How many rounds should a duel last?

**econ21** · 07-14-2009, 10:24

A quick poll to tweak my proposed duelling system: how many rounds would players like to see a duel typically last? I am not asking for an artificial limit (like 15 rounds for a boxing match), just for the average amount of time we should expect to see a duel play out for until one side is beaten.

To recap: each round players submit rock-paper-scissors to an umpire, who then uses that to adjust some dice rolls based on stats and works out the damage dealt to the loser.

In my proposed rules, the damage per round is 2d4 (2-8) and players start off with 8 hit points. So typically, a duel will last a couple of rounds. When players get combat experience, they may well become scarred, getting more hitpoints and potentially extending the combat by a turn or two.

I chose to keep duels short because I wanted to keep the number of interactions with the umpire to a minimum (thinking they would require a 24 hour period of notice between each). You could rationalise it as being first round joust, second round foot combat.

However, it has been pointed out that (a) it might be possible for both combatants and umpire to be online for a period of time, so that interactions need not take days; (b) short duels might be anti-climactic; (c) short duels make the duels more dependent on luck than stats or RPS "strategy".

Consequently, I am throwing this open to a poll and will adjust the damage in the light of people's preferences.

**Cecil XIX** · 07-14-2009, 10:53

I don't see a need to worry about it.

**TinCow** · 07-14-2009, 11:52

Voted Other. I say you make them however long you think they need to be, on a case-by-base basis.

**Marcus Agrippa** · 07-19-2009, 11:12

why not just have a MP battle with identical small forces?
1 archer
1 bodyguard
1 spearmen

Then the duel is more about whos sightly better not whos got the largest forces and it keeps it in the game.
Cos the rock paper scissors is contrary to dueling. it depends on luck where as I duel all every week and it's far more reactionary than that. you react or set the enemy up or lure him in to doing somethings premature.
so a small tactical battle give us gameplay and some skill.

**econ21** · 07-19-2009, 12:17

Originally Posted by Marcus Agrippa

why not just have a MP battle with identical small forces?
1 archer
1 bodyguard
1 spearmen

An MP battle was TinCow's suggested way of handling a duel type situation in KotR, but no one ever took him up on it. Reading about how early tournaments were basically grouped melees between knights, I can see it has some appeal in terms of historical flavour. The practical problem is that not everyone wants to do MP and it may be tricky to arrange in some cases. I would like to keep the option of resolving a duel by the rules I suggested, but if two players want to solve a grudge by a "bloodless" MP battle, that would be fine too.

**econ21** · 07-20-2009, 15:34

Given the results of this poll, I think I will leave the tournament rules as they are - with 2D4 damage per round (and 8 hits points to start). I was thinking the rules implied a two round battle, but that is assuming one side wins both rounds. Early on, contests should be more equal, so they should average around 3 rounds - which is the most popular option.

I'll edit the first post of the tournament thread to make it easier to find the current rules.