But at higher levels a fight to first HP loss is meaningless.
Meaningless in what way? If the point of a duel is to derive satisfaction, and satisfaction is defined as dueling with lethal weapons to the point one opponent produces a physical mark on the other to regain and restore honour. This physical mark may be only a scratch, the so-called 'first blood'.
I think we both agree that HP are abstract representation. But perhaps they shouldn't be used in this instance of representing a duel if the point of the contest is not lethality (i.e. a judicial duel).
Consider these two extreme examples where HPs fall down in a duel:
1) A veteran soldier (the so called 'first level PC) may suffer many minor cuts, scratches and abrasions that may each sequentially leave a physical mark, but their sum total does not affect their combat ability in any way.
They have sustained the visible manifestation of 'First Blood' without the need to have lost 1/3 of their life force (using your definition of what constitutes FB)
2) A very skilled duelist using a rapier against an inferior foe may toy with their foe to sequentially cut off buttons, locks of hair, belt and suspenders. His foe is vastly humiliated in the process (especially if their trousers drop!) and has lost honour and the duel and yet not a single loss of anything one could call a Hit Point has been lost.
I can see what you are trying to do with this home-brew solution to the D20 rules; providing some drama to the duel by prolonging the circumstances of the contest. But in this instance the D20 combat system doesn't appear to help emulate many of the swashbuckling traditions of dueling that appear in such historical based literature as "The Scarlet Pimpernel", "Scaramouche", etc. There are no bonuses to fighting a duel for hurling taunts, using feints, playing mind-games with your opponent to unnerve them. And using HP as the metric to see who wins or loses a duel may be similarly unhelpful.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-02-16 12:59 am (UTC)Meaningless in what way? If the point of a duel is to derive satisfaction, and satisfaction is defined as dueling with lethal weapons to the point one opponent produces a physical mark on the other to regain and restore honour. This physical mark may be only a scratch, the so-called 'first blood'.
I think we both agree that HP are abstract representation. But perhaps they shouldn't be used in this instance of representing a duel if the point of the contest is not lethality (i.e. a judicial duel).
Consider these two extreme examples where HPs fall down in a duel:
1) A veteran soldier (the so called 'first level PC) may suffer many minor cuts, scratches and abrasions that may each sequentially leave a physical mark, but their sum total does not affect their combat ability in any way.
They have sustained the visible manifestation of 'First Blood' without the need to have lost 1/3 of their life force (using your definition of what constitutes FB)
2) A very skilled duelist using a rapier against an inferior foe may toy with their foe to sequentially cut off buttons, locks of hair, belt and suspenders. His foe is vastly humiliated in the process (especially if their trousers drop!) and has lost honour and the duel and yet not a single loss of anything one could call a Hit Point has been lost.
I can see what you are trying to do with this home-brew solution to the D20 rules; providing some drama to the duel by prolonging the circumstances of the contest. But in this instance the D20 combat system doesn't appear to help emulate many of the swashbuckling traditions of dueling that appear in such historical based literature as "The Scarlet Pimpernel", "Scaramouche", etc. There are no bonuses to fighting a duel for hurling taunts, using feints, playing mind-games with your opponent to unnerve them. And using HP as the metric to see who wins or loses a duel may be similarly unhelpful.
::B::