On Every Fight Having to End in Death

[Tybalt]

It's the fact that everyone wants to be prepared IF violent RP does break out.

 

[blargtheawesome]

Disabling is a less irritating solution than a character dying. You get fighting experience, and your enemy gets to RP as being injured or crippled, which can be quite fun as well as lead to tons of development (@blargtheawesome can attest to this). This is something most people don't consider doing, but it's so easy to handle. Injury is less contested than getting killed, and someone with a broken leg would obviously be unable to pursue you.

Really quite is, and I think people who even have a strong fondness for fighting RP would like it. If your character is crippled for decades or, really, even half of one- that's a lot of time he spent either at 10-50% fighting ability. Or, hell, he might even remain that way. Your dude isn't gonna be as good of a fighter. And I can go on for hours about all the ways Nwalme, who has been crippled in some fashion- not counting mental trauma- for roughly half of the time I've been RPing him, can cheat. Or trick whoever wants to fight him, or just in some cases tries to completely work around the fact that whoever he's fighting probably has much better technique, or just try to do something quick and dirty and run away.

My opinion is that we don't apply the law correctly.

By that I mean be that, in a normal medieval society, most if not all of you would currently either be rotting in a dirty rat-ridden cell, have both of your eyes missing, have a hand cut off or be dead either from the gallows or the execution block.

What I'm trying to make you realize is that justice was often harsher, and it didn't really depend on which town you were in, it was a rather universal constant. The way you all behave in public, flashing blades for no reason and being often openly agressive for no reason, was often heavily punished.

For my part, I intend to apply rude but just laws and to implement a tolerance-zero justice in the Enclave of Haven. Im serious when I say that from now on, when I see people running around with their blades unsheated or fighting eachother, they better have a good reason or they're both going to jail pronto.

I think that if all House Lords, Kings and Lesser landbarons would do as me, this would dramatically reduce crime and agressivity.

Yes. I made the Chevalier's form of justice slightly more, uh.. tame than I wanted. Because people would have the choice between that, and a trial. Now, though, if you commit a crime in front of a religious dude expect anything from getting nailed to a Rahas sword to being forced to stare at the sun until you go blind.

Addendum: People don't seem to also realise: killing /is not/ easy. They don't seem to take into account the consequences, ( emotionally, physically, and socially ) of ending a person's life.
Unless there's something seriously wrong with your character, taking a life is not something you shrug off and do as a part of your daily routine.

Sure it is, just spend several months with your character getting legitimately broken down and made to accept some morally horrible beliefs, die several times to get desensitized to the notion, be treated like dirt throughout your childhood until you harbor more hate than love in your heart. Easy peasy! (not really, and even then- the example i used of course being my own character and personal experience- taking a life disquiets him for anywhere from several hours to a few days)

 

[Megadonkey30]

I feel the same way, having fights end in death also seems a bit boring and uncreative. In a world where it is known that most people come back after death, what does killing people in a fight actually achieve? Do you want to teach a lesson to the person who is sneaking in your house? What would killing them actually teach them? especially if they do not remember it. Most fights usually end in someone not being able to keep fighting, or happen to be in much pain, that the will to continue fighting leaves them. Being cut with a blade, painful, but not entirely a way to kill someone. Stabbing someone? It could be healed, and not every stab is in an important organ.

Also, a stab, or a slash is fairly easy to parry on its own, the best way to over power your opponent is to trick them, or simply use more force then they are. There are many ways to win a fight without it ending in death, and those ways are much more rewarding. Being defeated and forced to run home and lick your wounds is much better then letting someone stab you in the gut, and you dying.

 

[Pirapple]

I have a lot I would love to say on the topic, but my brain is working at absolute zero right now, so I will come back to this.

 

[Fronslin]

I haven't fought much IC but you don't /have/ to kill anyone. There are all sorts of little neat things you can do as an alternative.

Plotting, deception, conversion, and persuasion are all viable alternatives to killing someone at the end of a fight.

Who knows maybe saving that person who was just misunderstanding something will turn out to make your entire group happier. Or maybe by a stoke of luck they might return the favor.

 

[DraconDarknight]

My opinion is that we don't apply the law correctly.

By that I mean be that, in a normal medieval society, most if not all of you would currently either be rotting in a dirty rat-ridden cell, have both of your eyes missing, have a hand cut off or be dead either from the gallows or the execution block.

What I'm trying to make you realize is that justice was often harsher, and it didn't really depend on which town you were in, it was a rather universal constant. The way you all behave in public, flashing blades for no reason and being often openly agressive for no reason, was often heavily punished.

For my part, I intend to apply rude but just laws and to implement a tolerance-zero justice in the Enclave of Haven. Im serious when I say that from now on, when I see people running around with their blades unsheated or fighting eachother, they better have a good reason or they're both going to jail pronto.

I think that if all House Lords, Kings and Lesser landbarons would do as me, this would dramatically reduce crime and agressivity.

Read Hierax Laws for that... Cause we actually have medieval punishments

 

[Mryosi]

D) Backflip over a javelin, vanish into the shadow dimension, and appear behind them to snap their neck
Yeah, do this and you're getting banned for being an ass.

lol

But yeah, I said all of that so many times! Not every fight must end with death! Its such a nightmare to all "brave" character who "chose" not to know how to fight (And we get killed for it every so often).

Actually, even in medieval times, even in the most scary, brute battles, where people are fighting in pools of blood people respected one word "Yield". Knights were trained first to disarm only then kill. Once you fight against someone and he yields, rules of chivalry will make him surrender his weapon to you and stay wherever he is until the battle is over, when its over he will be your prisoner until you will sell him back to his family, among with a promise that his family will stop siding with the enemy perhaps. This is how knights earned money, war or tournaments.
Too all medieval fantasy readers it shouldn't be news. Nobel prisoners who yielded are a huge part of the war, they make lords decide where to attack to prevent banner-men to leave their host to free their son/brother/father.

It is worth mentioning though, it is true that if a knight fought a peasant, the knight would most likely not even bother to disarm him knowing that the little money his family has won't make taking his prisoner worth it. But it wasn't rare to capture a large amount of peasants together to later on trade for a nobleman or just simply convince them to join their ranks... or death.

 

[Redworrior83]

I agree with all this...
But I also think that, to add to it-
Whenever someone enters a Tavern or such, they always emote having 'two swords at their side, six daggers strapped to belt-' when really... Just going into a tavern for a drink, the most a person'd bring is a sword incase they got jumped. Like... Oh, I see. You are going to come into a tavern for a drink in full plate armor, carrying your finest weaponry.

The most Galo ever carries when going out somewhere is his bow and his machetes (Which are attached to his hip), though it isn't rare for him to be carrying extra such as a hatchet as a last resort.

 

[Gregor]

The problem i have with yielding is that most people just want to kill me, or disable me permanently or perma jail.

Sure if your character is a known noble who would ransom me i would yield

But to people who hate me because of what i stand for.
I would rather fight to death, knowing if i yield I am worse off.

 

[Tybalt]

I haven't fought much IC but you don't /have/ to kill anyone. There are all sorts of little neat things you can do as an alternative.

Plotting, deception, conversion, and persuasion are all viable alternatives to killing someone at the end of a fight.

Who knows maybe saving that person who was just misunderstanding something will turn out to make your entire group happier. Or maybe by a stoke of luck they might return the favor.

Maybe. But if somebody has already killed a freind of yours I doubt you'd be very forgiving or merciful.

 

[Spark]

Maybe. But if somebody has already killed a freind of yours I doubt you'd be very forgiving or merciful.

But then in the scenario where not every fight ends in death, would that person have actually killed your friend or just wounded him/her? At the moment most every fight ends in death so yes this person probably would have killed him. But in the ideal scenario like this thread suggests, he might not have That's the reason for not every fight having to end in death, it doesn't create a chain reaction of killing.

 

[Tybalt]

M

But then in the scenario where not every fight ends in death, would that person have actually killed your friend or just wounded him/her? At the moment most every fight ends in death so yes this person probably would have killed him. But in the ideal scenario like this thread suggests, he might not have That's the reason for not every fight having to end in death, it doesn't create a chain reaction of killing.

ost killing nowadays has started because they originally killed someone else.

 

[Spark]

Everyone just needs to like.... Eat, Pray, Love.

 

[Valonyx]

M

ost killing nowadays has started because they originally killed someone else.

Yeah, but what Spark's tryin to say is that if we begin stopping people from killing eachother in otherwise reasonable situations, it would slowly decrease the mortality rate related to murders.

EDIT: sniped.

 

[Tybalt]

Yeah, but what Spark's tryin to say is that if we begin stopping people from killing eachother in otherwise reasonable situations, it would slowly decrease the mortality rate related to murders.

EDIT: sniped.

Right r... But first you would have to eliminate each other's very reasonable grudges

 

[Spark]

Right r... But first you would have to eliminate each other's very reasonable grudges

Or give them something worse than death.

 

[Tybalt]

Or give them something worse than death.

Like?

 

[Exclaimer]

Life imprisonment? Permanent injury? Etc. are all other options if you truly hate the other.

 

[Spark]

Like?

Well death in Altera isn't even that bad so like what was said above ^^^. Then again.... The grewsome stuff isn't allowed anymore so I guess carving something into someone's face (*cough* @MaelstromPuddle ) is out of the question, taking a limb or something could do. Taking the sword arm would be pretty devastating to a knight. Or maybe some fingers. Paralysis. Burning them. Hmmm there are many things worse than death if you put your mind to it.

 

[Baron]

Christ if it isn't one thing it's another. The goal is to reduce pointless killing and violence, not replace one with the other. Instead of taking off a man's arm altogether, how about you just break it, or sprain it, or steal his sword, or get him to surrender?