLC

Hence, never challenge the guy with Hale and Hearty, Battle Scarred, and Fine Plate Armor to a duel - ever.

---

Indeed. In otherwords, you need to be an irresistable force in order to have a chance against an immovable object.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheFlax

Personally, I would rather see a system like econ proposed, detached from M2TW and with tactical options during the fight.

---

Certainly it's a matter of opinion. Mine is that since MII:TW is the reality upon which we build the rest of the game, we should stay as true to it as possible. I do want to include tactical options regardless though, as I wouldn't want be able to tell who's going to win before the fight even starts!

Its obvious both of you have put some thought into this and I have to commend YLC's dedication in writing out all those traits with a comment attached. I agree with Cecil about M2TW being the reality our characters live in, but its a pretty flawed and limited reality.

My two biggest qualms about this idea is firstly its complexity. That's a lot of date to take into account and I've always been a proponent of simple game systems. (When they are handled by humans) Secondly, when does adding data like traits, ancillaries and stats stops? For example, what of age? Surely experience isn't everything and a 20 years old has an advantage over a 60 years old in the physical department. I'm sure others could come up with a few other things like that which aren't represented in M2TW.

Indeed, there have to be limits. I wouldn't want to speak for YLC, but I think it's important to determine every possible factor we could implement, and from there narrow the focus down to what's feasible. I think we're just giving whoever creates the rules material he can choose to work with, not everything has to be included.

For a moment there I had a vision of horror; a system with about 50 to 60 modifiers for each characters. :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheFlax

For a moment there I had a vision of horror; a system with about 50 to 60 modifiers for each characters. :laugh4:

---

Hey now, better watch it - I'm starting to have fun organizing the system and choosing which stats to incorporate - no more then 20 will be in, and I am awaiting Cecil's ancillary list (and Save my Senator!).

I think in creating any dueling system it might be best to err on the side of simplicity... very few
MTW2 stats relate to personal combat anyway. Bonuses for special weapons and armor might be interesting, though.

Woad That's pretty much how tournements were done through most of the Middle Ages, I believe. :yes: