Before diving in, I think the RAW Dueling rules are pretty good. I wouldn't tweak much about them myself. However, my group is never going to understand them. It's just not gonna happen. Out of 5 players, we have one, maybe two players with a sharp enough understanding of game mechanics to understand why a katana is much better than a tetsubo for a Finishing Blow. When our Hida Defender threw down with the leader of a Lion patrol, he was lucky, and I was generous. Despite some broken ribs, the Lion was not Bleeding, and had I allowed the duel to continue, he would have struck a Finishing Blow the next round. However, my group's eyes were beginning to glaze over, so I called it there.

Obviously, the full Dueling rules aren't for us. At least not most of us, not yet. One-roll duels, on the other hand, are just a bit too swingy. I hate to have Life and Death come down to a single die roll. Also, near as I can tell, the One-Roll Duels don't account for the Iaijutsu techniques, which is just... boooo!

With that in mind, I've been trying to break down a Duel into three steps, hopefully keeping them simple enough. I think I've got a decent framework, but it will need some tweaking to get the numbers to work.

Challenge: This is an Initiative roll, pretty much standard. TN 1 Meditation.
Focus: This is basically an initial Staredown. You can't attack yet, but you can Center or Predict. Predict is now a rolled action (Not sure what the TN should be. 1? 2? Vigilance?), and 2 Opp can be spent to predict an extra stance. This also allows you to spend Opps on the roll, whether successful or not. Characters without an Iaijutsu technique should probably draw their sword, and unless they take a Water stance, won't be able to take another action (assuming it's an Iaijutsu duel).
Strike: You may act as usual at this phase, and the target cannot defend against any attacks. So as long as you hit, you inflict a Critical Strike.

So them's the basics. In a duel to First Blood, things will probably be over after the first strike. After that, I think it should come down to a skirmish, probably keeping the rules for Final Blow and bidding Strife to increase initiative.

There are a lot of little details I haven’t worked out, but overall, what do you think? I realize that basically what I’m doing is removing options, but those options were causing confusion and slowing the game down.

I think If you want to make duel simpler, without changing much;

Remove the predict and center actions. It won't change the outcome for good players (they won't use those actions) and it keeps it simpler for newcomer as they don't have to learn these useless actions anyway.

So basically the only difference between duels and skirmish becomes;

Staredown

Finishing blow

No range

everything else is like a skirmish.

1 hour ago, The Grand Falloon said:

Focus: This is basically an initial Staredown. You can't attack yet, but you can Center or Predict. Predict is now a rolled action (Not sure what the TN should be. 1? 2? Vigilance?), and 2 Opp can be spent to predict an extra stance. This also allows you to spend Opps on the roll, whether successful or not. Characters without an Iaijutsu technique should probably draw their sword, and unless they take a Water stance, won't be able to take another action (assuming it's an Iaijutsu duel).
Strike: You may act as usual at this phase, and the target cannot defend against any attacks. So as long as you hit, you inflict a Critical Strike.

Question: is Focus done in initiative order as well? When you go to Strike, is that a new round? If not, then Predict doesn't seem particularly useful.

I do like the "cannot defend" as to this specific duel. In a weapons beatdown match, sure, defending is great. But in Iaijutsu, it's just two people squaring off, drawing and trying to hit. You aren't blocking, you aren't dodging, so how exactly do you 'defend'?

41 minutes ago, Hida Jitenno said:

You aren't blocking, you aren't dodging, so how exactly do you 'defend'?

As written in the core, you definitely are dodging or otherwise spending fatigue to not get hit.

Though, a "cannot defend" rule would clearly take care of the Earth ring immunity to Iaijutsu duels. But it would probably make the ring too weak for duelling 😕

It is very hard to find the right fix to encompass all situations and all kinds of duels (so that they are all fun and played as intended, and balanced for all rings) and that doesn't require too much complexity.

On 2/27/2019 at 12:07 AM, Avatar111 said:

It is very hard to find the right fix to encompass all situations and all kinds of duels (so that they are all fun and played as intended, and balanced for all rings) and that doesn't require too much complexity.

Agreed. And I'm not sure I'd want to. I'm very happy with different types of duels playing very differently, because that's one check against a single character archetype dominating a given scene, in the same way that - depending on what you're actually trying to achieve - you could have a practical use for about 3-4 different skill/ring combinations in a given court scene, meaning that it'll be a rare party who has one single courtier character who can cover all the talky bits.

On 2/26/2019 at 2:41 PM, Avatar111 said:

Remove the predict and center actions. It won't change the outcome for good players (they won't use those actions) and it keeps it simpler for newcomer as they don't have to learn these useless actions anyway.

So basically the only difference between duels and skirmish becomes  ; Staredown, Finishing blow, No range, everything else is like a skirmish.

The way it played out, that's what it was, and that's why it was such a drag. These were two samurai on patrol, so they were wearing armor, which meant that trying to win through fatigue was a slog. The only thing that saved it was the Lion hitting his composure, getting some broken ribs, and grudgingly admitting defeat. It was repetitive and boring.

The thing is, I really like what they tried to do with Predict. A four-Strife hit is nasty in a duel, but it is much too easy to avoid. As you've pointed out, a duelist in Fire stance can swing wildly, not even bothering to keep successes (unless, of course, you make a really good roll), and just use Opportunity to inflict a much more reliable 2 Strife per round. You say the solution is not to use Predict, I say the solution is to tweak it, because I want it to be a valid strategy. Some folks seem to think that an Iaijutsu duel should always be "sudden draw and someone is dead." I don't quite agree, but I do think it should be a valid strategy, and that's pretty clearly what Predict and Center were intended to simulate.

Basically, I'm tackling two separate but related problems here. I really think making Predict a rolled action might fix it completely, because there's so much you can do with Opportunity. That's my blanket "Fix RAW dueling."

Of course, it doesn't fix the trouble at my table. I can't say they're not "gamers," because they enjoy games as much as anyone, but most of them don't enjoy poring over the rules, finding the tricks and the cracks in the system. Heck, out of my five players, maybe two have read most of the rulebook (and they're both playing shugenja instead of bushi, go figure). Honestly, the reason I disappeared from my own thread here is because I was seriously considering just digging up my old Savage Worlds conversion of L5R, because I don't know if they're gonna grok all the weird little nuances of the elemental stances, opportunities, and why they might willingly fail a check. Sooner or later, someone is going to get into a duel and die, and they player won't even understand what they did wrong. Even a duel to First Blood turns deadly really fast if nobody has managed a lucky roll by turn 4.

So, I think my original post might work okay for a duel to First Blood. Needs some tweaks, obviously, but at the end of three rounds, someone is probably taking a less-than-lethal strike. But then, of course, with only one round of preparation, Predict is not going to Strife them out anyway, so what's the point?

Arggh... my head hurts.

4 minutes ago, The Grand Falloon said:

But then, of course, with only one round of preparation, Predict is not going to Strife them out anyway, so what's the point?

Actually, it might! Duels don't happen in a vaccuum, so it's very possible that one duelist starts with a fair bit of strife. If you Predict in Fire stance and roll enough Opportunity, you can hit him with 2 Strife, and have a decent chance of inflicting 4 more. If he bid on initiative at all, he's in trouble...

Okay, clarifications and tweaks to my initial post. the Focus "Round" is basically there to introduce Predict and Center actions to my players, but I think I like having it there anyway. It doesn't actually count as a round, so you don't bid for initiative, and any Predict actions only count for the next round.

In an Iaijutsu duel only , any attacks made in round 1 can't be defended. So duels to First Blood are probably solved right here. All other rules are essentially the same as in a standard duel, with the addition of Predict being a rolled action. I think the TN should be 1, otherwise it becomes too hard to hit and becomes even worse than the RAW.

It's late and I've had some brandy, so I have no idea if this is good.

@The Grand Falloon

I modified the Predict action and gave Iai kata ability to do crits.

Made duels much more fun/fast.

But they still are super deadly because a lot of the time somebody will lose composure, and no way a regular rank 1-2 character can deal with a deadliness 7 katana finishing blow.

If you want less deadly you need to reduce the deadliness on finishing blow. Otherwise, my houserule will fix most of your issue with duels, with very minor changes, easy changes. Plus it puts more mindgame/fun in the duels.

Though, I suggest you practice duels in your game with Non Deadly weapons (bokken?) So that the players understand it. You can play this out in the story.

Starting new players right away, like Kakita with 6 composure, in a katana duel is a sure way to have him become maimed in the the first session.

On 3/9/2019 at 12:59 PM, Avatar111 said:

Though, I suggest you practice duels in your game with Non Deadly weapons (bokken?) So that the players understand it. You can play this out in the story.

Especially if you're starting with new low-level character, it's a good intro to the story.

A bokken sparring match between player characters is unlikely to result in much more than bruised pride (especially since the player can 'pull' the blow by not keeping excess successes on a finishing blow) but is a great way to get them used to the mechanics.

On 3/9/2019 at 7:28 AM, The Grand Falloon said:

Sooner or later, someone is going to get into a duel and die, and they player won't even understand what they did wrong. Even a duel to First Blood turns deadly really fast if nobody has managed a lucky roll by turn 4. 

Well....yes. It's two trained warriors going at one another with razor-sharp hand-and-half scalpels. Even a non-lethal duel has a pretty good chance of someone coming out with serious lasting injury.

"You done got yourself killed" is very possible in this game if duels get involved, in a way (by comparison) that getting killed in skirmishes and mass battles is pretty hard unless someone decides to pull a Famous Last Stand (tm).

On 3/9/2019 at 8:02 AM, The Grand Falloon said:

Actually, it might! Duels don't happen in a vaccuum, so it's very possible that one duelist starts with a fair bit of strife. If you Predict in Fire stance and roll enough Opportunity, you can hit him with 2 Strife, and have a decent chance of inflicting 4 more. If he bid on initiative at all, he's in trouble...

It depends on the situation, but yes. This is where different PCs co-operating can really matter. A duel rarely happens for no reason; if it's spilling out from an intrigue scene, then the courtiers in the party are responsible (in theory) for making sure the enemy duellist is going to start on 50% composure, and for ensuring that the terms of the duel favour your party's champion.

Predict as a check is an interesting thought, but it does lead to the important question "what happens if you fail?".

The main issue of predict in normal duels is that you can't afford to 'waste' actions during a duel. Predict is good for ensuring someone isn't in stance X, but it's not so good for giving someone strife (since generally a competent opponent will have 2-3 stances they could pick from). Actually turning "they're not in [whatever] stance this turn" into meaningful advantage is more difficult, since you've had to 'waste' an action to do it.

That said, I like a three-roll-no-defend idea; it's very similar to Showdowns in Edge of the Empire, which I think are very simple and elegant duelling mechanics. Mostly meant for shootouts, but perfectly useable for blade duels.

On 2/26/2019 at 10:26 PM, The Grand Falloon said:

Also, near as I can tell, the One-Roll Duels don't account for the Iaijutsu techniques, which is just... boooo!

In common with a lot of things, it suggests you should do so but doesn't quantify how .

"The base TN for this check is 1, but it can be adjusted to account for relevant factors such as the players’ description and the circumstances, at the GM’s discretion."

Specific techniques a player can draw upon, much like specific narrative tricks or elements of the environment, would be the sort of thing which would justify changing the TN of one player's check.

How much? That's a GM-and-Player call, sadly with no guidance.

On 3/11/2019 at 4:03 AM, Magnus Grendel said:

That said, I like a three-roll-no-defend idea; it's very similar to Showdowns in Edge of the Empire, which I think are very simple and elegant duelling mechanics. Mostly meant for shootouts, but perfectly useable for blade duels.

Can you give some details for those of us who haven’t played EotE? I’m interested if the rules could be adapted.

@The Grand Falloon

I realise that after many iterations, your initial idea of the "cannot defend" on the strike is actually the real best solution.

Though I only applied it for the Iaijutsu Rising Blade kata (because increased TN due to vigilance, and can't easily scale up in deadliness. Adding it to Crossing Cut for example could be absolutely devastating) balance it out. Now there is actually a technique that can allow you to draw and win! That isn't too strong out of duels, and that is hard to increase the severity of.. actually making the Center action and Kakita Ability etc, super important for duels (if you want that one draw win). Also, since it is only on the Iai kata, it makes it tempting to use prebuffs like Center, air or void opportunities etc to maximise the chance to pull it off.

Anyway, just though I'd leave that here. I think you had a really solid idea that with some polish is the best thing so far I could come up with. Both to keep it balanced, in setting, and fun, and simple.

Gg!

17 hours ago, AndyDay303 said:

Can you give some details for those of us who haven’t played EotE? I’m interested if the rules could be adapted.

Steps:

1. The Face-Off
   • Each character does one of the following
     • Size Up: Perception/Streetwise* versus Cool**. Success boosts your initiative check on 'the draw'.
     • Intimidate: Deception/Coercion*** versus Discipline**. Success penalises your opponent's initiative check for 'the draw'.
     • Advantage**** results from this check are 'stored' and can be spent during 'the draw'.
2. Initiative roll
   • A pretty much standard initiative check, using the Cool** skill rather than the Vigilance***** skill.
3. The Draw
   • The winner acts first. Their first action has to be to draw their weapon, obviously, but gets to spend success and advantage from this check plus advantage from 'the face-off', using a unique table of options which only apply to the first round of a show-down.
   • The loser acts second, but also gets the same extra options
   • These extra options are pretty brutal, from free draw****** and aim******* actions up to and including " if the attack inflicts damage on a rival******** NPC target, it kills the target immediately ."
4. Combat continues
   • If no-one goes down in the draw, combat reverts to the default rules, using the initiative order just established.

* Essentially Scrutinize approach in air stance

** Essentially Focus

*** Essentially Inflame approach in fire stance

**** Essentially

***** Shockingly, essentially Vigilance

****** Essentially prepare

******* Essentially self-assistance or a temporary advantage to use

******** Edge of the Empire includes three tiers of NPCs instead of two. Minions, Rivals and Nemesis. Basically, this means Adversary NPC who's not the campaign's main villain.

Thanks!

From the looks of it, EotE is just a slightly elaborated version of the one-roll duel. Interesting.

2 hours ago, AndyDay303 said:

From the looks of it, EotE is just a slightly elaborated version of the one-roll duel. Interesting.

Pretty much. I like them; they're a great balance between 'one-roll-resolution' and 'extended skirmish with more rules on top' that are the two options we have in the current L5R rules for duels, allowing a handful of different skills to matter and giving you some choice in tactics to tailor to an opponent.

They work well in Force & Destiny to resolve lightsaber duels in a way which feels cool without taking the 'spotlight' off the other PCs during a fight scene for an extended period.

The most impressive example of this we've had recently being a totally-not-channelling-the-dark-side* jedi facing a pair of dark apprentices who managed between the three checks (staredown, draw, lightsaber skill combat check) to have a faintly ridiculous three triumph icons** and seven advantage icons to spend on top of the successes she needed to actually pass.

These were spent as follows:

• 3 x Advantage - draw her double-bladed lightsaber as an incidental
• Triumph - kill a rival-level opponent instantly
• 2 x Advantage - perform an aim action as an incidental
• 2 x Triumph - perform a second combat check against another target in range.
  • Said boosted combat check produced enough advantage to trigger linked and inflict a second hit with the same damage as the first.

Or to translate, in the time it took to them to blink, one dark apprentice was cut in half and the other into three.

I can neither confirm nor deny that session involved the PC using enough Dark Side pips on the force dice to lose half her morality score in one week, but it was definitely awesome.

* Fear leads to anger. Anger leads directly to lots of dismembered body parts littering your docking bay with no intervening stages. Don't say I didn't warn you.

** A sort of equivalent to the face on the skill die, but in effect it's probably closer to given how much scarier the 'triumph' options are than the others.

33 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Pretty much. I like them; they're a great balance between 'one-roll-resolution' and 'extended skirmish with more rules on top' that are the two options we have in the current L5R rules for duels, allowing a handful of different skills to matter and giving you some choice in tactics to tailor to an opponent.

They work well in Force & Destiny to resolve lightsaber duels in a way which feels cool without taking the 'spotlight' off the other PCs during a fight scene for an extended period.

The most impressive example of this we've had recently being a totally-not-channelling-the-dark-side* jedi facing a pair of dark apprentices who managed between the three checks (staredown, draw, lightsaber skill combat check) to have a faintly ridiculous three triumph icons** and seven advantage icons to spend on top of the successes she needed to actually pass.

These were spent as follows:

• 3 x Advantage - draw her double-bladed lightsaber as an incidental
• Triumph - kill a rival-level opponent instantly
• 2 x Advantage - perform an aim action as an incidental
• 2 x Triumph - perform a second combat check against another target in range.
  • Said boosted combat check produced enough advantage to trigger linked and inflict a second hit with the same damage as the first.

Or to translate, in the time it took to them to blink, one dark apprentice was cut in half and the other into three.

I can neither confirm nor deny that session involved the PC using enough Dark Side pips on the force dice to lose half her morality score in one week, but it was definitely awesome.

* Fear leads to anger. Anger leads directly to lots of dismembered body parts littering your docking bay with no intervening stages. Don't say I didn't warn you.

** A sort of equivalent to the face on the skill die, but in effect it's probably closer to given how much scarier the 'triumph' options are than the others.

*** probably about equivalent to +1 severity.

Star Wars is close to a masterpiece of a game. Does have its quirks and starts to show its age and a bit of bloat, but such a beautiful design at its core.

The possibility of a Triumph is very interesting (such as the possibility of Despair). Something we discussed here before. Explosions kind of play this role, but in most cases in which bonus successes doesn't matter, it is hard to get a "critical success". And there is no really "critical fails".

L5R biggest improvement over star wars is the rings/approaches, the strife, the advantages/disadvantages.
But a lot of things from Star Wars that I prefer; bonus/hinderance dice allow for easy check customization, check difficulty mechanic with the purple and red die, simpler range system, triumph/despair, talent trees.

8 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Pretty much. I like them; they're a great balance between 'one-roll-resolution' and 'extended skirmish with more rules on top' that are the two options we have in the current L5R rules for duels, allowing a handful of different skills to matter and giving you some choice in tactics to tailor to an opponent.

They work well in Force & Destiny to resolve lightsaber duels in a way which feels cool without taking the 'spotlight' off the other PCs during a fight scene for an extended period.

The most impressive example of this we've had recently being a totally-not-channelling-the-dark-side* jedi facing a pair of dark apprentices who managed between the three checks (staredown, draw, lightsaber skill combat check) to have a faintly ridiculous three triumph icons** and seven advantage icons to spend on top of the successes she needed to actually pass.

These were spent as follows:

• 3 x Advantage - draw her double-bladed lightsaber as an incidental
• Triumph - kill a rival-level opponent instantly
• 2 x Advantage - perform an aim action as an incidental
• 2 x Triumph - perform a second combat check against another target in range.
  • Said boosted combat check produced enough advantage to trigger linked and inflict a second hit with the same damage as the first.

Or to translate, in the time it took to them to blink, one dark apprentice was cut in half and the other into three.

I can neither confirm nor deny that session involved the PC using enough Dark Side pips on the force dice to lose half her morality score in one week, but it was definitely awesome.

* Fear leads to anger. Anger leads directly to lots of dismembered body parts littering your docking bay with no intervening stages. Don't say I didn't warn you.

** A sort of equivalent to the face on the skill die, but in effect it's probably closer to given how much scarier the 'triumph' options are than the others.

So I guess the big thing about the Star Wars System is this table where you can spend points to get advantages. L5R has lots of tables to spend opportunities on. What’s one more???

It's not just the advantage/threat table, but resolving the duel in 3 checks, not one.

In Legend of the Five Rings , either you play out the duel 'longhand' (which can take ages) or resort to a one-roll-duel, which is, as written, a TN1 Martial Arts Melee check.

There's comparatively little scope for mind games, cool effects, and tactics. Not mechanically, anyway. The GM is advised to vary the TN to reflect narrative ideas, but no guidance is given. Having a higher focus, or an iai strike technique, or whatever, should matter, but you're left with rough at-the-time judgement to go by.

For Edge of the Empire Showdowns, 3 checks is not a dramatic increase in the time involved, but it benefits you in three ways:

• It means a character with skills other than shoot/stab (like coercion) has a good chance of winning the duel by slapping on massive difficulty changes and/or picking up advantage to perform aim actions during the staredown (equivalent to the first 2-3 rounds of most duels in Legend of the Five Rings that don't just devolve into a slap-fest)
• Because non-success icons from all three checks get 'stored up' for round 1, it means that even a starting level character can amass enough advantage and triumph across three rolls to pull off stuff they couldn't have considered achieving with just one roll. This is not a million miles away from the theoretical effect of the Centre action*
• It involves a few actual meaningful tactical choices. Using some of your gleaned advantage, one (cheap) option is to do a guarded stance action as an incidental - which is a very sensible idea if you don't take your opponent out in one go. But you're doing that by drawing off the advantage you might otherwise use for a second hit with linked (with something like a double-bladed saber) which might put them down for good.

Basically, it feels like a nice middle-ground between the complexity of multi-turn 'full' duels and comparatively simplified 'one-roll-duels'.

* Before @Avatar111 points out it doesn't work in practice, I know. Theoretically, storing up the and results for the turn where you actually strike is a sensible idea since whilst it's risky, it means you can actually get the double-results you need to deliver the that a less-than-ring-4 samurai must have to win a duel-to-first-strike (barring going to comprmised and finishing blows. The fact that it's a very inefficient way of doing that and that earth stance buggers the idea up is a failure of execution rather than concept.

3 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

It's not just the advantage/threat table, but resolving the duel in 3 checks, not one.

In Legend of the Five Rings , either you play out the duel 'longhand' (which can take ages) or resort to a one-roll-duel, which is, as written, a TN1 Martial Arts Melee check.

There's comparatively little scope for mind games, cool effects, and tactics. Not mechanically, anyway. The GM is advised to vary the TN to reflect narrative ideas, but no guidance is given. Having a higher focus, or an iai strike technique, or whatever, should matter, but you're left with rough at-the-time judgement to go by.

For Edge of the Empire Showdowns, 3 checks is not a dramatic increase in the time involved, but it benefits you in three ways:

• It means a character with skills other than shoot/stab (like coercion) has a good chance of winning the duel by slapping on massive difficulty changes and/or picking up advantage to perform aim actions during the staredown (equivalent to the first 2-3 rounds of most duels in Legend of the Five Rings that don't just devolve into a slap-fest)
• Because non-success icons from all three checks get 'stored up' for round 1, it means that even a starting level character can amass enough advantage and triumph across three rolls to pull off stuff they couldn't have considered achieving with just one roll. This is not a million miles away from the theoretical effect of the Centre action*
• It involves a few actual meaningful tactical choices. Using some of your gleaned advantage, one (cheap) option is to do a guarded stance action as an incidental - which is a very sensible idea if you don't take your opponent out in one go. But you're doing that by drawing off the advantage you might otherwise use for a second hit with linked (with something like a double-bladed saber) which might put them down for good.

Basically, it feels like a nice middle-ground between the complexity of multi-turn 'full' duels and comparatively simplified 'one-roll-duels'.

* Before @Avatar111 points out it doesn't work in practice, I know. Theoretically, storing up the and results for the turn where you actually strike is a sensible idea since whilst it's risky, it means you can actually get the double-results you need to deliver the that a less-than-ring-4 samurai must have to win a duel-to-first-strike (barring going to comprmised and finishing blows. The fact that it's a very inefficient way of doing that and that earth stance buggers the idea up is a failure of execution rather than concept.

Centering is really sensible. Just not viable because of earth stance (or because Iai kata can't crit). But then again, maybe there something I don't understand, but to me the designers of the game are totally lost about duels..

Even the new Kenshinzen title ability. Lets be honest here, this is probably a rank3+ title. But the ability basically is garbage that will cost one void point from the opponent and now you are in void stance and probably didn't do that much damage compared to a fire ring attack. At rank3, if the opponent have water3 melee3, thats it, you probably just lost (god forbid he had a second void point) worst comes to worst they just crossing cut fire ring, or earth ring and go from there next round and it is better than what the kenshinzen did.

I cannot shake my head around the fact of how they perceive or think duels play out midgame and on. To me, they seem totally disconnected from their own ruleset here. Totally missing the point by not allowing Iai kata to crit and earth stance to exist.

But then again.. who knows.. maybe Center and Predict are key actions, maybe a kenshinzen with battle in the mind kata and his title ability, and way of the crane is REALLY a better duelist that just a regular dude with crossing cut, HPS and good earth/fire. I just don't see it.

edit: anyway, it is what it is. I feel the small houserule I have fixed the issue for me. So I'll be going with that. Only predict action is still bad with the houserule, center is actually viable (decent risk vs reward).

To be fair, maybe a whole revamp as per what you people are discussing here (3 rolls duels or what not) whould be better. IF somebody comes up with something really solid I might be tempted.

On 7/8/2019 at 4:41 AM, Magnus Grendel said:

It's not just the advantage/threat table, but resolving the duel in 3 checks, not one.

In Legend of the Five Rings , either you play out the duel 'longhand' (which can take ages) or resort to a one-roll-duel, which is, as written, a TN1 Martial Arts Melee check.

There's comparatively little scope for mind games, cool effects, and tactics. Not mechanically, anyway. The GM is advised to vary the TN to reflect narrative ideas, but no guidance is given. Having a higher focus, or an iai strike technique, or whatever, should matter, but you're left with rough at-the-time judgement to go by.

For Edge of the Empire Showdowns, 3 checks is not a dramatic increase in the time involved, but it benefits you in three ways:

• It means a character with skills other than shoot/stab (like coercion) has a good chance of winning the duel by slapping on massive difficulty changes and/or picking up advantage to perform aim actions during the staredown (equivalent to the first 2-3 rounds of most duels in Legend of the Five Rings that don't just devolve into a slap-fest)
• Because non-success icons from all three checks get 'stored up' for round 1, it means that even a starting level character can amass enough advantage and triumph across three rolls to pull off stuff they couldn't have considered achieving with just one roll. This is not a million miles away from the theoretical effect of the Centre action*
• It involves a few actual meaningful tactical choices. Using some of your gleaned advantage, one (cheap) option is to do a guarded stance action as an incidental - which is a very sensible idea if you don't take your opponent out in one go. But you're doing that by drawing off the advantage you might otherwise use for a second hit with linked (with something like a double-bladed saber) which might put them down for good.

Basically, it feels like a nice middle-ground between the complexity of multi-turn 'full' duels and comparatively simplified 'one-roll-duels'.

* Before @Avatar111 points out it doesn't work in practice, I know. Theoretically, storing up the and results for the turn where you actually strike is a sensible idea since whilst it's risky, it means you can actually get the double-results you need to deliver the that a less-than-ring-4 samurai must have to win a duel-to-first-strike (barring going to comprmised and finishing blows. The fact that it's a very inefficient way of doing that and that earth stance buggers the idea up is a failure of execution rather than concept.

Having not played SW/Gen I cannot really comment. From my armchair, it looks like the Faceoff is a false choice (both options give you margin on initiative, so you simply roll the best stat). Initiative is the main stat, because the guy who draws first gets to use the table of interesting choices. Ultimately, it strikes me as appearing a lot like 4E L5R dueling, with the exception that you get a table of options.

But again, I’m looking in from the sidelines

7 minutes ago, AndyDay303 said:

From my armchair, it looks like the Faceoff is a false choice (both options give you margin on initiative, so you simply roll the best stat).

Yes and no.

• Both options in the Faceoff essentially contribute to you getting a better initiative than your opponent.
• So in theory you'd just take 'the best' skill/stat combination from the four options to maximise the number of successes.
• However,
  1. Firstly that still represents options to cater for more player archetypes - it means, for example, that a player with a high streetwise/coercion/deception/perception but low ranged (light) skill might still have the means to win a shootout against a 'better' but less savvy pistoleer - because they can use the results of the staredown to win the initiative and the bonus draw and aim manoeuvres to balance out their comparative lack of skill with a pistol.
  2. Secondly, whilst you know your skill/stat combination you also have to take into account your opponent's Cool/Discipline scores.
  3. Thirdly, some players may have talents or equipment which influence what they want out of the checks, aside from the showdown rules themselves. If you have Quick Draw (or a similar ability) and your opponent doesn't, you don't need the 'free action to draw a weapon' and they do. Equally, some weapons give you bonus advantage icons when making checks with them. If this is the case, choosing to 'intimidate' rather than 'size up' may result in you making a 'worse' roll and having less advantage available, it is likely to hurt the player who doesn't get free advantage far more than the one who does. By comparison, a player who has abilities which need advantage icons or free actions to power them (True Aim makes a standard aim action way better but gives no benefit unless you get to aim), wants to take 'size up' to improve their Draw roll; not just because of winning initiative but also because of having the a big enough pool of advantage when they do.
• Equally, a big part of it is having a large number of advantage icons available.
  1. Imagine if duels were a 'challenge/focus/strike' format (because it's a classic L5R phrase, hence The Grand Faloon's use of it. This consists of:
     1. Challenge - sentiment to size up an opponent, command to intimidate them, or performance to mislead them
     2. Focus - an initiative check using meditation (because that's the basic duel mechanic and it seems right)
     3. Strike - a one swing each 'first round'
     4. If both are still standing, roll into a normal skirmish with the rolled initiative values.
  2. Now, yes, you get a unique table of things to spend on for the strike action (including an option requiring quite a few which says " your target may not defend against this strike "). more importantly, any icons not spent immediately in the challenge or focus step can be 'reserved' and added as a kept result on the strike action. Now, you're potentially resolving your default strike action with (roughly) three times as many as you'd normally get, meaning, for example:
     1. A low Martial Arts [Melee] character only needs to roll to succeed on a strike action, because to inflict a critical strike has been 'stored up' from the challenge and focus rolls.
     2. A gifted samurai who already has a high focus and can win initiative without passing the focus check can afford to harvest multiple from the roll, allowing them to use Razor-edged to push a critical strike up to a severity which inflicts Bleeding.

11 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Yes and no.

• Both options in the Faceoff essentially contribute to you getting a better initiative than your opponent.
• So in theory you'd just take 'the best' skill/stat combination from the four options to maximise the number of successes.
• However,
  1. Firstly that still represents options to cater for more player archetypes - it means, for example, that a player with a high streetwise/coercion/deception/perception but low ranged (light) skill might still have the means to win a shootout against a 'better' but less savvy pistoleer - because they can use the results of the staredown to win the initiative and the bonus draw and aim manoeuvres to balance out their comparative lack of skill with a pistol.
  2. Secondly, whilst you know your skill/stat combination you also have to take into account your opponent's Cool/Discipline scores.
  3. Thirdly, some players may have talents or equipment which influence what they want out of the checks, aside from the showdown rules themselves. If you have Quick Draw (or a similar ability) and your opponent doesn't, you don't need the 'free action to draw a weapon' and they do. Equally, some weapons give you bonus advantage icons when making checks with them. If this is the case, choosing to 'intimidate' rather than 'size up' may result in you making a 'worse' roll and having less advantage available, it is likely to hurt the player who doesn't get free advantage far more than the one who does. By comparison, a player who has abilities which need advantage icons or free actions to power them (True Aim makes a standard aim action way better but gives no benefit unless you get to aim), wants to take 'size up' to improve their Draw roll; not just because of winning initiative but also because of having the a big enough pool of advantage when they do.
• Equally, a big part of it is having a large number of advantage icons available.
  1. Imagine if duels were a 'challenge/focus/strike' format (because it's a classic L5R phrase, hence The Grand Faloon's use of it. This consists of:
     1. Challenge - sentiment to size up an opponent, command to intimidate them, or performance to mislead them
     2. Focus - an initiative check using meditation (because that's the basic duel mechanic and it seems right)
     3. Strike - a one swing each 'first round'
     4. If both are still standing, roll into a normal skirmish with the rolled initiative values.
  2. Now, yes, you get a unique table of things to spend on for the strike action (including an option requiring quite a few which says " your target may not defend against this strike "). more importantly, any icons not spent immediately in the challenge or focus step can be 'reserved' and added as a kept result on the strike action. Now, you're potentially resolving your default strike action with (roughly) three times as many as you'd normally get, meaning, for example:
     1. A low Martial Arts [Melee] character only needs to roll to succeed on a strike action, because to inflict a critical strike has been 'stored up' from the challenge and focus rolls.
     2. A gifted samurai who already has a high focus and can win initiative without passing the focus check can afford to harvest multiple from the roll, allowing them to use Razor-edged to push a critical strike up to a severity which inflicts Bleeding.

The initiative check provides a way to store opportunities (air) or ways to reduce the next TN (void). Which makes these 2 options good for rolling initiative (otherwise probably Fire: two strife and resist checks, Earth: no crit, or Water heals would be better) But yeah, it isnt as much as three times.

Quote

"unique table of things to spend on for the strike action (including an option requiring quite a few which says " your target may not defend against this strike" )

This is Mandatory ( I think).


Probably a duel specific opportunity table (with only a few options) could also be a way to "fix" duels. I am extremely happy with my current fix right now, but, if the intention is to really tweak the design in a deeper way, it sounds awesome, Maybe also try to include "predict and center" in there.
I am not sure about the extra check (your "challenge check") though. But minor detail.

1 hour ago, Avatar111 said:

Probably a duel specific opportunity table (with only a few options) could also be a way to "fix" duels.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see one at some point.

Shadowlands included a set of tables for use in the shadowlands and a second set for use if you carry the shadowlands taint (which is nice because it actually gives the taint a positive aspect, making it - appropriately enough - dangerously tempting, like adding an automatic kept on your next check or reducing all sources of fatigue for the rest of the scene by 2).

The original beta rules had a specific table for mass battles which never made it into the final cut, including things like inflicting panic with fire , bypassing fortifications with air , and so on. A similar one for duelling scenes doesn't sound unreasonable in some future sourcebook (since Courts of Stone is the crane-focused one, maybe the Dragon-focused one?)

Most Edge of the Empire , Age of Rebellion and Force and Destiny sourcebooks had similar tables.

13 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

I wouldn't be surprised if we see one at some point.

Shadowlands included a set of tables for use in the shadowlands and a second set for use if you carry the shadowlands taint (which is nice because it actually gives the taint a positive aspect, making it - appropriately enough - dangerously tempting, like adding an automatic kept on your next check or reducing all sources of fatigue for the rest of the scene by 2).

The original beta rules had a specific table for mass battles which never made it into the final cut, including things like inflicting panic with fire , bypassing fortifications with air , and so on. A similar one for duelling scenes doesn't sound unreasonable in some future sourcebook (since Courts of Stone is the crane-focused one, maybe the Dragon-focused one?)

Most Edge of the Empire , Age of Rebellion and Force and Destiny sourcebooks had similar tables.

oh, I don't play with all the new opportunity tables. Heck, I don't even play with p.329 of the core book.
I think this is one of the weakest core design of the game, the way opportunities are handled.
I'm ok with them for techniques, or generic ring effects, but when it start to be "+10% on your next check to sell an item in the next 24 hours" I just think its bloated and dirty.

But opportunities in the techniques, or for special things like duels (though kept at minimum), is fine.

edit: if there was only a generic (well designed) table for each rings with only 3 choices, and then a SMALL table for each "mini games" or conflicts (mass battle, duels, intrigue,skirmish etc) I think it could be ok. But the areas of opportunity usage they have beyond p.328 is just messy, and what they expanded on in shadowland and courts of stone is just very situational and overly tedious. My own nasty opinion, as usual. I like clean stuff.

11 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

• However  , 
  1. Firstly that still represents options to cater for more player archetypes    -

I agree that this is good. However, This does not make dueling a tactical affair with interesting choices. It just opens the field to more dueling builds.

11 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

• 1. Secondly, whilst you know your skill/stat combination you also have to take into account your opponent's Cool/Discipline scores.

What choices do you have when taking these into account? Knowing their cool, or not knowing it, doesn’t seem to offer tactical depth.

11 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

1. Thirdly, some players may have talents or equipment which influence what they want out of the checks, aside from the showdown rules themselves.

That is great! But it is still not a choice I make during the duel. It is a choice I make during character advancement, or when at the store. I won’t go to a duel and choose to NOT use the special doohikiy that gives me a phat bonus. That is a false choice.

So not to beat a dead horse, but aside from using your advantages that you roll to pick off a table, where are your choices? What makes this tactical? Because from what I can tell, if you’re using advantage to pick off of a table, that’s because you’ve won initiative. Meaning you won the draw. Which means you won that segment of the duel already, the advantage table is just the icing on the murderous cake.

9 hours ago, Avatar111 said:

edit: if there was only a generic (well designed) table for each rings with only 3 choices, and then a SMALL table for each "mini games" or conflicts (mass battle, duels, intrigue,skirmish etc) I think it could be ok. But the areas of opportunity usage they have beyond p.328 is just messy, and what they expanded on in shadowland and courts of stone is just very situational and overly tedious. My own nasty opinion, as usual. I like clean stuff.

I whole heartedly agree! I loath sitting and waiting while my players comb through tables to spend their opportunity.

4 hours ago, AndyDay303 said:

I won’t go to a duel and choose to NOT use the special doohikiy that gives me a phat bonus. That is a false choice.

That depends highly on what the special doohicky is. Many of them vary in 'activation cost', sometimes by strain (analogous to strife), sometimes by conflict points (analogous - roughly - to honour loss, I guess), sometimes by taking other rolled effects out of commission by 'eating' the results. Rapid Reaction lets you take strain to increase your initiative, for example, but tricks which inflict strain aren't uncommon so basically incapacitating yourself for the moment of the shot itself is possible if you overspend and then your opponent spends some of your rolled threat to give you more strain.

4 hours ago, AndyDay303 said:

Because from what I can tell, if you’re using advantage to pick off of a table, that’s because you’ve won initiative. Meaning you won the draw. Which means you won that segment of the duel already, the advantage table is just the icing on the murderous cake.

Remember you've also got to balance "winning the draw" (which is a binary state) with "putting the other guy down when you've done so" before they get their turn.

Choosing between size up and intimidate essentially boils down to:

1. How bothered you are about going first
2. Whether you're bothered about having more advantage and triumph to spend or your opponent having less.

Essentially, your skill/stat balance will push you down one route - either size up or intimidate - for a given opponent, to get the best impact on who gets the first Draw. What you've then got to decide is how big a deal who gets the draw is likely to be in terms of who's left standing.

If think you can afford to give them a wounding shot provided you can follow it with a killshot, then you need to be going for size up unless the disparity between skills is ridiculous, because getting those two triumph results for the auto-kill is hard, and whilst you may have a better willpower (the stat which powers coercion) attribute dice don't have any triumph symbols on them, but proficiency dice you'll get from upgrading your cool check do .

But even then, letting your opponent get the drop is risky because whilst you know what results they may have to spend you may not know the full list of doohickeys they have in their kitbag.

Is there extreme amounts of tactics? No. Because it's meant to be a quick resolution method. But I think there's still enough to be interesting. Equally, you could argue that for a given statline and opponent, there's a fairly predictable 'best' way of fighting a duel 'longhand' in L5R, too.