Tournament Combat

[Lanna Rose]

I think people are worried about the fight till you're bleeding out thing is cause of healing spells. I think that if a few NPCs were sent out as tourny healers then it wouldn't be such a problem. the way it wasa this last tourny was that the PC's were the healers giving us lett heals for the event. I personaly liked the 1-1 this year. I thought it was pretty fun.

 

[Pantzike]

I think people are worried about the fight till you're bleeding out thing is cause of healing spells. I think that if a few NPCs were sent out as tourny healers then it wouldn't be such a problem. the way it wasa this last tourny was that the PC's were the healers giving us lett heals for the event. I personaly liked the 1-1 this year. I thought it was pretty fun.

The issue is generally more of an IG one then an OOG one.

There are characters who view any use of actual resources (healing or otherwise) outside of REAL combat as a waste or even deplorable.

Depending on the character it could be anything from "put that time and energy into defending farms" to "when goblins attack later and we have no spells left because we participated in tournament, we will be less prepared to defend ourselves so it's not worth the risk".


Using a quick HQ example: Last year many people bowed out of Spellcasters due to not wanting to waste the resources. Then the participants agreed with each other to not recast protectives during the combat to further limit resource drain. All that being said... many participants were still "hated on" by some CHARACTERS (not players) for choosing to participate or in what way they participated.

I think if you're looking for the IG perspective you should ask IG and you may have more of those voices speak up. Asking here OOG you will get more of the OOG perspective of the mechanics of tourny. OR you may get mixed signals as people may, as a player, prefer combat based on body points and beating people to a pulp, but their characters may view that as a waste.

My 2 cents.

 

[mikestrauss]

I think people are worried about the fight till you're bleeding out thing is cause of healing spells. I think that if a few NPCs were sent out as tourny healers then it wouldn't be such a problem. the way it wasa this last tourny was that the PC's were the healers giving us lett heals for the event. I personaly liked the 1-1 this year. I thought it was pretty fun.

The issue is generally more of an IG one then an OOG one.

There are characters who view any use of actual resources (healing or otherwise) outside of REAL combat as a waste or even deplorable.

Depending on the character it could be anything from "put that time and energy into defending farms" to "when goblins attack later and we have no spells left because we participated in tournament, we will be less prepared to defend ourselves so it's not worth the risk".


Using a quick HQ example: Last year many people bowed out of Spellcasters due to not wanting to waste the resources. Then the participants agreed with each other to not recast protectives during the combat to further limit resource drain. All that being said... many participants were still "hated on" by some CHARACTERS (not players) for choosing to participate or in what way they participated.

I think if you're looking for the IG perspective you should ask IG and you may have more of those voices speak up. Asking here OOG you will get more of the OOG perspective of the mechanics of tourny. OR you may get mixed signals as people may, as a player, prefer combat based on body points and beating people to a pulp, but their characters may view that as a waste.

My 2 cents.

Honestly, I realize that the question would probably get significantly different answer IG than OOG. And, if I were making the decision purely based on IG factors, I would definitely change the format. But, it is important to keep in mind that PC doesn't just mean "player character". It also means "paying customer". And, with 75% of the responding customers expressing distaste for this format, I think it would be a disservice to the players and hinder their enjoyment of the event if the event was changed.

More people might respond to the poll and change the percentages or people may change their minds (I set the poll up to allow vote changing), but unless minds change or there is a massive in-game push for it, likely combat will not change in this way.

-MS

 

[Toddo]

Also a point to consider is that IG the noble in question at a tourney wants his ego fluffed, and real blood shows him that people are willing to die for him. Historically tourney's aren't about pleasing the populace, they're about the noble being reassured that people are willing to risk death for his favor and to find promising knights to fill positions in court. Nevermind the fact that having the best jouster in the realm or the winner of the melee owing them fealty gives them power over the other nobles as tales spread of their victories. Conscripted peasants may end up quitting the field if they know that a tourney champion is at the vanguard. Real blood and danger raises the champion's reputation, and having public displays of deadly skills encourages bards to sing of the invincibility of certain contenders, giving advantages in war. I'd hardly consider that a waste of resources.

 

[IvanDrake]

Toddo makes an excellent point. But I don't think our players really see themselves in a "medieval" time. For example, everyone is up in arms about the unfairness of the Ashbury legal system when in real medieval times there was no "right to confront an accuser" or "I deserve a fair trial in public!" Nobles could literally send anyone they wanted to prison for pretty much any reason they wanted.

--- Eric Stehle

 

[Ezri]

Right, but players SHOULD think that they're in a medieval setting. A lot of our modern ideals have been creeping into game lately (admittedly, we put some in on purpose, like men and women both being able to be knights) but things like free speech and a right to a fair trial just plain don't exist in this world.

 

[Robb G]

dammit plot, oppress us!!!

 

[Simon]

One question...individual tournament wise, what do those people who have fought in the final round have to say? That would be a rather important voice to hear from.

Personally my character might fight in combat just to test himself, but he would never use any skills since that endangers his ability to handle real trials later.
Personally my character will never compete in the casters competition again because its a waste of magic he would need to face real trials later.
Personally me the player does not want to use up an inordinate amount of the toys I have paid to play with for a short time in a long game so no skill will be used in a tournament.

Final thought. I loved the Chvialric code and the theory of the tournament and I love the way all those ideals played out in fact...and the way so many did not. However, did not the greatest martial champions compete in the Joust, a tournament which we can in no way represent and which had the most matter of fact means of judging...which did not necessarily require the shedding of blood? The biggest problem though is that the dynamics of per day abilities makes it near impossible to really replicate.

Out of curiosity, how many really significant figures were known for their accomplishments in tournaments?

~js

 

[IvanDrake]

Final thought. I loved the Chvialric code and the theory of the tournament and I love the way all those ideals played out in fact...and the way so many did not. However, did not the greatest martial champions compete in the Joust, a tournament which we can in no way represent and which had the most matter of fact means of judging...which did not necessarily require the shedding of blood?

If you are inferring that medieval jousting tournaments were bloodless affairs, I believe you are incorrect.

--- Eric Stehle

 

[IvanDrake]

According to a qick internet search......

"Many a tournament had its tale of killed and wounded in the chronicle books. We read how Roger of Lemburn struck Arnold de Montigny dead with a lance thrust under the helm. The first of the Montagu earls of Salisbury died of hurts taken at a Windsor jousting, and in those same lists at Windsor the earl's grandson Sir William Montagu was killed by his own father. William Longéspee in 1256 was so bruised that he never recovered his strength, and he is among many of whom the like is written."

--- Eric Stehle

 

[Mike Ventrella]

Right, but players SHOULD think that they're in a medieval setting. A lot of our modern ideals have been creeping into game lately (admittedly, we put some in on purpose, like men and women both being able to be knights) but things like free speech and a right to a fair trial just plain don't exist in this world.

It's always interesting to me, playing the town Magistrate, how much of what my character does would be fought against by what I do in real life.

 

[soleedge]

For me personally, I am fine with the format of combat already.


When I competed in martial arts tournaments, I was aware of the risk that one mistake on my end could result in a significant injury, and this was in a controlled environment where you wore protective gear and had referees watching us for our safety. I think alot of us in real life have also played in sport or competed in a contest of sorts where we faced similar rules and risks.


I think as long as you make the combatant aware of the rules, it is at the discretion of that player whether or not to compete. That player should also be willing to accept the consequences of his actions in the sanctioned fight, whether it be a loss of skills or having to need a healer after they are felled in combat.

 

[Gilwing]

Personally my character might fight in combat just to test himself, but he would never use any skills since that endangers his ability to handle real trials later.
Personally my character will never compete in the casters competition again because its a waste of magic he would need to face real trials later.
Personally me the player does not want to use up an inordinate amount of the toys I have paid to play with for a short time in a long game so no skill will be used in a tournament.
~js

Ironically Joe, a teammate of mine said he had the best time as a caster with his left over spells from the casters fight. We took into account that most of his healing spells would be out because he would take other spells in there place.

As for Team Tournament combat, that's part of the whole competition. It doesn't start at the beginning of the fight but is through out the whole weekend, choosing to use your parrys on Friday night against a BBG or save it to fight in heroes. Same goes for during the fight it self, do I use it against player X or player Y? You can do like others have in the past and made agreements to not use any "skills" during the combat. Why not right, if you know you have a better chance against player Y then save them and don't use them against player X.

 

[Dreamingfurther]

Honestly I think it would be a major change for the worse to do this "first blood" idea. It significantly favors those players who have the OOG money to invest in armor. AND it gives players no benefit for their characters "toughness" IG.

In general I think the same characters that will have an issue with "blood sports" are still going to have an issue with just about any sort of "sports" in game. And reducing the coolness of the tournament for many of the people who really "do" like tournaments for the sake of these individuals probably is a mistake. Just my thoughts though, I think the vote speak pretty clearly.

 

[Garathon]

Playing devil's advocate here since I don't really care how this plays out. I personally believe that a tournament is game. Games have rules and you need to succeed or fail based on your ability to play the game in the environment provided. Now on to my real thought...

The one point that has not been made during this is that fighting to first blood may create an environment where true skill is all that is tested. As was stated, statistically most players have on or around 20 armor points. For most of us fighters a whole lot more then 20 is encumbering and slows our striking rate or tires us out. I know that even given the option I would never where a 40 suit. It would be too hot and too slow for boffer combat. You could even mandate a max armor points for the combat. Fighting to first blood tests true boffer combat skill and removes level advantage. Someone mentioned MMA and Martial Arts tournaments earlier and I think that actually makes the concept of evening the playing field a more valid standpoint. Most Martial Arts or MMA tournaments are broken by either skill level (belt rank) or weight class. I think our IG levels are very much an equivalent. Generally speaking our lower level characters who would like to fight in the tournament have little to know chance against our top level characters. Many of those people would take 2 or 3 hits from an Ithaca or Sparticous and even with a 40 suit would still be down. If everyone had the same armor then it is all down to skill and how hard you can hit.

I think it would be very interesting to either break the combat into level ranked brackets, which could be held all at the same time, and then have everyone wearing the same level of armor and going out at first blood. This would really make it a true skill test. I suppose you could then have low, mid, and high level champions or have the top in each level fight in the final.

Lastly, I totally agree that you should be able to fight with whatever weapon combination you prefer.

 

[Octaine]

Playing devil's advocate here since I don't really care how this plays out. I personally believe that a tournament is game. Games have rules and you need to succeed or fail based on your ability to play the game in the environment provided. Now on to my real thought...

The one point that has not been made during this is that fighting to first blood may create an environment where true skill is all that is tested. As was stated, statistically most players have on or around 20 armor points. For most of us fighters a whole lot more then 20 is encumbering and slows our striking rate or tires us out. I know that even given the option I would never where a 40 suit. It would be too hot and too slow for boffer combat. You could even mandate a max armor points for the combat. Fighting to first blood tests true boffer combat skill and removes level advantage. Someone mentioned MMA and Martial Arts tournaments earlier and I think that actually makes the concept of evening the playing field a more valid standpoint. Most Martial Arts or MMA tournaments are broken by either skill level (belt rank) or weight class. I think our IG levels are very much an equivalent. Generally speaking our lower level characters who would like to fight in the tournament have little to know chance against our top level characters. Many of those people would take 2 or 3 hits from an Ithaca or Sparticous and even with a 40 suit would still be down. If everyone had the same armor then it is all down to skill and how hard you can hit.

I think it would be very interesting to either break the combat into level ranked brackets, which could be held all at the same time, and then have everyone wearing the same level of armor and going out at first blood. This would really make it a true skill test. I suppose you could then have low, mid, and high level champions or have the top in each level fight in the final.

Lastly, I totally agree that you should be able to fight with whatever weapon combination you prefer.

Combat is one event for the tourney, so how would points be given out if we had say three brackets ( low, middle, high level )?

 

[Garathon]

Not sure. Perhaps you would give points to each champion. Maybe you break up the total points that normally would have been awarded for the whole event and you give smaller amounts to each level bracket.