14 hours ago, player2902697 said:

• Compare the character's dueling stat, (normally military stat) pick the lowest, designate this as "X".
• Add 5 to the low stat, designate this as "Y": X + 5 = Y
• Take other character's dueling stat, designate this as "Z"
• Subtract "Z" from "Y", designate this as "N": Y - Z = N
• Add 1 to N, designate this as "M": N + 1 = M
• M is the number you put on the honor dial to have the character with the highest stat win the duel.
  • Note: If M is less than 1, choose 1 on the honor dial.

Well there's the problem: you're doing it wrong. Your inexperience is not an argument for a bad system. No-one should be duelling this way.

Or better yet, everyone should duel this way: more wins for me!

The original error has been addressed but lets put it simply 'you only lose honor based on the dials NOT on the dials PLUS strength therefore if you bid 1 you will NEVER lose honor' (caveats unless someone has a card that increases your bid or decreases theirs below one)

So the op then doubles down on that with the assumption that bidding 5 is honourable. Nope wrong way round bidding 5 is taking every wrinkle in the rules to win. Some might consider that the dueller bidding 5 is cheating and some might consider that the duellist bidding 5 has perhaps seen the other duellist slipping or be distracted and rather than honourably stepping back to allow the fight to be 'fair' has taken advantage. If you bid one you are behaving utterly honourably and taking no advantage of circumstances and any win is more 'honourable'

Quote

...SO I HAVE TO LOSE HONOR WHEN THE OTHER GUY CHEATS...BUT I STILL WIN THE DUEL...

so from what you said YOU are cheating to win the duel (which in your example you win) so you lose honor and the other person is behaving honourably.

Lets use some examples. We have Doji A the best duelist in the world and Scum B a worse fighter. We pretend the OP is controlling A

I - If B cheats and A is completely honourable then B wins the duel! but B loses some honor and A gains some

II - If B is honourable and A is honourable then A wins the duel as A is a better dueller. No one loses honor

III - If A cheats and B cheats then A wins the duels as A is a better duelist and the dirty tricks of B were countered by the dirty tricks of A Neither loses honor as oboth were as bad as each other.

IV - If B is honourable and A cheats as he 'really' wants to win the duel then A wins the duel but people see someone of better ability doing his damndest to use every trick in the book to beat someone who is worse at duelling but is still behaving impeccably. B gets honor even though he loses

V -(OTHER) minor variations of above i.e one bids 3 the other 2 and so on)

You seem to be stating that you like option IV

The more I consider it the more I like the new duelling mechanic. Your duellists have no honor and therefore it costs you. Serves you right

(I use 'cheats' but in my games I assume 'takes advantage of distraction')

4 minutes ago, Matrim said:

(I use 'cheats' but in my games I assume 'takes advantage of distraction')

Or maybe causes the distraction.

*Points* "Oh my kami, is that an oni over there!?" Opponent turns to look. *Stabby stab* "I win!"

19 hours ago, player2902697 said:

First things first, I love the IP. I missed the magic of L5R CCG over the years. I stopped playing because AEG broke the game. Now that it is alive again, I am a happier person.

The character with the lowest stat just sets the dial to "1", and as long as the duel stat are within 5 of each other, the character with the lowest stat always GAINS HONOR AT THE EXPENSE OF THE BETTER DUELIST!!!

Now, I believe FFG's position on this is, "a character could use other methods to win the 'conflict' that the duelist has challenged them to" (ie Scorpion Clan members could use poison, Lion Clan could kick dirty in the opponent's eye, Crab Clan member could wait for the strike and then crack the weakling over the head with a War Fan...etc.) This next idea, I am expressing as if I were inside the game world... Dueling is a special thing, it has a definition. All duels are fights, but not all fights are duels. If an honorable SAMURAI challenges a person to a duel, that samurai is signifying a fight with VERY specific rules. These rules are so specific, it is rare to hear of someone seeing one, let alone actually FIGHTING one. A duelist, someone who has trained to duel, would not challenge someone to a duel in order to lose. THEY WENT THROUGH TRAINING IN ODER NOT TO LOSE!

Stepping out of the game world, the dueling mechanics are all wrong. The duels should be deadly, I mean, when a duel is triggered in the game, it should be just as threatening as "bow", "send home" or "discard"...after all, IT IS A DUEL! Someone is about to be hit with a KATANA! If a duel challenge is made and accepted, both parties are agreeing to the specific rules of the duel. If someone cheats, then they are a cheater and SHOULD LOOSE HONOR! The honorable duelist that followed the rules should not LOOSE honor because someone jerk-off with a sword CHEATED! To even have to articulate this idea feels ridiculous. DUELING IS BROKEN!

Am I wrong?

Historically speaking, the dueling system is right on. In feudal Japan to use your sword on an unworthy opponent was disgraceful. If a samurai were challenged by a peasant, for the samurai to use anything but his bamboo and paper fan to aid in his defense would lose him honor. The game mechanic here represents this idea. The stronger duelist clearly should win and the more effort they put into the duel than needed will result in the loss of honor.

As a side note, to openly disrespect a samurai in feudal Japan was an instant death sentence. Merely not getting out of the way or accidentally brushing the Saya (scabbard) would result in instant butchery. The sword would be drawn, all offenders would be cut down, and the blood would be flung from the blade before re-sheathing... all without breaking stride or looking back.

So, IMHO, the duel mechanics are spot on theme wise.

I think that the dueling mechanic is fine.

I think that the duels currently available in the Core leave something to be desired.

8 hours ago, Ishi Tonu said:

No way Sho. Nope, duels are always to the death no matter what, and a duelist always win and this whole half baked dueling system is garbage until they make it the way the OP wants it and we are all dumb for not seeing it that way.

I'm convinced. It was that whole Mcgregor v Mayweather bit that changed my mind. Too much straight up knowledge being dropped there to deny it any longer...........I hope he's got some more insights into how this game should be. I should go in and follow his stuff for sure.......so I just click ignore user to do that right? Yeah that seemed to do the trick. Now I'm getting best part of his posts.

Funny that he brought that up, because what -I- saw in the Mayweather v McGregor fight was that 8 rounds of throwing empty punches wore McGregor out, at which point Mayweather decided to put him out of his misery. I didn't see any illegal punches, and legal punches or not in the state McGregor was by the end of round 9 he wasn't going to win... so the analogy doesn't really fit.

This thread did give me an excuse to re-watch some parts of The Samurai trilogy tho! So there is that. I should go watch the whole thing next... but every time I go to watch it I end up watching Yojimbo instead b/c its better lol

1 hour ago, shosuko said:

This thread did give me an excuse to re-watch some parts of The Samurai trilogy tho! So there is that. I should go watch the whole thing next... but every time I go to watch it I end up watching Yojimbo instead b/c its better lol

Watch these too:

13 Assassins

Hari Kiri, Death of a Samurai

Sword of Doom

......there is one other one I'm missing I just can't remember the name but it's where the decedent of a Samurai works in a medicine shop and a decedent of another samurai who was his friend and sometimes rival comes in and then the recap stories about their samurai ancestors.more drama than action but really good. It was on Netflix for awhile.but got bummed be for I could ever get the name.

10 minutes ago, Ishi Tonu said:

Watch these too:

13 Assassins

Hari Kiri, Death of a Samurai

Sword of Doom

......there is one other one I'm missing I just can't remember the name but it's where the decedent of a Samurai works in a medicine shop and a decedent of another samurai who was his friend and sometimes rival comes in and then the recap stories about their samurai ancestors.more drama than action but really good. It was on Netflix for awhile.but got bummed be for I could ever get the name.

13 Assassins is legit! I watched that one again recently. I haven't heard of Hari Kiri, Death of a Samurai. I'll check that out

The one you're thinking of is When the Last Sword is Drawn - its epic! Shinsengumi are awesome! Definitely heavier on the drama, but I like that. My favorite scene is where the samurai makes a big deal about thanking everyone for how much money he received, and the other samurai are like "its money, don't make a scene" lol

A cool one to watch if you like the idea of different l5r clans as ninja, go check out Shinobi, Heart Under Blade. Its pretty awesome!

Awesome thanks!

I've updated my list. Hari Kiri is by the same director as 13 Assassins......who also has a new movie coming out this November, Blade of the Immortal.

HK is a little more drama up front than 13A, but, it's a good revenge story and the final battle is on par with 13A.

Sword of Doom might as well be about a guy with a bloodsword. He is not a nice dude but it's sweet to watch him lose his mind while cutting fools.

Blade of the Immortal looks to be high action fantasy and is based I. The manga series.

To: Stone37
“If a samurai were challenged by a peasant, for the samurai to use anything but his bamboo and paper fan to aid in his defense would lose him honor.”
- Sure, but that is already in the game. I cannot challenge a character that has a “ - “ [dash] as a dueling stat (military stat, normally). The “unworthy” are already weeded out.

To: Yogo Gohei
“I think that the duels currently available in the Core leave something to be desired.”
- Thank you for agreeing with my second point. Duels should be more threatening.

To: shosuko
“I didn't see any illegal punches”
- There were is the early rounds.

“the state McGregor was by the end of round 9 he wasn't going to win... so the analogy doesn't really fit.”
- But endurance is part of the boxing match, because it goes on for a long number of rounds. 10 rounds, three minutes per round…that is thirty minutes of fighting.

“Again - don't think of it as "cheating" think about it as not trusting your skills, or being too aggresive…There is a scene in the Musashi trilogy in which Kojiro duels a samurai to show his skill to a lord and prospective employer. He wins the duel, but in doing so strikes too hard and injures his opponent - who is a vassal of the lord he is wanting to work for. For this reason he was not hired because he could not show reserve.”
- I agree. What you are describing is breaking the rules. It was a duel to display skill, not to injure…not to the death…and in the clip, the swordsman did not get to use a real sword. The swordsman landed the first “strike”, but broke the RULES of that particular duel, and he was penalize…or rather, not HONORED with the job. With respect Shosuko-sama, you literally proved both my points. Duels should not penalize the honorable duelist and dueling should be a more serious threat.

- I absolutely loved the clip.

“L5R is a fiction, written by FFG - if they decided dragons were common pets they would be common pets.”
- I agree. And this is why I am saying dueling should be changed, and changed for a better system.

“I get a general sense from your first post you are frustrated because in order to ensure a win against another character you MUST risk losing honor.”
- THANK YOU! You have accurately articulated a portion of my position. I am not crazy, at least not about dueling. We will get to the “Imperial Favor” and the “Void Ring” in another post.

To: Zesu Shadaban
“(and maybe this is what you're really trying to get at) is that there's no such thing as a DUELING stat in this game…Had he continued to use illegal moves (which could be thematically compared to a higher honor bid) he may have beaten Mayweather...but without some sort of underhanded/sneaky tactics, he really didn't stand a chance.”
- Dueling stat. That could be the start of a better dueling system, if we wanted to pitch a complete reworking of the dueling structure.
- To the second part, “Had he [Connor] continued to use illegal moves (which could be thematically compared to a higher honor bid) he may have beaten Mayweather…” No, the referee would have paused to fight and penalize Connor for using illegal strikes (removed points from the score card)…dishonoring him for cheating. And if Connor cheated enough, the referee would have stopped the fight and announced Floyd the winner, because Connor was cheating.
- If we are saying, and it has NOT been described this way by FFG, the number on the dial is an indicator of how much honor a character is willing to LOSE, then there should be a “0” indicator on the dial, for honorable dueling characters.

“As Daario puts it to Jorah Mormont in an episode of Game of Thrones, `I’m either the **** who killed an old man, or the **** who got killed by an old man.` “
- That would be challenging someone with a “ - “ [dash] military stat. And I agree with you, duel an unworthy opponent, become dishonored. But we are not allowed to duel unworthy opponents in a duel. It is already in the game.

“Or maybe causes the distraction.
*Points* "Oh my kami, is that an oni over there!?" Opponent turns to look. *Stabby stab* ‘I win!’ “
- Um, isn’t this cheating? Creating the distraction? Or lying to get the advantage? Isn’t this dishonorable.

To: Ishi Tonu
“I+D+O+N+T+C+A+R+E = please tell me more about why you don't like dueling.....go ahead, I'm listening.”
- I am just ignoring you. I don’t mind someone disagreeing with me, but respect is a thing. You are demonstrating you have none to give. And like the old saying goes, “Give none, get none.” If you don’t care, then don’t post. Obviously you do care about something, you keep posting. So, don’t lie. Oh, wait…You are a scorpion player, aren’t you? I see what you did there…

To: DarkHorse
"Yogo Hiroue had suggested to his lord that it might be advantageous for them if Bayushi Gensato threw the fight."
- I agree. There should be some flexibility in the mechanic, whatever it would be. A duelist should be able to lose a duel, on purpose, without anyone losing honor.

- Or, to parse it another way, Yogo Hiroue could say, "Bayushi Gensato, should deceive everyone by pretending to be a person unworthy of the duel." In which case, the deception, by its very nature is...a dishonorable stratagem. In which case, I should be able to bid "0".

To: Kaimetsu-Uo
“Connor has a chance to win if he breaks the rules. He can bid 5 on his honor check (least honorable conduct) and win the duel (boxing match) by breaking the rules of the duel (using illegal strikes, for example) by scoring 7.”
- First things first, if Connor continues to cheat (break the rules), the referee stops the fight and declares Floyd the winner. On the other hand, I do see what you are trying to express. But it seems, like the post with Zesu Shadaban-sama, like you are talking about a dishonor system, in the duel mechanic. And I will go along with that, if there was a “0” [ZERO] on the dial indicator. Let me be honorable and just rely on my skill. That way, if the other cheats and bids “5”, I will be more than happy to take his “5” honor in to my honor pool. That penalizes the the dishonorable, lets me be honorable and, for lack of a better clan example, lets the scorpion clan cheat to win the conflict. I understand the argument of “just bid `1`”, but “1” is not “0”. The “1” indicator on the honor dial is me as an honorable duelist saying, “I am willing to be a little dishonorable.” And I do not believe that an honorable duelist that trusts his skills completely would say this in a duel where that duelist would want to act honorably. To the honorable person, saying, “I want to be a little dishonorable” is the same as saying, “I want to be dishonorable.” And honorable people do not want to be dishonorable. See what I mean?

To: almost all of you [Ishi Tonu is the exception]
- Thank you for your time in hashing this out. Even in the disagreement, I am understanding what you are getting at, and though, I think some of you might be describing the duels differently from FFG, I am starting to see other ideas that can be used around dueling. It seems like we are all in agreement that the dueling system should have an honor component and a dishonor component. We also seem to agree there should be some flexibility (randomness) in it, someplace.

Here is my thought on changing dueling, without a complete rework of the dueling structure:
1.) Make the duel refusable with a small penalty.
2.) Put a “0” on the honor dial.
3.) Make the duels, or at least some duels, more threatening.
4.) Make Political duels.

Note - Just as an aside, I am being reminded that zero is the most important number of all. The null-position. Without it, there can be no beginning and we would never be able to value anything. Thanks for the odd idea people.

2 minutes ago, player2902697 said:

If someone cheats, then they are a cheater and SHOULD LOOSE HONOR! The honorable duelist that followed the rules should not LOOSE honor because someone jerk-off with a sword CHEATED!

Your entire premise is based on a complete reverse understanding of how duels actually work. The inherent dueling skill is the printed skill, and the honor dial represents the dishonorable tricks that can be used to win the duel. If you bid high, you are not honorable, and therefore lose honor.

This seems like an account was created to troll the forum.

2 minutes ago, player2902697 said:

To: shosuko

“Again - don't think of it as "cheating" think about it as not trusting your skills, or being too aggresive…There is a scene in the Musashi trilogy in which Kojiro duels a samurai to show his skill to a lord and prospective employer. He wins the duel, but in doing so strikes too hard and injures his opponent - who is a vassal of the lord he is wanting to work for. For this reason he was not hired because he could not show reserve.”
- I agree. What you are describing is breaking the rules. It was a duel to display skill, not to injure…not to the death…and in the clip, the swordsman did not get to use a real sword. The swordsman landed the first “strike”, but broke the RULES of that particular duel, and he was penalize…or rather, not HONORED with the job. With respect Shosuko-sama, you literally proved both my points. Duels should not penalize the honorable duelist and dueling should be a more serious threat.

- I absolutely loved the clip.

Its a great clip - but I think calling it "cheating" is a misnomer. When you have two people dueling, as with sparing, you are engaging in an actual fight. If you are dueling to first blood, it doesn't matter how much blood was spilled by that first blood, you win... but people may judge you for it regardless.

In a thematic sense the duelist isn't just trying to "win" the duel, but also to display the quality of their skill and technique. Even Musashi, who cared very little what others thought of him, dueled to improve his skill and to show others the incorrect things they were doing.

I feel that bidding high is symbolic of using more power. If you are more aggressive, and your opponent is more aggressive, that is fine. You are a match for their power. If you bid 1 and your opponent bids 5 then the honor exchange is representative of the recognition of your calm under duress, and your control over your emotions during a duel. If you challenge a weaker character to a duel, and they still exercise proper form while you hack them in half... I think it is reasonable to say "Hey, you won, but wow... that wasn't very cool." aka honor loss.

This is how I reconcile the mechanics and thematics.

2 hours ago, LuceLineGames said:

If you bid high, you are not honorable, and therefore lose honor.

Ok, then I should have a "0" on the dial to signify, "I am an honorable duelist, dueling honorably." That way, even if the opponent chooses to be "only a little" dishonorable, they get punished "only a little," as signified on the honor dial by selecting "1".

2 hours ago, shosuko said:

If you are dueling to first blood, it doesn't matter how much blood was spilled by that first blood, you win... but people may judge you for it regardless.

Sure, like I said, I can fully go for that, but you are defining one of the rules of the duel when you say, "to the first blood." And breaking that rule is still breaking the rule, and thus dishonorable. Even if it is a mistake in form, or being too aggressive. I should have a "0" to signify "I exercised the correct form with out being too aggressive, at the skill level I am at" i.e. perfection in the form for that level of the duelist.

So, to both of you, either way you decide to look at it, there needs to be an accurate representation of the honorable duelist exercising the proper form, without cheating, in the duel. With that being put on the table, even if a rework of the dueling mechanic is off the table, it still needs to be adjusted. And like I articulated above, "1" is not "0". Now, someone may say, "Dude, you are arguing of one honor, relax." And I agree, it does not seem like much, but that one honor is exactly the Scorpion Stronghold ability for that turn. And if it is a big enough deal to be a stronghold ability, then it is big enough to argue for. Especially, if HONOR is a victory condition.

Can you at least see what I m getting at?

2 hours ago, player2902697 said:

2.) Put a “0” on the honor dial.

I've felt this should be a thing, but it would weaken Contingency Plan and other bid changers. Minimizing bid at 1 is a reasonable way of saying everything has a risk of losing honor.

31 minutes ago, Shosuro Onigatsu said:

weaken Contingency Plan and other bid changers.

Actually, no, it doesn't. " Contingency Plan " is already set to "0" as a hard stop. But, if the card stated you could change either dial amount. THAT would be a thing. And the Bayushi Manipulator only cycles the honor dial UP by "1". And in this case, having a zero on the dial, would punish the Bayushi Manipulator more for being dishonorable, because HE IS A RIGHT BASTARD and MORE dishonorable. It makes the Bayushi Manipulator BETTER!!! How? Because now, instead of winning a duel event by "5", the way dueling is now ("6" vs. "1"), he can win a dueling event by "6" ("6" vs. "0"). It's a win/win!!!

2 hours ago, shosuko said:

Its a great clip

Allow me to share of of my favorite duels with you...

You could play multiple Coningency Plans on the same bid, that's why it has a minimum of zero. By minimizing dial at 1, it can still force an honor trade at minimum starting bids, meaning every action you take involving honor has a risk of losing you some.

The design/dev team should have allowed a zero on dial and a way to increase or decrease the bid of other players as well.

Remember that at least for now every time the Honor Dial is used it is used by both players. Add in that Honor only gets paid by one player to the other when the dialed values are different and the '1' effectively acts like a zero - no Honor is lost.

So now we get to the Duel. The Honorable Duelist dials up a small value and indeed may just dial the 1 minimum. The opponent may feel the need to win the Duel outweighs the need to be honorable so they dial up a higher number. As a result the opponent has lost face (represented by losing Honor) and the player who was honorable has gained Honor. Works correctly.

Specifically in Core L5R, Dueling is Crane's game mostly. Not only do they have a strong Duelist (Kaezin) who sports a Duel effect that can radically alter a contest they alone can create new Duellists (unless their opponent is splashing Crane into their deck). Using Kaezin as an example, having a Duelist with a likely rating of 5 means you can afford to Dial 1 on Duels and if your opponent needs to win it you harvest Honor. Ditto something like attaching Duelist Training to the Doji Challenger.

2 hours ago, player2902697 said:

Ok, then I should have a "0" on the dial to signify, "I am an honorable duelist, dueling honorably." That way, even if the opponent chooses to be "only a little" dishonorable, they get punished "only a little," as signified on the honor dial by selecting "1".

Sure, like I said, I can fully go for that, but you are defining one of the rules of the duel when you say, "to the first blood." And breaking that rule is still breaking the rule, and thus dishonorable. Even if it is a mistake in form, or being too aggressive. I should have a "0" to signify "I exercised the correct form with out being too aggressive, at the skill level I am at" i.e. perfection in the form for that level of the duelist.

So, to both of you, either way you decide to look at it, there needs to be an accurate representation of the honorable duelist exercising the proper form, without cheating, in the duel. With that being put on the table, even if a rework of the dueling mechanic is off the table, it still needs to be adjusted. And like I articulated above, "1" is not "0". Now, someone may say, "Dude, you are arguing of one honor, relax." And I agree, it does not seem like much, but that one honor is exactly the Scorpion Stronghold ability for that turn. And if it is a big enough deal to be a stronghold ability, then it is big enough to argue for. Especially, if HONOR is a victory condition.

Can you at least see what I m getting at?

1 is 0 when you start counting from 1 and not zero. Since the dials are equal, it wouldn't matter if they started at 2, because it is still the same minimum bid for both players.

If a duel was to "first blood" and my attack which drew "first blood" actually cut my opponent's throat and killed him it would not be cheating, or breaking the rules. Once I drew blood I stopped, and I can be the winner at that point. The problem isn't as simple as whether I broke the rules or not, but also whether I displayed skill, honor, and grace. If the duel is to the first blood and I maim or kill my opponent it shows a lack of restraint and poise. Restraint and poise are the core of civility, and thus honor.

This is a common thing in Tameshigiri - it isn't just about the cut, or how clean the cut is, it is also about blade control and technique. If I walk up to do a Dodan cut and I do a running jump in the air, bringing my sword down to the mats and then, cutting through the mats bury my sword in the wood base... this is not a good thing. However if I walk up and calmly draw and cut downward stopping with a few straws between my sword and the wood base this is very good. Its not just about cutting, but about blade control. Being able to pull your punches in sparring, or being able to strike to JUST the first blood, without causing injury is much more showing of skill, and thus honor than it is to butcher your opponent with a disgusting display of brute strength.

Honor is about control, technique, reserve, poise, civility, ect. The dial is about how much you turn up the brash, aggressive, overbearing, ect and if you are exceptionally brash and overbearing as a duelist against someone who is well composed and graceful, even if they lose it won't be much to your credit...

4 hours ago, player2902697 said:

Allow me to share of of my favorite duels with you...

Nice! I didn't know there was a live action Rurouni Kenshin. Shishio looks funny tho lol.

funimation.com has another one that seems to cover the first season of the anime(I did not consistently watch). It was pretty good.

20 hours ago, Stone37 said:

Historically speaking, the dueling system is right on. In feudal Japan to use your sword on an unworthy opponent was disgraceful. If a samurai were challenged by a peasant, for the samurai to use anything but his bamboo and paper fan to aid in his defense would lose him honor. The game mechanic here represents this idea. The stronger duelist clearly should win and the more effort they put into the duel than needed will result in the loss of honor.

As a side note, to openly disrespect a samurai in feudal Japan was an instant death sentence. Merely not getting out of the way or accidentally brushing the Saya (scabbard) would result in instant butchery. The sword would be drawn, all offenders would be cut down, and the blood would be flung from the blade before re-sheathing... all without breaking stride or looking back.

So, IMHO, the duel mechanics are spot on theme wise.

That isn't "historical" at all.

Samurai weren't paragons of Bushido in real life. "Bushido" wasn't even an actual thing. It was invented by a Japanese-American immigrant named Inazo Ito, in a mostly fabricated book about Samurai. Not only did westerners eat it up, but many Japanese people adopted the idea that it was a real thing. This was in 1900.

In most eras of medieval Japan, a Samurai would cut down a peasant that offended him with whatever he felt like using. The only reason it wasn't usually a katana is because katana were actually not the primary weapon of Samurai. For most of their history, bows and spears were.

All that said, the dueling mechanics of this game do reflect the themes of the romantic depiction of samurai common to most media, and that certainly includes Rokugan's samurai.

1 hour ago, shosuko said:

1 is 0 when you start counting from 1 and not zero.

No, Shosuko-sama. With respect, "1" is never "0", even when "1" is where you start counting from. A "1" on the dial is saying, "I am not trusting my skill alone. I am going to be a little dishonorable." Why? Because even if you select "1" on the dial, you are still adding "1" to your dueling stat. Give me a "0" on the dial and let me be honorable.

1 hour ago, shosuko said:

If a duel was to "first blood" and my attack which drew "first blood" actually cut my opponent's throat and killed him it would not be cheating, or breaking the rules.

When you say, "the first blood," you are setting a rule, a "non-lethal" rule. When you kill your opponent, that breaks the rule about being lethal. If you kill a person in a non-lethal duel, I agree, you should be dishonored. So, let there be a setting on the dial to signify, "In this duel, I will sacrifice the actual strike, if it will endanger my opponent's life." So, we still need "0".

1 hour ago, shosuko said:

The dial is about how much you turn up the brash, aggressive, overbearing, ect

Even today, when and where sword-culture is all but extinct, people practice with live-steel without murdering half the class/dojo. But we are talking about samurai. These people practice with live steel as if their lives depended on it, because it did. There should be a way to signify a correct form and control. Give the honorable duelists a "0" on the dial to signify that.

Like I said, any way you want to cut it, we need a "0".

rubbish. it is a nice troll but why not post with your primary account?

Today I'm smack-talking and eating popcorn... and I'm fresh outta popcorn.

So if I have the straight of it, you don't like dueling in its current state because it involves risking honor to resolve. And because this is a completely fictional setting not bound to any particulars of Japanese culture, FFG can (as described above with dragons) do whatever they want with it. EXCEPT institute a dueling system that doesn't meet your expectations.

... yeah I need something to wash down all this popcorn, so much salt.