5 hours ago, Starbane said:

I do like the game. I also like the dueling rules.

You are in good company.

5 hours ago, Starbane said:

Based on the definition of honor in the rules as I posted earlier, duels are functioning as FFG intended them. You are attempting to turn dueling into something it is not per the rules.

Yes, this is all true. I read the rules and played by them. That is the entire reason I want them changed to something better.

5 hours ago, Starbane said:

You are confusing what you don’t like with the conditioning of being broken.

Oh, I am sorry. I will try to be more clear. As a matter of fact I will give you the best reasons why these rules are broken, right now:

Thesis: "The dueling rules are broken."

1.) Game Mechanics: No other action type in the game punishes the initiator of an action in the same way dueling does. "Route", "Outwit", "For Shame" and others, for example, do not "punish" the initiator. You pay a cost, sure. But that is not punishment. You are managing resources to achieve an effect on the game board. The cost of that effect is up front and everyone can see it before you the resolution of the event is made manifest. If we say there should be an element of randomness in a duel mechanic...and there should be...it should punish the losing character/player and reward the winning player/character. The current system, in the vast majority of duels, punishes BOTH sides. So, it is possible to win every duel and lose the game because of it.

2.) Game Balance: This game is made up of micro-conflicts. Each micro-conflict can have different win conditions, subjectively or objectively. Plus, because each player can have different methods for their "win condition" and "goals" for the action, the "win condition" can be obscured. This adds subtly to the game and it is a good thing. But winning each micro-conflict is supposed to get the winner closer to one of the possible win conditions not farther way, or rather, it should not contribute to the winner of the micro-conflict losing the game, directly. Under the current rules, it is possible for a player to initiate 4 duels, in a single combat phase, and lose the game at the end of the fourth duel, immediately. This gives a very slanted advantage to the loser of the duel and in so doing, unbalances the game.

3.) Effect of Honor Loss: No clan starts the game with more than 12 honor and, I think, more clans start a game with 10 honor, more clans start with 10 honor than any other value. Dishonor is a victory condition. There are cards that transfer "1" honor from one player to another, one clan to another clan. Character effects, a clan stronghold and the Air Ring can do this. But the dueling rules can force one player/clan to transfer "4" honor to the other player/clan and the transfer can be as high as "5" or "6" honor with other card effects. This is one-third to almost one half of a clan's starting honor, possibly in one duel. This means, the dueling rules can force transfers of honor, in one duel, more power than any clan champion ability, any stronghold, any single activation of a ring. No action in the game is this powerful. And, even if we came to the conclusion that any card/action should be this much power, because most duels are normally trigger against characters with lower duel stats than the initiating character, this transfer is more likely to go to the loser of the duel. So, the player initiating the duel is giving his opponent access to the most powerful action in the game, as far as honor transfers are concerned, but because of the math behind the challenger having a higher duel stat, the largest honor transfers will happen in favor of the player/character losing the duel. The reward is going in the wrong direction.

4.) Fictional Storyline: Rokugan is a realm governed by an honor component. This has duelists and the majority are supposed to honorable. Because the rules say, "you must enter a number on the dial of how much honor you are willing to lose", it makes gives every duel an element of dishonor. Honorable samurai/duelists would not want to be dishonorable, by definition. The dueling rules directly contradict the idea of honorable duelist, by definition. Because you always have to add the number on the dial (the amount of honor to risk) to your military stat. So, under this current system, every duel is DISHONORABLE, at some level, even when both players choose "1", because both characters are still RISKING "1" honor. That, by definition, is DISHONORABLE. Honorable characters would not do this.

This dueling system does all four of these things at the same time, and so, none of these points stand alone. And for these reasons the dueling rules should be changed.

6 hours ago, Starbane said:

However, that does not make them broken and none of your post have proven the rules to be broken

If you think none of my post have been point to what is broken in the dueling rules, you are not reading my posts.

But hey, I am not the only one. Zesu Shadaban identified an honor dial issue (Yay Zesu!) and shosuko says there should be changes when around the idea of duels that end in ties. These are two people that ridiculed the idea of changing the dueling rules at all. There was another person that came up with a whole new lay of rules that included political dueling. I knoe the thread is long, but it is all in here. We have been very busy.

39 minutes ago, Tebbo said:

We may yet see duels which do something with a tie.

It's just too early to gripe too hard. After these 120 more cards are added we might have a better idea how duels can play out and whether they're fun and thematic or bleh.

I imagine we will see Crane dueling cards which allow us to recover some honor or like duelist training, use other resources in place of honor.

I see the hope in your statement, Tebbo. But if the underlying rules are broken, any duel that comes later will use the same rules and may be, to some degree, broken as well. This concerns me.

10 hours ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

Now, among people and teams that are in conflict over something worth having, none of them walk into the conflict to lose on purpose. That is called taking a dive, it is considered cheating and, usually, that person or team is penalized for it. You are admitting that your version of the Crab Clan, takes dives, half the time, in order to try to win. Does that thought sit nicely with what the Crab Clan is supposed to be? Like I said, "Excellent stratagem, fantastic idea...using dueling to force your opponent to lose cards/honor." But is that what the Crab Clan of Rokugan actually stand for?

This is the part that chews at me. If I pick up a Crab Deck...I will defend at all costs. I will become the beat stick and pummel the world unto my will, I will sacrifice my own brother to make sure you do not cross the bridge. And I will be proud of that, even if I lose. That is the Crab Clan.

Have you ever actually read ANYTHING Japanese, or Eastern in general? Challenging a clearly superior foe in order to dishonor them happens ALL THE TIME. Dying to demonstrate moral superiority is normal, expected, and revered.

It really seems to me that you simply cannot get past your own assumptions and put yourself in a non-American (and incidentally, non-adolescent) mindset of "winning is everything". There is no honor for an inferior opponent in winning a duel, if it is demonstrated that he is inferior. The idea that it is a good thing for the "plucky underdog gets stupidly lucky and wins" is something that is almost uniquely American. Most people in the world admire someone who combines talent and hard work to become the best, and a random fluke allowing someone who has put less effort/skill into a match to win is seen as UNfortunate, and an affront to the way the world should work. It's like watching the bad-guy win.

Listening to you is like every cultural-superiority, ugly-American overseas stereotype playing itself out over a game, in a setting that lets us see it play out in near real time. It's NOT all about winning, duels aren't even MOSTLY about winning. If you want all-or-nothing winners get the glory look at the conflicts, THOSE are where the warring sides in this game are all in and winning is the moral imperative. Duels are not deathmatches, they are not brawls, they are filled with cultural expectations, hidden meanings, rules both written and unwritten, and goals that are almost certainly far more complex than "hurr-durr, I hits 'em harder". Read the fiction, "Garden of Lies", that duel was instigated just to get Kitsuki Shomon to go to a party and be obligated to stay after winning!

1 hour ago, Mirith said:

So every Samurai, Courtier and Shugenja in Rokugan is the equivalent of the top players of a professional sport, in terms of skill?

They are participants in the conflict.

1 hour ago, Mirith said:

Also, what you describe is best described as Glory, not Honor (Especially in RPG Terms, not so much in the LCG terms since glory isn't really touched)

No. I meant honor. Card effects "honor" or "dishonor" individual characters. That happening to a clan gains a player an honor token to symbolize how many times the clan has been "honored".

1 hour ago, Mirith said:

So I would agree, if you win a major dueling tournament, you should probably gain honor.

I would say, if you win any contest where the rules where adhered to, you would gain honor.

1 hour ago, Mirith said:

We don't have a <X> Championship event.

I was using those type of events as easy examples because the "honor" became a physical item.

1 hour ago, Mirith said:

These duels could be back alley duels (Which should probably lose both sides honor for participating), or battlefield duels (where you really are just trying to kill each other, again not the most honorable).

The rules do not say that. The rules say honor, specifically the risking of it, are apart of EVERY duel. Duelist Training, as a particular duel, allows you to discard from your hand instead of losing honor. But once you choose honor in that duel the broken rules apply.

1 hour ago, Mirith said:

But Honor really depends on behavior, not results.

The rules do not say this. And if you talking about flavor/story telling, I would be willing to go along with that, but if you search for the terms "thesis: dueling rules are broken" you should see a post by me where I explain why the dueling rules break with the story-line.

1 hour ago, Mirith said:

Bayushi Jin learns Kitsuki Daisuke's dark secret of his love affair with Kakita Kae. Jin blackmails Daisuke saying that he would expose their secret unless Daisuke finds an some reason to challenge Shiba Jouta, an inexperienced duelist in court. Daisuke tricks Jouta into saying something unfortunate and challenges him. The duel goes normally, and Daisuke wins handily using normal means, no tricks, just by being a better duelist. Is this honorable of Daisuke? Is this Dishonorable of Jouta?

According to the RULES...this is not possible. Why? Because in the duel, you said, "Daisuke wins handily using normal means, no tricks, just by being a better duelist." In the RULES, you are required to select a number on the dial between "1" and "5". The dial is the indicator of how much honor you are WILLING to lose. Put another way, the number is the indication of how dishonorable you are willing to be, how much you are willing to cheat. Selecting "1" means "I am gonna cheat a little" and "5" is "I am gonna cheat a lot. Once the dials are revealed, that number is ADDED to your skill. So, there is no, "winning by just being a better duelist." And even when you both bid the same amount, no honor is exchanged...but not because you were both honorable. It is because you were both willing to cheat the same amount. Your scenario cannot exist under these rules.

Started sneezing and feeling a general sense of unease, so figured I'd check here first to see who was talking about me. To make something very clear to anyone just joining...whatever this even is anymore, here is the "issue" I identified with the honor dial. The rules as written do not currently have a maximum limit in place that an honor bid value can be increased. The current card pool has cards which, in extreme fringe cases, can allow a player to increase their own bid to very high numbers. Due to my concern regarding open design space that may allow future cards to manipulate opponent bids, I submitted a rules query about maximum bid value manipulation. As far as things stand now, I have no problem with how the honor dial interacts with the dueling system and have no interest in seeing the dueling system changed. There is a significant difference between wanting the dueling system expanded on with new cards/variations to dueling, and wanting the system completely changed from the current ruleset. I won't speak for him directly, but I'm pretty sure @shosuko feels more or less the same way, since his points were only that an effect for tied duels could be added, and that FFG could and probably will add cards to expand on dueling.

32 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

Started sneezing and feeling a general sense of unease, so figured I'd check here first to see who was talking about me.

It has been quiet with out you. Sorry you are felling bad.

36 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

here is the "issue" I identified with the honor dial. The rules as written do not currently have a maximum limit in place that an honor bid value can be increased...I have no problem with how the honor dial interacts with the dueling system and have no interest in seeing the dueling system changed.

Duly noted...my friend. I though the issue you identified applied to duels as well as other things that touched the honor dial. but if I am wrong, I can take that.

39 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

have no interest in seeing the dueling system changed...I'm pretty sure @shosuko feels more or less the same way...

Except for the ties... He expressly said there should be change when it comes to duels duels ending in a tie.

Nope, nope, nope. You used ellipses to remove all the context of my statement and misconstrue what I said. I'm done with that. I'll post the response to my bid value inquiry somewhere else when I get it.

1 hour ago, KineticOperator said:

Have you ever actually read ANYTHING Japanese, or Eastern in general? Challenging a clearly superior foe in order to dishonor them happens ALL THE TIME. Dying to demonstrate moral superiority is normal, expected, and revered.

Oh dear...Wow...ok...

Even in era(s) where samurai where prevalent, there were vast amounts people living in Japan. In that environment, OF COURSE things were happening all the time. Women were getting pregnant all the time, that does not mean every woman was pregnant all the time. There is a point where the rare event, the event that happens rarely over time, becomes common when the population looked at increases, meaning the amount of possible environments where the situation can possibly happen is broadened. That does not make it less rare, unless you are taking the shallow view, just looking at "time".

1 hour ago, KineticOperator said:

It really seems to me that you simply cannot get past your own assumptions and put yourself in a non-American (and incidentally, non-adolescent) mindset of "winning is everything".

Oh, you have not been paying attention. It got all political in this piece.

1 hour ago, KineticOperator said:

It's NOT all about winning, duels aren't even MOSTLY about winning. If you want all-or-nothing winners get the glory look at the conflicts, THOSE are where the warring sides in this game are all in and winning is the moral imperative. Duels are not deathmatches, they are not brawls, they are filled with cultural expectations, hidden meanings, rules both written and unwritten, and goals that are almost certainly far more complex than "hurr-durr, I hits 'em harder". Read the fiction, "Garden of Lies", that duel was instigated just to get Kitsuki Shomon to go to a party and be obligated to stay after winning!

The rules do not say anything to this...and the current rules break the story-line. The RULES say, you MUST choose a number on the dial that indicates how much honor you are willing to LOSE...ie how dishonorable you are willing to be. So, there are NO honorable duels...ANYWHERE in the LCG. You can find honorable duels in the fiction. So....yeah...

"Duels are not deathmatches"...if you have no fate on the target character, Mirumoto Raitsugu's duel is to the death, or the closest thing to it in the game. So...there is that too...

12 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

Nope, nope, nope. You used ellipses to remove all the context of my statement and misconstrue what I said. I'm done with that. I'll post the response to my bid value inquiry somewhere else when I get it.

Oh, ok.. I parsed it wrong. Sorry.

15 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

Nope, nope, nope. You used ellipses to remove all the context of my statement and misconstrue what I said. I'm done with that. I'll post the response to my bid value inquiry somewhere else when I get it.

Where did I do this?

*puts mustard on the table*

How has this been going on for 11 pages?

8 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

*puts mustard on the table*

How has this been going on for 11 pages?

Because most new people to the thread are repeating arguments that have already been articulated. It takes a lot of space to clean that up.

11 hours ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

And that is my point...

I agree. But there have the same underlying rules. Unless a card actually says, "do not use the honor dial" every duel uses the dishonor dial.

See, we are having a very productive conversation.

Because you can splash it anywhere, I agree.

Only if you are looking at one game. I am looking at the all of the cards and the dueling rules applying overall. There are nine cards that have duels, three of those cards are the attachment in question. If you are looking at which duels get trigger most often...yes, it is Duelist Training. But I am not throwing out the baby in the bath water...once you choose honor in the Duelist Training duel...you hit the problem in question...the broken rule.

What I think is so funny about your argument is that you are deeply entrenched in this idea that challenging someone to a duel risks your honor. I don't think you understand how the dueling works, or why it is so strong. The character with the higher duel stat always has the honor advantage. Consider this

I have Raigutsu with an Ornate Katana and I challenge your Doji Challenger

We are currently 5 stat to 3. For me to assure a win I can bid 4. This is a lot of honor to risk, but it also takes all of the risk away from my opponent. They know they cannot win the duel so they make me look bad by calling me out as a bully, losing the duel badly with a bid of 1 and collect the sympathy of all bystanders improving their clan's honor as the civilized people that they are.

However I can just bid a 1 instead. If I bid a 1 then my opponent then must decide - do they bid 4 and win the duel? Or do they bid 1 and still accept defeat? If they feel they can win the duel and pump up all of their resources into the duel to beat me, then I can shame them for how much effort it took them to beat me using just my most basic techniques and improve the honor of my family even though they "won" the duel.

If they bid just 1 themselves then I am at no honor loss AND I won the duel. For this reason the aggressor is typically best bidding only 1 ever time. The real skill and beauty of the dueling system isn't the ability to always get your amazing duel-victory-condition. The amazing part is that you put your opponent in a position where they either give you honor, or give you an effect worth much more than any normal action. If you aren't playing the game to maximize on making this a difficult choice with no right answer for your opponent, then it is your own tactical failing. I recommend watching some videos online so you can see what dueling is about in this card game.

Also - add Contingency Plan to your deck. I'm really getting excited to play a Crane -> Unicorn deck with Contingency Plan. I'll force honor losses through dueling and drawing, maybe get Hotaru on the Ring of Air once or twice, cancel a key event my opponent plays just for fun, and then Contingency plan a draw or duel bid to steal that crucial last honor my opponent THOUGHT was safe from me muahahahahaaa!!!!

9 hours ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

I don't care if I am "liked"... I care about being right. But it is a cute joke.

Sometimes being liked IS being right. If we were to try and decide which side of the road we drove on, and everyone liked driving on the right side of the road, but you insisted you didn't care what people liked and drove on the left side of the road anyway... you would then be wrong regardless of your opinion.

Likewise as you are the only person who I've seen become so hung up on this representation of honor, where pretty much every other person I've spoken with enjoys the new system, and feels it is quite thematic and engaging... well you can continue to wallow in your opinion all you want, but there is no reason for it to change. There is no "right" or "wrong" beyond what system is "liked" because it feels both thematic and engaging.

24 minutes ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

Because most new people to the thread are repeating arguments that have already been articulated. It takes a lot of space to clean that up.

Well, I'll take you're word for it. I really can't get into the thread, someone's ego is currently blocking the entrance.

46 minutes ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

Oh dear...Wow...ok...

Even in era(s) where samurai where prevalent, there were vast amounts people living in Japan. In that environment, OF COURSE things were happening all the time. Women were getting pregnant all the time, that does not mean every woman was pregnant all the time. There is a point where the rare event, the event that happens rarely over time, becomes common when the population looked at increases, meaning the amount of possible environments where the situation can possibly happen is broadened. That does not make it less rare, unless you are taking the shallow view, just looking at "time".

L5R is a work of fiction, and I am referring to Japanese/Eastern fiction. In that context, "honor-dueling" and "honorable deaths" are absolutely central. They aren't "A theme", they are "THE theme" to be found over, and over, and over. "47 Ronin" is a perfect example where they ALL DIE, and by doing so prove the honor of their lord Oishi.

Done, blocking, hopefully won't come across anything else quite so obstinately contrary and unwilling to address the points of people who disagree.

8 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

Well, I'll take you're word for it. I really can't get into the thread, someone's ego is currently blocking the entrance.

I admit, I got a little snippy with someone that did not show respect, in general, in the conversation, sure. But it is all here. Don't take anyone's word for it...look for yourself.

22 minutes ago, KineticOperator said:

L5R is a work of fiction, and I am referring to Japanese/Eastern fiction. In that context, "honor-dueling" and "honorable deaths" are absolutely central. They aren't "A theme", they are "THE theme" to be found over, and over, and over.

EXACTLY!!! HONOR is supposed to be "THE" theme. I fully agree, and I want that. But, THE RULES say, you must choose a number on the honor dial...the dial that THE RULES say, is the indicator of how much honor you are willing to lose. In other words, how DISHONORABLE your character is willing to be. Every duel. EVERY DUEL, IN EVERY GAME. So, there is no such thing as an HONORABLE duel, in the game...that is supposed to be based on the Rokugan fiction. Even if both players select the same number, that is not honorable combat. This is both players indicating that they are willing to cheat the same amount, even if they both chose "1" on the dial. So, the THE RULES are not aligned with the stories about/in Rokugan.

But the "intentionally losing a duel" was a rare thing. We keep reading about them because it is a "man-bites-dog" story. It is because it is rare, you keep reading about them. I am not going to argue that is didn't happen, but the majority of duels seem to be over a point of honor, between honorable combatants, the winning duelist usually got the "fame"/"honor" for winning and the losing person, when they died, it is normally said, died honorably. This is not the way the game is.

Now, there is a person in the thread that says, "Honor is just a resource to be managed. It has no over arching idea worth fighting and dying for, in the context of the game." I think when you take "honor" away from the fictional samurai tradition in the story we base the game on, it makes the game worse...not better. But I do agree with you, FULLY. Honor should be HONOR!

38 minutes ago, shosuko said:

Consider this

I have Raigutsu with an Ornate Katana and I challenge your Doji Challenger

We are currently 5 stat to 3. For me to assure a win I can bid 4. This is a lot of honor to risk, but it also takes all of the risk away from my opponent. They know they cannot win the duel so they make me look bad by calling me out as a bully, losing the duel badly with a bid of 1 and collect the sympathy of all bystanders improving their clan's honor as the civilized people that they are.

According to THE RULES, there is no "calling me out as a bully", "make me look bad"... The dial is the amount of honor YOU are willing to LOSE. This dial is the amount of DISHONOR you was willing to take (the removal of honor from your pool). So, you are ALWAYS risking honor.

43 minutes ago, shosuko said:

However I can just bid a 1 instead. If I bid a 1 then my opponent then must decide - do they bid 4 and win the duel? Or do they bid 1 and still accept defeat? If they feel they can win the duel and pump up all of their resources into the duel to beat me, then I can shame them for how much effort it took them to beat me using just my most basic techniques and improve the honor of my family even though they "won" the duel.

First, THE RULES do not say anything "you shaming" anyone. Second, you are talking about a duelist going into a duel and not striving for perfection in the form, not being precise and using a lesser technique. I have been constantly told in this thread, dueling about form, technique, grace...But here you are saying your duelist not attempting the perfect motion in the strike. And just to be clear, THE RULES do not support this!! According to the rules, the dial is a all about risking honor. Nothing more.

52 minutes ago, shosuko said:

If you aren't playing the game to maximize on making this a difficult choice with no right answer for your opponent, then it is your own tactical failing. I recommend watching some videos online so you can see what dueling is about in this card game.

I have been watching videos. I play every day. I have read the rules...THAT IS HOW I KEEP QUOTING THEM TO YOU, even in this particular post! This is how I cat describe exactly WHY the dueling rules are broken.

55 minutes ago, shosuko said:

Also - add Contingency Plan to your deck. I'm really getting excited to play a Crane -> Unicorn deck with Contingency Plan. I'll force honor losses through dueling and drawing, maybe get Hotaru on the Ring of Air once or twice, cancel a key event my opponent plays just for fun, and then Contingency plan a draw or duel bid to steal that crucial last honor my opponent THOUGHT was safe from me

Under the current rules, yeah, that is excellent stratagem!! You are absolutely right. It doesn't fix the broken rules, but it is excellent advice in this rule set.

56 minutes ago, shosuko said:

Sometimes being liked IS being right.

I guess, but I am glad this is not one of those events. The points I raise are demonstrable, based on the THE RULES. The story-line break is possibly subjective, because it is about a fictional story...but it is still a thing.

1 hour ago, shosuko said:

Likewise as you are the only person who I've seen become so hung up on this representation of honor, where pretty much every other person I've spoken with enjoys the new system, and feels it is quite thematic and engaging...

Sure, I completely understand your point. But just because more people like the new rules does not mean I am wrong. That is called, " argumentum ad populum ", the appeal to population. I am not trying to disrespect you, but that is a fallacy. If you understand my point...

1 hour ago, shosuko said:

well you can continue to wallow in your opinion all you want, but there is no reason for it to change.

I have given four reasons to change it, but I understand the "agree to disagree" idea in your point.

1 hour ago, shosuko said:

There is no "right" or "wrong" beyond what system is "liked" because it feels both thematic and engaging.

Ok. If we are looking at it from a subjective feel, sure. And without stepping away from that subjective idea, there are more reasons why it should be changed, game balance being just one reason. That is an OBJECTIVE reason. And, I am not alone. Some people that agree with me have posted in this thread. So, I am comfortable, thus far.

12 minutes ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

I guess, but I am glad this is not one of those events. The points I raise are demonstrable, based on the THE RULES. The story-line break is possibly subjective, because it is about a fictional story...but it is still a thing.

Sure, I completely understand your point. But just because more people like the new rules does not mean I am wrong. That is called, " argumentum ad populum ", the appeal to population. I am not trying to disrespect you, but that is a fallacy. If you understand my point...

This actually -is- one of those times. If everyone likes it, and we enjoy it, and it is the game we want to play - then the game is right. If it is not the game you want to play, you find a different game. This game is not in Beta like the RPG, it is in full release AND with glowing reviews... You are the only person that seems to be hung up on this...

Its not going to change because currently everyone likes it. Which makes it right.

3 minutes ago, shosuko said:

This actually -is- one of those times. If everyone likes it, and we enjoy it, and it is the game we want to play - then the game is right.

I the subjective point, sure, I completely understand. On the objective points, game mechanics, I respectfully disagree.

15 minutes ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

According to THE RULES, there is no "calling me out as a bully", "make me look bad"... The dial is the amount of honor YOU are willing to LOSE. This dial is the amount of DISHONOR you was willing to take (the removal of honor from your pool). So, you are ALWAYS risking honor.

How do you interpret the exchange of honor? Because the choices are clear.

As the aggressor you can choose to either 1) risk losing with a bid of 1, or 2) PAY HONOR to win.

As the challenged you can choose to either 1) pay honor to possibly win, or 2) take the loss with a bid of 1.

This isn't an "agree to disagree" moment. You either acknowledge reality, the way the game works, and will continue to work since everyone else is on board, or YOU disagree. Not with me, but with FFG and L5R in which case you might just want to find a different game.

*could go on to point out that since this is a subjective subject, and not an objective one, there is technically no right or wrong answer, just an opinion of what someone likes or dislikes. That spending 11 pages trying to defend a position seems largely fruitless endeavor much akin to tilting at windmills.*

*instead, will nom on some popcorns and just enjoy for the time being, and wait for a response that won't be read.*

*nom. nom*

1 minute ago, shosuko said:

How do you interpret the exchange of honor?

I look to what THE RULES say. The rules are clear.

2 minutes ago, shosuko said:

As the aggressor you can choose to either 1) risk losing with a bid of 1, or 2) PAY HONOR to win.

As the challenged you can choose to either 1) pay honor to possibly win, or 2) take the loss with a bid of 1.

Yes, this is true because the authoritative source...THE DUELING RULES...say the difference between the to dials, the dials that indicate how much honor you are willing to LOSE in this duel, is paid to the player with the lower bid.

So, according to THE RULES, there is no "calling me out as a bully" or someone else that "makes me look bad". THE RULES say, it is ONLY about how much honor YOU choose to LOSE in the duel. It is just that cut and dry...pardon the pun.

8 minutes ago, shosuko said:

This isn't an "agree to disagree" moment.

But when I think the rules should be changed, and I put real reasons why it should be changed, what are we supposed to do with this, when you and I do not agree? I am simply stating my position. Telling me, "you are outnumbered", does not address the points I brought up. So, I simply respect your position and go one having my own perspective until the specific points are proven wrong.

If you said, "the four point swing is not more powerful than the clan champions, Air Ring, and all the strongholds, as honor swings are concerned..." and you PROVE IT, I will change my opinion.

If you said, "The honor dial does NOT indicate how much honor you are willing to lose in a duel..." and you PROVE IT, I will change my opinion.

If you said, "Here is the overall presidence of where actions punish the initiator with unknown amounts..." and you PROVE IT, I will change my opinion.

Like I said earlier in the thread, I am easy. Quoting the current rules does not do any of the above. Personal interpretations on the dueling rules does not do any of the above. And that has been the majority of responses I have received in opposition of my ideas about changing the dueling rules.

14 minutes ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

I look to what THE RULES say. The rules are clear.

Check out Theresa May over here.