Talk:League of Duelists

Tie Votes

Should judges be free to vote for a tie?

• Personally I say they should be able to, I think it allows for a more fair system when all other things being equal, the duel is too close to call. It allows for continued RP and adds a bit more realism into dueling, because on any given day, two people may very well be evenly matched. Tiphareth 19:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

• I am of the opinion there should be no ties. Only because I tend to use duels to settle conflict, and feel any tie will just ensure another duel must take place; something that is not always easy to organize. But I'd also not moan if they were allowed. - Kuzial
  • I'd like to point out that I don't at all feel that Ties should be common, but rather reserved for duels that wliterallyrally not be "fair" to judge one way or another because they were so close. Tiphareth (talk) 00:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

What to do if there is a tie?

• There is the option of giving each of the duelists one more round to eek out a victory, or to just rule a tie and say both duelists are too tired/injured/etc to continue... or perhaps a combination of both. Tiphareth 19:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Beyond time constraints, I like this idea... though, I often end duels in a position where I simply cannot fight any more, beyond a desperation attack if I win... so adding another round could get tricky, but is manageable if judges take into consideration perhaps some of the exhaustion isn't so apparent in the final round... but it is a good idea. - Kuzial
    • That is a good point, perhaps the state of the duelists at the end would be part of the decision process on whether an "overtime" round is reasonable or not. Tiphareth (talk) 00:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
    • And you could also take into consideration asking whether or not the duellists themselves how they'd want to resolve it, based on what their characters can handle/etc. ~ Krice
  • I just thought of something quite important. If we have only one round, it's going to advantage the person attacking over the person defending. Personally, as a general rule of thumb, I try to keep my defences written more straight forward than my attacks. Because it involves direct interaction with my opponent, I like to ensure it is crystal clear... with attacks, I can be more poetic because it is my creation alone I am making. So depending on whether I got to attack next or not would really make a difference to me. -Svil.
    • To me, a "round" is one attack and one defense for each duelist. So it would basically be like the duel is starting over, there would be a single attack, the other character would get a defense and attack post, then there would be a final defense. Who posts first could be redetermined by some random means, or could just alternate from the original posting order, or could be the same. Depending on what the duelists wanted.Tiphareth (talk) 03:26, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
      • If you were to do it that way, perhaps the person who goes first can have shorter time. Otherwise it adds over half an hour to a duel, which is a fair bit, and also the person who goes first have essentially twenty minutes to impress the judges, rather than half that. So like two seven minute rounds and the other person gets a 10 minute round. Or if you do long duels, you could do two 10 minute rounds and one of 15.
        • That sounds fair to me. Also if you let the person who went second in the duel go first in the OT round, it would balance out who gets extra time a bit. Tiphareth (talk) 03:42, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Should an auto-hit round be mandatory?

• I believe an auto-hit round should be mandatory in every duel, so the character wins as well as the player winning the duel. This ensures that whoever wins actually wins, and the differences can be settled accordingly in RP, instead of beyond an OOC knowing who won, there is no definitive IC victor. (Note: There are exceptions to this rule, of course. But in general I think it makes sense.) - Kuzial

• I too firmly believe that every IC duel should have an autohit round as part of the stakes. It is my opinion that the duel isn't yet over after the final defense, the duelists are merely waiting to see who has "earned" the right to end the fight. Tiphareth (talk) 00:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)