The Coffee House

Full Version: Face-Off Arena FAQ and Guidelines
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Welcome to the Face-off Arena! This is the place to put come up with your own fantasy battles and contests - and then ask other members who they think would win!

That's quite vague, though - so, here's a thread that's designed to add a little bit of clarity :) .

What kinds of battles take place here?

Pretty much anything! Some of the threads feature races; others involve mental contests (like creating an invention); and I'm sure you'll be able to think of any number of others. However, the vast majority of these face-offs we have now are physical combat: the competitors fight one another, using any powers and weaponry that they have at their disposal, until one competitor incapacitates all of their opponents (in such a way that they can no longer continue fighting). Typically, it will be assumed that a participant in physical combat cannot run away (more on this later on in the thread).

Since most threads are "physical combat" match-ups, we request that if your thread is not physical combat, then the opening post should say what it is instead.

UPDATE 3rd November 2019: Sometimes, we get frivolous battles which are just intended as a joke. These are fine; however, they should be marked as jokes in the topic title.

Who can the competitors be?

We have a broad spectrum of competitors in the face-offs we currently have: prehistoric animals, modern animals, historical warriors, superheroes, supervillains, and even some robots :P . These are all fair game.

There's only one real restriction: if you want to use real-life humans in physical combat matches, then they must be known specifically for physical combat. For example: historical warriors, boxers, and martial artists are all fine to include, because they're known for some kind of combat prowess. However, a thread about "Would Katy Perry defeat Taylor Swift in a fist fight?" creates no opportunity for a legitimate and interesting discussion (because neither singer is known for any combat skills), and would simply serve as a stick for their respective fans and haters to beat each other with. So, don't go down that route, please.

Note that this restriction only applies to physical combat - so, something like "Mo Farah vs. Usain Bolt in an 800m running race" would be fine: that's a race, and not a physical fight.

What powers can be used?

A wide range of weapons have been used in real-world history, and a wide range of magic powers have been used in fantasy. This offers a vast array of potential battles between characters with different combinations of offensive and defensive match-ups. However, in the interests of keeping these match-ups fair and interesting, the following powers should be avoided:

  • Time travel (as this would allow a character to go back in time and kill their opponent as a defenceless baby);
  • Anything that brings in any kind of outside help (more on this below);
  • If the goal is "Fight to the death", then immortal characters may not be used.

Furthermore, combatants can only use powers and weapons that are included in the opening post, as part of either the picture or the description. For example: if the battle is "Iroquois Warrior vs. Spartan", and you want the Iroquois warrior to be able to use a bow - then, you must either find a picture that shows him with a bow, or mention the bow somewhere in the description. If neither the picture nor the description contains a bow, then the Iroquois warrior in this battle may not use a bow, even if they did historically.

Where does the battle take place?

The terrain on which a battle takes place is often key to deciding the winner: for example, cavalry will fight much better on flat land than in forest. Therefore, this needs to be defined as part of the setup for the battle.

For small-scale physical combat (e.g. battles between individual animals or warriors, or small groups), the default setup is the Standard Battle Arena. For larger-scale physical combat (e.g. battles between entire military forces, or between overpowered superheroes), the default setup is the Expanded Battle Arena:

[Image: 0j6oCTh.png]

[Image: jmlCANE.png]

They have some similarities, but they also have some important differences, so I'll go through the details:

  • The standard arena consists of a circular grass field, with a 1km radius (if the fight is between two aquatic creatures, then the grass is replaced with water). The expanded arena consists of a barren planet the size of Earth.

  • On the standard arena, the two combatants start in the middle of the arena, 100 metres apart. On the expanded arena, they start on the planet's surface, 100 kilometres apart.

  • Both arenas are surrounded by a spherical force field. This force field serves two purposes: a) it prevents either combatant from leaving the arena, and b) it prevents either combatant from calling on any outside help (that help will be stuck behind the force field).

These setups aren't intended to constrain people: it's designed to be flexible and customisable. For example, you may want to start a battle where the arena is all forest; or enlarge the radius; or move the starting positions closer together or further away; or you may want to dispense with the force field. These are all things that you're allowed to do if you want - in which case, you should specify any alterations to the arena in the opening post of your thread.

For physical combat, if the opening post does not specify otherwise, then the battle will be assumed to be taking place on a Standard Battle Arena or an Expanded Battle Arena, depending on the scale of the combat. Extreme-scale physical combat (e.g. on the interstellar level) will not be assumed to be using a battle arena; however, it will still be assumed that there is some kind of force field surrounding the field of battle (so, no running away or outside help).



If you've got any questions, then please go ahead and ask them here. Otherwise, have fun :) !
We have quite a lot of different types of battle in here: some are physical combat; others are races; and still others are battles of wits. However, a few of the battles are jokes that are intended for humour rather than to start a serious discussion (we had a "Jarkko vs. Desk" one on the old forum, for example).

I think these battles are fine to have; however, I appreciate that they can be a bit annoying to people who are fans of the more serious battles. As a result, I've added the following into the opening post:

Quote:UPDATE 3rd November 2019: Sometimes, we get frivolous battles which are just intended as a joke. These are fine; however, they should be marked as jokes in the topic title.

Thanks for understanding :) .
Oh yeah, and there's also this thing, for when the Expanded Battle Arena won't cut it:

[Image: hve9fJ5.png]

Obviously, this is not recommended unless your combatants have some kind of FTL capability (or just a lot of patience :lol: !!!)
In order to make it clearer to everybody which powers and weapons are being used (and thus, make it easier for them to come to an informed conclusion), I have added the following:

Quote:Furthermore, combatants can only use powers and weapons that are included in the opening post, as part of either the picture or the description. For example: if the battle is "Iroquois Warrior vs. Spartan", and you want the Iroquois warrior to be able to use a bow - then, you must either find a picture that shows him with a bow, or mention the bow somewhere in the description (e.g. in a list of their weapons). If neither the picture nor the description contains a bow, then the Iroquois warrior in this battle may not use a bow, even if they did historically.
Question: What if outside help is one of the powers?

Example: The Army of Hades which is magic by Kratos which causes multiple souls to come from the ground and do major damage to their enemies.
(12-08-2022, 02:57 AM)Ellis Wrote: [ -> ]Question: What if outside help is one of the powers?

Example: The Army of Hades which is magic by Kratos which causes multiple souls to come from the ground and do major damage to their enemies.

What I'd say there is, it depends on whether the souls are already present at the start of the battle :P .

If the opening post specifies that there are souls present under the surface of the arena, then Kratos would be allowed to summon those souls (and only those souls) as part of the fight. However, if the opening post says nothing about any souls (i.e. e.g. just an unmodified Standard Battle Arena), then Kratos wouldn't be allowed to pull in random souls from outside (they'd be stopped by the forcefield at the edge of the arena :lol: ).

I hope that's clear :) .
And how about politicians with a military background? I’m of course not going to have a battle with John McCain, Winston Churchill, or James Callaghan(The guy before Thatcher. He served in World War II) but George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant, the Duke of Wellington, James Garfield,  and Theodore Roosevelt were all politicians that also had noteworthy military careers and to exclude them would be limiting. Not even counting famed warrior kings like Alexander the Great, Carolus Rex, Richard Lionheart, and Gustavus Adolphus. Political figures from Antiquity and the Medieval period would be permitted for sure but I’m not including living, active political figures.
(01-09-2024, 07:32 PM)JHG Wrote: [ -> ]And how about politicians with a military background? I’m of course not going to have a battle with John McCain, Winston Churchill, or James Callaghan(The guy before Thatcher. He served in World War II) but George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant, the Duke of Wellington, James Garfield,  and Theodore Roosevelt were all politicians that also had noteworthy military careers and to exclude them would be limiting. Not even counting famed warrior kings like Alexander the Great, Carolus Rex, Richard Lionheart, and Gustavus Adolphus. Political figures from Antiquity and the Medieval period would be permitted for sure but I’m not including living, active political figures.

Good question :) . And it's not just politicians: it could theoretically apply to anybody with both military and non-military achievements!

What I would say is: if their military achievements are noteworthy enough that they'd still be known even if they'd never entered politics, then they're probably fair game. After all, most of these people were generals and above - and they'd typically be leading troops in battle, rather than engaging in physical combat themselves :P . However, I do think it's important to keep any such threads focused on the military aspects of their careers... I certainly don't want people who oppose the non-military things they did to come in and start using those threads as a stick to beat them with.

I hope that makes sense :) .
(01-09-2024, 08:30 PM)Kyng Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-09-2024, 07:32 PM)JHG Wrote: [ -> ]And how about politicians with a military background? I’m of course not going to have a battle with John McCain, Winston Churchill, or James Callaghan(The guy before Thatcher. He served in World War II) but George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant, the Duke of Wellington, James Garfield,  and Theodore Roosevelt were all politicians that also had noteworthy military careers and to exclude them would be limiting. Not even counting famed warrior kings like Alexander the Great, Carolus Rex, Richard Lionheart, and Gustavus Adolphus. Political figures from Antiquity and the Medieval period would be permitted for sure but I’m not including living, active political figures.

Good question :) . And it's not just politicians: it could theoretically apply to anybody with both military and non-military achievements!

What I would say is: if their military achievements are noteworthy enough that they'd still be known even if they'd never entered politics, then they're probably fair game. After all, most of these people were generals and above - and they'd typically be leading troops in battle, rather than engaging in physical combat themselves :P . However, I do think it's important to keep any such threads focused on the military aspects of their careers... I certainly don't want people who oppose the non-military things they did to come in and start using those threads as a stick to beat them with.

I hope that makes sense :) .

That’s perfect actually!