I really hate those ugly as sin plastic "bear claws" gauntlets. See guys wearing them with cuffs nearly to the elbow... And take them all as "cuff shots".
.
If it wasn't already well past time to do it I would suggest a 2 inch cuff on gauntlets rule that way if it hit the cuff it wouldn't be any good and if it didn't it would be easy to tell. I wish more fighters made their equipment with things like that in mind.
I wear a wisby style gauntlet, the splinted cuff is a major portion of my forearm protection. I see no reason to restrict cuff/equipment design to account for a problem few who have difficulty with blow acknowledgment. It is better to correct individual behavior than to forbid an accepted and proved design.
I understand this however with a guantlet cuff, padding and a possible vambrace underneath it may be that the fighter simply didn't feel it at all rather than bad behavior.
I am not finger point to bad behavior, only that different types of protection may require different methods of gauging calibration.
Globose breastplate do not always transfer energy into the wearer so a different method for calling the shot may be required.
This is the same as a gauntlet cuff, or an extra heavy helmet with an aventail.
My point is these things can be addressed outside of the application of a new rule.
While I disagree with the logic, here is an explanation I once received from a fighter who used the "if I get a partial block the blow is no good"
Again- I do not subscribe to this viewpoint.
The logic goes, 'We are using edged weapons, any block will cause the edge to turn such that the weapon will not be able to cut properly regardless of force.' There is probably some truth to this. Then again my sword is not likely to cleave through rivited mail with padding underneath either. (At least not enough to kill a man in one blow.)
We are fighting with sticks and have to draw our conclusions from stick fighting, we can't take a flawed model too far. If an edge (taped edge) hits hard enough, regardless of who threw the shot or if the shot was friendly fire or ones own...take the shot.
'Because I do not even consider the question.'
Epictetus
If it hits with sufficient force, its good, I don't care if it bounced off the marshal's staff, or the moon, much less my shield.
Good is good, we're trained to recognize that from the beginning of our time in armor. I know it when I feel it, and if it is good enough to make me think about it, it is good.
-Ulrich
"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."
-Terry Pratchett
I agree with that. Good is good regardless. If you have to think about it then it registered that you were struck and it was probably good.
If you have to think about it and come up with an excuse for why it wasn't a good blow then you are gaming the honor system and basically cheating IMO. The goal is not to be struck. That is the chivalrous method for counting blows.
If it hits something on the way in but still contacts you enough that you have to think about it it was probably good. If it bashes your shield into your head and doesn't actually hit you then it wasn't good but hopefully your opponent will be honorable enough to let you know that you were not actually struck.
