Duels in the Imperium

[sablewyvern]

One personage was requested a duel was sausages...one of the sausages would be inoculated with cholera. I'm not quite sure how this was supposed to work.

Sounds like a Duel of Wits.

"You've just made one of the classic blunders! The first, as we all know, is never get involved in a land war in Asia. The second, and only slightly less well know, is never match wits with a Sicilian when death is on the line!"

 

[Vargas]

Pistol duels were back-to-back with an agreed upon number of paces before turning and firing. Basically, both participants would turn and fire ONE round.

I'm no expert, but pistol "technology" of that time made a single shot, possibly even the three shots mentioned, far less probable of hitting, let alone wounding, than a pistol today would. I think for duelling to be considered an effective social "tool", a certain amount of skill and/or luck is required by those involved. The implication seems to be that it's the strength of the person's character which gives him the edge in the duel. Just a thought . . .

Now, having said that, while duelling is a great roleplaying device, and certainly reflects a fuedal mindset, would it survive into the 57th century? The example of the Soviets in Afghanistan not withstanding, duelling stopped being a socially available option for some reason and I can't help but think whatever the reason(s), they would continue to apply.

 

[castiglione]

This seems illogical to me. If it has been agreed beforehand that a duel is to first blood, then neither party is putting his life on the line - same if they're shooting from 5000 paces, same if they're using tazers. Barring accidents, both parties are pretty much guaranteed to survive.

Dueling to first blood could mean the duel is stopped after one participant is stopped. Or it could be stopped after one participant is run through the heart (or at least it COULD be, theoretically). Granted, knowing that the duel is to first blood, neither combatant is likely to murderously lunge at his opponent (if he wanted to, he would've demanded a duel to the death) but the fact that the possibility is OUT there means that, as far as everyone is concerned, both parties are putting their life on the line. It's a matter of perception.

Let's look at the case of dueling in Renaissance Italy - many duels ended with neither participant even being scratched when their seconds rushed in to separate them after their circled and feinted warily at each other and this behavior of seconds was understood (and expected) by all. Yet, because there was still the perceived possibility that one or both participants could die in their duel, their honor was satisified.

 

[castiglione]

Now, having said that, while duelling is a great roleplaying device, and certainly reflects a fuedal mindset, would it survive into the 57th century? The example of the Soviets in Afghanistan not withstanding, duelling stopped being a socially available option for some reason and I can't help but think whatever the reason(s), they would continue to apply.

One could argue that dueling or dueling behavior is still common today; the rules of conduct just aren't written down (or even consistent) but they're still there. Heck, how many "fights" have you seen with two guys going chest to chest but neither side really throwing a punch and then suddenly their friends rush in and separate them. To me, that pretty much resembles two guys dueling with swords (without the swords) and then their seconds rushing in. And in the end, they've both "defended" their honor. Everyone knows a priori that their friends are going to rush in and put a stop to anything before things get out of hand and this is known and expected but even then, if one of them had backed down beforehand, he would have suffered a perceived loss of status.

 

[rancke]

It's funny you should mention non-conventional dueling weapons, i.e. pillows. The "injured" party in a duel usually got to choose the weapons. One personage was requested a duel was sausages...one of the sausages would be inoculated with cholera. I'm not quite sure how this was supposed to work.

Randomized the sausages and each eats one, would be my guess.

I once read a short story about a duel between a high school bully and one of his victims. The victim maneuvered the bully (who was much stronger than him) into agreeing to something that gave both of them an equal chance. They put a rattlesnake into a box with a hole big enough for a hand at each end, shook the box to rile up the rattler, whereupon both parties to the "duel" simultaneously put a hand into the box. There'd be an even chance of which one the rattler would bite (Except the victim cheated ).

In Mack Reynolds' Code Duello a team of special agents is sent to operate on a world with an extremely over-geared macho culture. Offworlders tended to inadvertently insult someone within hours of arrival and be challenged to duels. Even the best-trained secret agent seldom lasted more than a few duels. One of the special agents was an extremely strong professor who chose Macedonian pikes when he was challenged (Another was an Olympic level athlete from a world where everyone were about the size of 10 year old children. She dressed in a pretty pink frock and had various lethal devices hidden in her teddy bear).


Hans

 

[G. Fieendish]

In some ways dueling is a way of showing commitment to one side of a disagreement. Putting forward your willingness to die/kill for your point of view does send a strong message, but ultimately it is futile as very rarely does your willingness to commit violence strengthen your argument.

One issue that hasn't been raised is non-human dueling, either between members of alternative races, or between alternative races and humans. I can certainly see Vargr barehand dueling with the winning position being throating, or Aslan wrestling till concession or death. Much like barehanded dueling between humans (getting back to the brawling alternative).

K'Kree headbutting maybe?

In Aslani/Human Duelling, as I recall from several suppliments, the Human's issued with 2 artificial dewclaws, or a pair of daggers & it proceeds as a standard duel either to first blood or to death...
Needless to say, if said "trigger" incident does proceed to a formal duel, then said Aslan must be very thin-skinned indeed, i.e a male with Tolerance 0....

 

[castiglione]

Randomized the sausages and each eats one, would be my guess.

I actually gave this a lot more thought than I should have and I came to the same conclusion as you. It's the only thing that makes sense (given the "weapons").

Being the dope that I am, I initially thought they were meant to "fence" with the sausages (I thought you could still catch cholera from the randomly "poisoned" weapon if some sausage goo splashed on you).

 

[jatay3]

I once made a culture where there were several kinds of dueling. One version known among the more intellectual class is "chess for seven" in which they play chess and the winner is allowed seven blows without reply.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Needless to say, if said "trigger" incident does proceed to a formal duel, then said Aslan must be very thin-skinned indeed, i.e a male with Tolerance 0....

Ummmm .... no. He needed to be a normal Aslan. The guys with any Tolerance level at all are the extraordinary ones. If an Aslan makes it more than 100 steps into human culture without a duel, he's a 1-in-1,000. :smirk:

I once made a culture where there were several kinds of dueling. One version known among the more intellectual class is "chess for seven" in which they play chess and the winner is allowed seven blows without reply.

Blows on what? A trumpet? Oh! You mean.......
Yikes! I have to play a game of chess just to give a guy his just deserts? o: Talk about your "justice delayed"....

 

[castiglione]

When I was a kid, we used to play poker for "finger whips" (you whip your fingers across the other guy's forearm...same idea as an Indian burn but you hit the guy); we'd make our bets in "whips" and the guy who won the "pot" got to hit someone that many times.

 

[far-trader]

You know, castiglione's post reminded me of a game we used to play as kids. Looking back now it might almost have been a kind of dueling. I can't remember what we called it, or even why we played it (I do remember challenges issued in heat as well as friendly practice), but some of us probably still have the "dueling scars" from proving our "manhood" through it.

It began with each boy (c'mon, it was ages ago and girls were not only icky but not allowed to play "guy" stuff) facing the other a couple feet apart.

Each would produce their jack-knife (or later, I was so cool I had a lock-back, that I still carry to this day as a tool) and in turns throw it to one side or the other of the opponent to stick in the ground and the opponent would have to move their nearest foot to the blade. If the blade didn't stick no move was required.

You won by being the last one standing (i.e. not falling over from your ever widening stance) or being able to retrieve their knife (since without the knife you couldn't take your turn).

I'm sure it was a widely "played" game at the time. Anyone know what I'm talking about? Maybe remembers what they called it? Or knows how it originated?

Oh, the "dueling scars" mentioned above? Well let's just say sneakers are not proof against a thrown knife blade :smirk: Nobody lost any toes but there might be some with a mark from a cut when the throw was a little off.

 

[aramis]

We used screwdrivers, Dan, but the same game.

A little safer. I was like 8 or 9.

 

[G. Fieendish]

Re; Fritz_Brown's 11:36 am post
That's why they're accompanied by Tolerant escorts, to make sure they don't make such, potentially fatal social mistakes.....
Incedentally, didn't the PGP Solomani & Aslan suppliment have a section on Aslan Duelling....?
I seem to recall a proverb/insult from said suppliment concerning thin skinned /over honourable Aslans...
"He's so Honourable, he duels Females....".

 

[Todg]

This is in reference to the crazy variant (En Garde! in the world of Traveller) thread...

...do you think it'd be appropriate or even logical for an officer to fight a duel with an enlisted man? I'm assuming they're in different services, i.e. Marine officer gets into it with an Army enlisted man in a bar, words are exchanged and the next thing you know, they're standing back to back at dawn in some secluded glade while their seconds inspect their dueling revolvers.

The TU is socially conscious - hence the SOC stat. That probably means that there won't be dueling outside of one's social class - at least not far out. Say one SOC either way. Rank will be less important than SOC, IMO.

 

[Todg]

BTW, you might find this helpful: The code duello:

http://travellercentral.com/rules/code_duello.html

 

[Icosahedron]

Dan, we called the game 'Stretch' (ingenious, eh?) Dunno how widespread the name is, but this is the UK, so the game is pretty widely played.

 

[zonk]

You know, castiglione's post reminded me of a game we used to play as kids. Looking back now it might almost have been a kind of dueling. I can't remember what we called it, or even why we played it (I do remember challenges issued in heat as well as friendly practice), but some of us probably still have the "dueling scars" from proving our "manhood" through it.

It began with each boy (c'mon, it was ages ago and girls were not only icky but not allowed to play "guy" stuff) facing the other a couple feet apart.

Each would produce their jack-knife (or later, I was so cool I had a lock-back, that I still carry to this day as a tool) and in turns throw it to one side or the other of the opponent to stick in the ground and the opponent would have to move their nearest foot to the blade. If the blade didn't stick no move was required.

You won by being the last one standing (i.e. not falling over from your ever widening stance) or being able to retrieve their knife (since without the knife you couldn't take your turn).

I'm sure it was a widely "played" game at the time. Anyone know what I'm talking about? Maybe remembers what they called it? Or knows how it originated?

Oh, the "dueling scars" mentioned above? Well let's just say sneakers are not proof against a thrown knife blade :smirk: Nobody lost any toes but there might be some with a mark from a cut when the throw was a little off.

I played it. D*mned if I remember what we called it

 

[Agemegos]

However, I'd allow pistol duels between equals using tazer rounds or tranqs.

I don't see it myself. The whole point of a duel is after all to prove that you are prepared to defend your honour with lethal force.

 

[Agemegos]

In some ways dueling is a way of showing commitment to one side of a disagreement. Putting forward your willingness to die/kill for your point of view does send a strong message, but ultimately it is futile as very rarely does your willingness to commit violence strengthen your argument.

That's why it is the custom of social groups with high but insecure self-esteem. Insult the honour a nobleman or a member of a street gang and he has no retort but violence.

 

[Icosahedron]

I don't see it myself. The whole point of a duel is after all to prove that you are prepared to defend your honour with lethal force.

I figured the point of the duel may be to punish the transgressor without resorting to the 'barbarity' of a fistfight, the 'risk' of mortal combat, or the further dishonour of not giving the fellow a sporting chance to defend himself.

Assuming that duelling has any point at all!