Dueling is still practiced in several cryptic nations, notably Grand Normandy. It is illegal there, but so common that the Crown usually ignores it if there is no death or permanent injury resulting.
The challenger, the party that conceives themselves injured, calls out their opponent, the challenged. This just about has to be done in front of witnesses, the more the better, or it is just ranting.
The challenged party accepts the challenge and also proposes the details, from the classic and extreme:
"Pistols at dawn, in the deer park, one shot each."
... to the commoner:
"Sabers to first blood, tonight, in the garden."
... to the quite common but little recorded:
"Fists to first fall! Right here, right now, bucko!"
Note that the challenged proposes the weapons, and where, when, and how far they are to be used.
That is if they accepted. The challenged party may refuse the challenge. Remember they do this in front of witnesses. The refusal may make them look:
- Charitable:
- "Roland was being a silly ass and was tight as a tick. Max was being nice by refusing. He could blenderize Roland." Max would have looked like a bully by accepting Roland's challenge.
- Sensible:
- "Obviously, Terrence could beat Carl to a pulp. It doesn't change the fact that Carl was speaking the known truth, and politely too. Terrence would have won, but he'd be the one to look bad. I certainly don't think less of Carl for declining to be smacked around by a bully wrapped up in self-deception." This is rare. The general feeling is that Carl should have accepted the challenge in a suitable form since, as the challenged party, he could pick the form of combat. There's always poisoned cookies (see below).
- Disgraced:
- "I doubt Duncan will have the face to bring up his opinion of Charlotte again, certainly not in front of her or Hugo!" Duncan does not have the courage of his convictions.
The challenged ought therefore to think carefully about the whole social situation, as well as about personal safety and how strongly they feel about the issue. So ought the challenger, before issuing the challenge: who is he up against, how well can they fight, and what do they have to lose? (Unfortunately, these challenges often come in heated moments, when it is hard to think carefully. So much nicer to get a letter delivered by hand, by the challenger's second.)
The challenger may propose changes to the terms of the duel. The thing is, the challenged party can refuse without loss of honor. Suppose you, as the challenger:
- Raise the stakes:
- ("To first blood?! To the death!") This may make you look like a bully or a raging idiot.
- Lower the stakes:
- ("Yes, I feel strongly about the Oxford comma, but really! Let's make it three shots with rubber bullets instead of one shot with lead.") This is almost sure to make you look feeble, though not as feeble as if you withdrew the challenge.
- Just change things:
- ("Now, you know I don't know the first thing about swordsmanship. How about quarterstaves? We both do that.") ("Sorry, old scout. Can't make the deer park at dawn. How about in the parlor with Colonel Mustard and the candlestick? Wait...") This is about the only one that can work.
A challenger who wants to control the terms had best do it beforehand, in the challenge. "Sir, I challenge you! I have my knife, you have yours. How about right here and now? First blood!" This is not really kosher, but remember this generally happens in front of an audience, in a heated moment. If the audience waives the niceties, you might pull it off. Or you might get, "Accepted! But it's hand-to-hand until one of us can't rise," from a champion in baritsu, and you would have to take it.
If you want a duel and want to control the terms, it is better to goad the other party into challenging you ("Do you challenge me?" "Yes!"), so that you, as the challenged, can pick time, place, and weapons.
A proper duel takes at least five people: the challenger, the challenged, a second for each of them, and a referee. Additional witnesses are a plus.
The referee is there to make sure of fair play, of course. If seconds aren't available, just the referee may do. The minimum for a duel, to distinguish it from a private brawl, is a ref.
The seconds are there to make sure their principals are not unfairly disadvantaged, to act as go-betweens and negotiators if the principals can't stand to talk to each other, and to patch up their principals afterward if that's a live option.
Sometimes a doctor attends to do the patching up, or even a medical team apiece for really grand duels. In any case, both sides should have the same support. Both or none have seconds, etc.
Additional witnesses are valuable because duels are largely about reputation, about who is known to have the courage of their convictions, so the more people who know, the better.
Some things are Not Done in dueling:
- No one squeals to the authorities. Anyway, unless there was loss of life or limb, the authorities don't want to hear about it, at least not in Grand Normandy.
- The loser's friends do not beat up the winner. (Or, for that matter, vice versa.)
- After the duel is resolved (won, lost, tied, declined), nobody beats up anybody over that issue, neither principals nor seconds nor supporters. The subject is closed.
- You don't challenge the incapacitated.
- You don't challenge children.
- You don't challenge the oathbound, e.g. some (but not all) clergy.
- You don't challenge the other sex to physical combat. (Wits, chance, or magic are allowed.)
- Instead, the challenged party should get a champion of the same sex as the challenger.
On one social level, the man can't really win in such a situation: he either loses the duel or he wins and is a brute. So on another social level, this is regarded as unfair to the man. Time to call in his action-oriented sister, wife, fiancée, or kinswoman.
In modern Grand Normandy, if a woman disguises herself as a man and challenges a man to physical combat, oh well. (Sometimes the disguise is quite thin.) Not everybody regards this as a proper way to level the field of honor. Finding a male champion is much more widely acceptable.
Of course, things that are Not Done do get done, but then it's messy and scandalous.
If the challenged party should not fight, a champion can fight in their stead. But if no one volunteers, it gets really awkward. Generally, the challenger looks bad for challenging someone who shouldn't fight, if that situation was obvious. Sometimes, the challenged party looks bad if no one is willing to champion them. Or the whole thing can blow over, because the challenged is in a great position to scuttle the duel without losing face, and you get a little dance that does nothing but blow off steam and make positions clear:
Esmerelda: "I challenge you, Roger!"
Roger's sister: "Done! Hatpins to first blood!"
Roger: "No, Pamela. I won't have it."
Dueling is a stylized fight. What distinguishes it from a plain "contest" is that each turn of a principal is intended to injure the other principal. This makes non-physical duels a little different from plain contests in the same domains.
The type case of a magic duel is the kind in which each mage shifts from shape to shape, seeking to destroy or evade the other. But few to no human mages have that kind of power. Instead, mage-duels are usually done by casting and warding against malign spells on each other, or by physical attack with magical means (elements, animals, animated weapons, etc.).
Since magic is so variable and individual, these duels may take a lot of work to set up, and the referee almost has to be a mage too.
Unless it is a specifically magical duel, magic should generally appear nowhere on the field of honor. Even lucky pieces are often forbidden, and the ultra-strict may even forbid prayers (virtually impossible to enforce).
Typically, dueling by gambling is not about getting rich or winning a prize. So the stakes are simply counters. And each turn should be potentially damaging, so each turn should give a chance to win or lose counters. Since the only damage is to bragging rights, gambling as a form of dueling is not common.
Any manipulation of luck is, of course, forbidden.
Popular with those lacking physical or magical combat skills, who are nonetheless serious about points of honor. It is usually done as an endurance test. The referee gives the signal and both principals seize identical hot objects, or whatever the ordeal is. The winner is the one who endures longest.
Duel by ordeal can be "tuned" in severity by picking the amount of damage the ordeal does
"The chalice with the palace has the pellet with the poison.
The vessel with the pestle has the brew that is true."
—The Court Jester, starring Danny Kaye
Like ordeal, popular with those who are serious about points of honor but are not mages or warriors. Usually done with drinks, classically with wine in fancy matched cups, but any other comestible is possible.
The principals get to examine the food or drink as closely as they like. They go simultaneously or the challenged party goes first and must finish after the first bite or sip; otherwise, it is tantamount to refusing the challenge. The challenger must go too, if it wasn't simultaneous. The referee is often given the job of preparing the food, or an independent party may be engaged.
Poison dueling is easy to "tune" to different levels of severity. Just lower the dose, or use emetics or laxatives instead of poisons proper. Another method is to use multiple offerings, e.g. a dozen cookies, only one being laced with emetic. Each principal takes one, probably nobody gets sick, and we could declare honor satisfied. Time for snacks. Or not.
Return to Inkliverse
Return to Wind Off the Hilltop
Copyright © Earl Wajenberg, 2019