The setting is now-ish, with better robots and stuff to do our jobs for us. Somehow - that's the question - people bring back mortal combat to resolve their conflict (accepted by the law of course).
The rules of combat are really simple (and enforced by the law) that combatants having access to the same set of resources (agreed by the 2) in a limited amount of time, the first one get the kill is right.
So how do I justify bringing back that practice?
I want it to gradually coming back to the time the story take place, around 2400-ish.
The historical practice is this: there was some long wiped out ancient civilizations which the historian claims that used to kill each other to resolve conflict. (they're talking about the past, not like there's anyone alive to defend it). Similar to how we talked about the Aztecs..
The details of mortal combat system is only relevant after it become a thing. But here it is:
- You can only pull the mortal-combat card when the issue is generally accepted as insulting your honor or defend from an accusation, don't count on it when you're caught redhanded thieving or raping. Examples: your neighbor claimed that you slept with his wife
- The combatants must pay (the city) a fee for the proceeding, then will be isolated for a time with the necessary resources agreed by both (to craft whatever weapon or poison, whatever)
When the time come, the fight will be hosted at the city hall or nearby stadium where others can watch and learn, and bet (i guess)
When in doubt, think trial by combat
Edit 2 As for why I want this thing back. Well, in my story, the MC is a mortal combat coach. Because not everyone is well fitted to fight another to the death. A scrawny teenager have no chance against a professional pit fighter. So his job is to make the teenager somehow come out on top, be it with trickery or whatever.
The purpose wasn't to make mortal combat just. In itself it wasn't perfect and can't be just. People accept non-perfect stuff just fine. This is about setting the stage for the MC.