We can't re-enact fighting very well. It just isn't possible. We could really go out and kill each other. Then there would be no doubts about a "good" blow. But That's not what we want. We want a realistic fight that everyone lives through to fight again. So we take things light. We take things in armoured places the same as unarmoured. We fight in ways that are controversial. But we do it on equal ground with little chance for serious injury. I've seen an arrow from a long bow go straight through and out the back of plate armour at 50 feet. I've also seen the same archer at the same distance and his best at the same power have the arrow bounce off with out leaving a scratch. Why? Because it was a centimeter to the right. We can't test enough and educate enough for everyone to know what would kill and what wouldn't. So we generalize. I wear brigantine, so I take lighter than a guy in plate. Sometimes I find a guy in nothing who takes harder than I do. (magic invisible armour ya know) So he's a little off no big deal I smack his bare ribs harder hoping he takes the blow before I break him. I make mistakes too. I once didn't take a blow to the ribs because I didn't feel a thing. After the fight I found a softball sized dent in my rib plate. I think a real mace would have disemboweled me plenty. How about you? It's a game that we take pretty seriously. We want to live history. Emphasis on live. There are so many areas in the SCA that are farther from being "period" than the fighting is. Why don't we sit around complaining about those first? Why? Because we are doing this for the fighting. So if you don't like the way this is go somewhere else. If not that practice up and become the King. Then when you complain waves will be made and things will be changed.
I like the way things are and there is little to nothing that I would change. But I would love to hear what you(everyone else) would change and why. I'm new to the study of history and I'm not a great fighter. But I will be!
Ideas on what we do and why
For the most part, our calibration should be the same without reguard to what we are actually wearing since we are considered to be wearing the same armor.
Other than that, you are right, it's an approximation which is difficult to tell if we are being accurate without using sharp, pointy metal things.
Other than that, you are right, it's an approximation which is difficult to tell if we are being accurate without using sharp, pointy metal things.
-
Murdock
- Something Different
- Posts: 17705
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 2:01 am
- Location: Milwaukee, Wi U S of freakin A
- Contact:
"it's an approximation which is difficult to tell if we are being accurate without using sharp, pointy metal things"
But it's not even a good approximation. And the single handed shap pointy things are virtually useless against armour. After the years of research conducted by various individuals we _know_ what we do is grossly innacurate.
After my limited degree of study of the effictiveness of armour, and taking Conn's class, i've come to the same conclusion many seem to have reache, SCA combat is in almost no way based on, or representative of period armoured martial practice.
Now attempting to change it to become so and reamin safe is another subject. But please let's stop pretending we are fighting in a historical manner. Thats step one.
"There are so many areas in the SCA that are farther from being "period" than the fighting is."
Spacifically what?
But yes in generally the SCA seems to err toward ease over history in nearly every case.
"Why don't we sit around complaining about those first? Why? Because we are doing this for the fighting. "
We do complain about other things, heck we complain about nearly everything here. But we copmplain mostly about armour and fighting becasue this is and armour board.
I can fight anythime i want to. And i would submit that SCA Chivalric combat isn't fighting, it's sparring, it's a game. With a buncha guys armed with bats you don't want it to become a fight.
If we just wanted to hit people there are lots of venues for that. SCA combat is supposed to be about more than smacking people.
But it's not even a good approximation. And the single handed shap pointy things are virtually useless against armour. After the years of research conducted by various individuals we _know_ what we do is grossly innacurate.
After my limited degree of study of the effictiveness of armour, and taking Conn's class, i've come to the same conclusion many seem to have reache, SCA combat is in almost no way based on, or representative of period armoured martial practice.
Now attempting to change it to become so and reamin safe is another subject. But please let's stop pretending we are fighting in a historical manner. Thats step one.
"There are so many areas in the SCA that are farther from being "period" than the fighting is."
Spacifically what?
But yes in generally the SCA seems to err toward ease over history in nearly every case.
"Why don't we sit around complaining about those first? Why? Because we are doing this for the fighting. "
We do complain about other things, heck we complain about nearly everything here. But we copmplain mostly about armour and fighting becasue this is and armour board.
I can fight anythime i want to. And i would submit that SCA Chivalric combat isn't fighting, it's sparring, it's a game. With a buncha guys armed with bats you don't want it to become a fight.
If we just wanted to hit people there are lots of venues for that. SCA combat is supposed to be about more than smacking people.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Murdock:
SCA combat is supposed to be about more than smacking people. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are right on many points. But how can we be more historically acurate? How can we do it? For one in tourneys we could go to three telling blows. How hard would that be? I don't know why we haven't changed already. In wars we are supposed to take blows differently based on our armour. I am a war junkie. So how do we do this? get all the marshalls to understand a good blow in different armours and teach people to authorize for their specific armour. Just Ideas and I'm too new to know all the conotations of chages like this. I think SCA combat is so behind the times. Come on guys are you living in the dark ages?
[This message has been edited by Tim (edited 05-29-2001).]
SCA combat is supposed to be about more than smacking people. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are right on many points. But how can we be more historically acurate? How can we do it? For one in tourneys we could go to three telling blows. How hard would that be? I don't know why we haven't changed already. In wars we are supposed to take blows differently based on our armour. I am a war junkie. So how do we do this? get all the marshalls to understand a good blow in different armours and teach people to authorize for their specific armour. Just Ideas and I'm too new to know all the conotations of chages like this. I think SCA combat is so behind the times. Come on guys are you living in the dark ages?
[This message has been edited by Tim (edited 05-29-2001).]
-
James Schardt
- Archive Member
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Hopkisville, KY
"In wars we are supposed to take blows differently based on our armour."
Ummm...When did this happen? As far as I knew we were all technicly supposed to consider ourselves to be wearing a chain hauberk and conical helm with nasal and take shots according to that. This means that a shot I throw at the masocist wearing the bare minimum armour should be taken the same by the guy wearing full gothic plate. I know it doesn't always work that way, but that is the technical interpretation of the rules.
Now to throw a small monkey wrench into your idea for counted blows (BTW I like counted blows in a tournament situation, but think it is a very bad idea for wars. I'll give you an example of why:
Rhinoskin the Numb goes to a major war where three counted blows mean death. The whistle is blown and he heads towards the opposing side. He comes acroos his first opponent who gets two good shots through before Rhinoskin gets three shot on him and he goes down. Rihnoskin moves off and finds another opponent. This guy only gets one shot on him before going down under Rhinoskin's onslaught. Rhinoskin moves on to another opponent....See the problem? Rhinoskin is cheating but is unlikely to be caught. In the mean time he may be gaining a very strong but undeserved reputation as a good fighter. He may get caught. But at least two of his opponents would have to compare notes and realize what he did. Then they would have to be believed by the side they just fought against who might just dismiss thier complaint as the losing sides sour grapes.
There is a movement within the SCA towards counted blows in tourney (I support this with all my heart), but I don't think it is a good idea for wars as it would undercut the honor system we have based our style of combat on.
------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody burns a village.
Ummm...When did this happen? As far as I knew we were all technicly supposed to consider ourselves to be wearing a chain hauberk and conical helm with nasal and take shots according to that. This means that a shot I throw at the masocist wearing the bare minimum armour should be taken the same by the guy wearing full gothic plate. I know it doesn't always work that way, but that is the technical interpretation of the rules.
Now to throw a small monkey wrench into your idea for counted blows (BTW I like counted blows in a tournament situation, but think it is a very bad idea for wars. I'll give you an example of why:
Rhinoskin the Numb goes to a major war where three counted blows mean death. The whistle is blown and he heads towards the opposing side. He comes acroos his first opponent who gets two good shots through before Rhinoskin gets three shot on him and he goes down. Rihnoskin moves off and finds another opponent. This guy only gets one shot on him before going down under Rhinoskin's onslaught. Rhinoskin moves on to another opponent....See the problem? Rhinoskin is cheating but is unlikely to be caught. In the mean time he may be gaining a very strong but undeserved reputation as a good fighter. He may get caught. But at least two of his opponents would have to compare notes and realize what he did. Then they would have to be believed by the side they just fought against who might just dismiss thier complaint as the losing sides sour grapes.
There is a movement within the SCA towards counted blows in tourney (I support this with all my heart), but I don't think it is a good idea for wars as it would undercut the honor system we have based our style of combat on.
------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody burns a village.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by James Schardt:
<B>"In wars we are supposed to take blows differently based on our armour."
Ummm...When did this happen? As far as I knew we were all technicly supposed to consider ourselves to be wearing a chain hauberk and conical helm with nasal and take shots according to that. This means that a shot I throw at the masocist wearing the bare minimum armour should be taken the same by the guy wearing full gothic plate. I know it doesn't always work that way, but that is the technical interpretation of the rules.
Now to throw a small monkey wrench into your idea for counted blows (BTW I like counted blows in a tournament situation, but think it is a very bad idea for wars. I'll give you an example of why:
Rhinoskin the Numb goes to a major war where three counted blows mean death. The whistle is blown and he heads towards the opposing side. He comes acroos his first opponent who gets two good shots through before Rhinoskin gets three shot on him and he goes down. Rihnoskin moves off and finds another opponent. This guy only gets one shot on him before going down under Rhinoskin's onslaught. Rhinoskin moves on to another opponent....See the problem? Rhinoskin is cheating but is unlikely to be caught. In the mean time he may be gaining a very strong but undeserved reputation as a good fighter. He may get caught. But at least two of his opponents would have to compare notes and realize what he did. Then they would have to be believed by the side they just fought against who might just dismiss thier complaint as the losing sides sour grapes.
There is a movement within the SCA towards counted blows in tourney (I support this with all my heart), but I don't think it is a good idea for wars as it would undercut the honor system we have based our style of combat on.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I reread the part about differences in taking a blow based on armour in wars. In the West it is only for helms. Open face helms take face blows lighter than closed faced helms. I was told that armour makes a difference too but that's not what the rules say. Damn Rhinohyding plate wearing peice of ... Oh well. I totally agree with you that the three telling blows thing shouldn't be used in wars. It isn't a tourney its war. That is where we really need to do some work on what to take and what not to. I think differences in armour should count. But then it would take even longer to authorize new fighters. I wouldn't be authorized yet. And then we would have less people playing this game and then even less people at the wars I so love. What to do what to do.
<B>"In wars we are supposed to take blows differently based on our armour."
Ummm...When did this happen? As far as I knew we were all technicly supposed to consider ourselves to be wearing a chain hauberk and conical helm with nasal and take shots according to that. This means that a shot I throw at the masocist wearing the bare minimum armour should be taken the same by the guy wearing full gothic plate. I know it doesn't always work that way, but that is the technical interpretation of the rules.
Now to throw a small monkey wrench into your idea for counted blows (BTW I like counted blows in a tournament situation, but think it is a very bad idea for wars. I'll give you an example of why:
Rhinoskin the Numb goes to a major war where three counted blows mean death. The whistle is blown and he heads towards the opposing side. He comes acroos his first opponent who gets two good shots through before Rhinoskin gets three shot on him and he goes down. Rihnoskin moves off and finds another opponent. This guy only gets one shot on him before going down under Rhinoskin's onslaught. Rhinoskin moves on to another opponent....See the problem? Rhinoskin is cheating but is unlikely to be caught. In the mean time he may be gaining a very strong but undeserved reputation as a good fighter. He may get caught. But at least two of his opponents would have to compare notes and realize what he did. Then they would have to be believed by the side they just fought against who might just dismiss thier complaint as the losing sides sour grapes.
There is a movement within the SCA towards counted blows in tourney (I support this with all my heart), but I don't think it is a good idea for wars as it would undercut the honor system we have based our style of combat on.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I reread the part about differences in taking a blow based on armour in wars. In the West it is only for helms. Open face helms take face blows lighter than closed faced helms. I was told that armour makes a difference too but that's not what the rules say. Damn Rhinohyding plate wearing peice of ... Oh well. I totally agree with you that the three telling blows thing shouldn't be used in wars. It isn't a tourney its war. That is where we really need to do some work on what to take and what not to. I think differences in armour should count. But then it would take even longer to authorize new fighters. I wouldn't be authorized yet. And then we would have less people playing this game and then even less people at the wars I so love. What to do what to do.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Tim:
It isn't a tourney its war.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Correction - It's melee.
I think folks who feel SCA fighting isn't authentic would enjoy the fighting more if they look at it as sport between nobles, rather than kicktheshitouttathem warfare. It's easier to imagine nobles partaking in unrealistic combat for the joy of it than to pretend you're there to crush your foes at whatever cost, while ignoing that lower leg opening.
Now, it's just a matter of making that unrealistic combat more historical.
[This message has been edited by Brodir (edited 05-29-2001).]
It isn't a tourney its war.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Correction - It's melee.
I think folks who feel SCA fighting isn't authentic would enjoy the fighting more if they look at it as sport between nobles, rather than kicktheshitouttathem warfare. It's easier to imagine nobles partaking in unrealistic combat for the joy of it than to pretend you're there to crush your foes at whatever cost, while ignoing that lower leg opening.
Now, it's just a matter of making that unrealistic combat more historical.
[This message has been edited by Brodir (edited 05-29-2001).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Brodir:
<B>
Correction - It's melee.
I think folks who feel SCA fighting isn't authentic would enjoy the fighting more if they look at it as sport between nobles,
[This message has been edited by Brodir (edited 05-29-2001).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are so right. I never thought of it like that. I agree with the whole concept. Nobles at play rather than enemies with rules is a much better way of looking at it.
I thought there was a difference between the wars and the Melees. You can have as many people as you want engage a single person in a war. The melees are all single combat at the same time as other fights. Winner moves on kinda thing. Historically inacurate ofcourse but isn't that the way we do it?
<B>
Correction - It's melee.
I think folks who feel SCA fighting isn't authentic would enjoy the fighting more if they look at it as sport between nobles,
[This message has been edited by Brodir (edited 05-29-2001).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are so right. I never thought of it like that. I agree with the whole concept. Nobles at play rather than enemies with rules is a much better way of looking at it.
I thought there was a difference between the wars and the Melees. You can have as many people as you want engage a single person in a war. The melees are all single combat at the same time as other fights. Winner moves on kinda thing. Historically inacurate ofcourse but isn't that the way we do it?
-
Gethin
- Archive Member
- Posts: 1339
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Prunedale, Ca, USA
- Contact:
Sounds like IKA.
My experience in the West is that there are two forms of fighting: Tournement and War.
Tourney is chain and norman nasal. In a standard tourney you can encounter melees.
In a war, it is wysiwyg. In the West, plate is proof to arrows. If you have an openface helm, light pressure to the face counts. Oh yeah, most westies hate arhery screen.
Tim, what is the year of the Marshals' book you are using. I have heard that a new one is due, but that the '94 is still valid
------------------
All the best,
Rhys
"Art calls for complete mastery of techniques, developed by reflection within the soul"
Sifu Jun Fan Lee
My experience in the West is that there are two forms of fighting: Tournement and War.
Tourney is chain and norman nasal. In a standard tourney you can encounter melees.
In a war, it is wysiwyg. In the West, plate is proof to arrows. If you have an openface helm, light pressure to the face counts. Oh yeah, most westies hate arhery screen.
Tim, what is the year of the Marshals' book you are using. I have heard that a new one is due, but that the '94 is still valid
------------------
All the best,
Rhys
"Art calls for complete mastery of techniques, developed by reflection within the soul"
Sifu Jun Fan Lee
I get all of my info off of www.west.sca.org Some may be out dated but it is usually updated within a few days of when a new rule is instilled. Its not official but it is handy.
-
Norman
- Archive Member
- Posts: 4313
- Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: East Brunswick, NJ, USA
- Contact:
What Brodir said --
Everything that happens on the SCA combat field makes odles more sense if you think of it as a Combat Game -- call it a tournament or call it whatever you want.
We all get together at big events where we hang out with our friends, then at some point everyone chooses up teams, agrees on a set of rules, gets a stick and some armour, and goes to beat up on their friends.
All quite period (except for all the armour authenticity problems).
What strength blow is proper -- whatever we agree to.
Quite simple really.
------------------
Norman J. Finkelshteyn
Armour of the Silk Road - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/3505
The Silk Road Designs Armoury - http://www.enteract.com/~silkroad
Jewish Warriors - http://www.geocities.com/jewishwarriors
The Red Kaganate - http://www.geocities.com/kaganate
silkroad@spam.operamail.com (remove "spam" from e-mail to make it work)
Everything that happens on the SCA combat field makes odles more sense if you think of it as a Combat Game -- call it a tournament or call it whatever you want.
We all get together at big events where we hang out with our friends, then at some point everyone chooses up teams, agrees on a set of rules, gets a stick and some armour, and goes to beat up on their friends.
All quite period (except for all the armour authenticity problems).
What strength blow is proper -- whatever we agree to.
Quite simple really.
------------------
Norman J. Finkelshteyn
Armour of the Silk Road - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/3505
The Silk Road Designs Armoury - http://www.enteract.com/~silkroad
Jewish Warriors - http://www.geocities.com/jewishwarriors
The Red Kaganate - http://www.geocities.com/kaganate
silkroad@spam.operamail.com (remove "spam" from e-mail to make it work)
-
Asbjorn Johansen
- Archive Member
- Posts: 1699
- Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Aldan PA
James,
I disagree with you on your assessment of the problems with 3 blows in melees. We shouldn’t throw away a valid way of increasing the authenticity of our game because someone want to throw their honor away. It would seem likely that the person who would do that with 3 blows, would be willing to blow off a single blow today. Would it be harder to detect, probably, but eventually it would catch up with them.
Even if it didn’t, it really wouldn’t matter much to me. The fool who debases himself to win, is not nearly as important to me as all the good gentles (and Tuchux) who take the rules to heart, and fight honorably.
3 blows in melee would remove the ridiculous images of lone fighters on their knees trailing after the melee. It would force fewer folks into the sometimes dangerous position of receiving a charge on their knees. It would make our combat that much closer to the Grand Melees of history.
Asbjorn
------------------
Given a willing opponent, I'd fight with full body targeting and grappling until a given number of blows were recieved or someone relents.
I disagree with you on your assessment of the problems with 3 blows in melees. We shouldn’t throw away a valid way of increasing the authenticity of our game because someone want to throw their honor away. It would seem likely that the person who would do that with 3 blows, would be willing to blow off a single blow today. Would it be harder to detect, probably, but eventually it would catch up with them.
Even if it didn’t, it really wouldn’t matter much to me. The fool who debases himself to win, is not nearly as important to me as all the good gentles (and Tuchux) who take the rules to heart, and fight honorably.
3 blows in melee would remove the ridiculous images of lone fighters on their knees trailing after the melee. It would force fewer folks into the sometimes dangerous position of receiving a charge on their knees. It would make our combat that much closer to the Grand Melees of history.
Asbjorn
------------------
Given a willing opponent, I'd fight with full body targeting and grappling until a given number of blows were recieved or someone relents.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Tim:
<B> Come on guys are you living in the dark ages?
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well....SOME of us are trying to live in the Dark Ages...and some of us are trying for a more modern 14th Century appearance.
Couldn't resist. I'm surprised nobody else beat me to that one.
-Aaron
<B> Come on guys are you living in the dark ages?
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well....SOME of us are trying to live in the Dark Ages...and some of us are trying for a more modern 14th Century appearance. Couldn't resist. I'm surprised nobody else beat me to that one.
-Aaron
-
James Schardt
- Archive Member
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Hopkisville, KY
Asbjorn,
I agree with you that it would be a good to get rid of the legless fighting durring wars (and in any other combat). I simply do not see counted blows as a good solution for wars. By making it more difficult to enforce the rules, one risks the problem spreading to people newer to the game. Take again the example of Rhinoskin. He is deliberately failing to count the shots he has taken but hasn't been caught yet. He is probably going to develope a reputation as a good "War Fighter". He will be held up as an example to newer members and may even be asked to train them. What do you think he will teach them? To follow the rules and make sure to count thier blows properly? Why would he? It hasn't worked for him. The rules have to be enforcable for them to function. I still have to disagree with you.
------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody burns a village.
I agree with you that it would be a good to get rid of the legless fighting durring wars (and in any other combat). I simply do not see counted blows as a good solution for wars. By making it more difficult to enforce the rules, one risks the problem spreading to people newer to the game. Take again the example of Rhinoskin. He is deliberately failing to count the shots he has taken but hasn't been caught yet. He is probably going to develope a reputation as a good "War Fighter". He will be held up as an example to newer members and may even be asked to train them. What do you think he will teach them? To follow the rules and make sure to count thier blows properly? Why would he? It hasn't worked for him. The rules have to be enforcable for them to function. I still have to disagree with you.
------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody burns a village.
-
Gaston
- Archive Member
- Posts: 826
- Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2001 2:01 am
- Location: Piney Flats TN, USA
- Contact:
James,
I'd agree with you about cheating, except for one thing - I've never seen anyone taken off the field for not calling shots. Cheating is cheating, regardless of the rules, and if we have to have that kind of refereeing we may as well be playing professional sports.
And if it gets that bad, count me out, I'm leaving before I'm corrupted. 8o)
I'd agree with you about cheating, except for one thing - I've never seen anyone taken off the field for not calling shots. Cheating is cheating, regardless of the rules, and if we have to have that kind of refereeing we may as well be playing professional sports.
And if it gets that bad, count me out, I'm leaving before I'm corrupted. 8o)
-
James Schardt
- Archive Member
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Hopkisville, KY
Gaston, no we don't have that kind of system (Thank God!). What we have is rules enforcement by custom or tradition. He will not be taken off the field for cheating (unless he is being unsafe). but after he is off the field he will probably be "talked to" by a couple of the more prominent fighters present. If that does not work he will probably find himself with a smaller and smaller number of people willing to fight him, not get the recognition he thinks he deserves, and may find himself being held up as an example of what not to do. Winning is fun, but being a social outcast isn't.
------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody burns a village.
------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody burns a village.
The only times I've seen anyone really not take blows is in tourneys when they just want to win no matter what. I hate that so much! Who wants to respect a king who only won because he wouldn't take blows? I for one will break the SCA social tabboo of not calling out someone who doesn't take blows. I fought someone who wouldn't take anything and I kept turning up the power until I broke some of his armour, 14 gauge steel armour. He still wanted to say light but his armour was broken so he had to end the fight. I didn't really know how cranked up I was until I saw that. I'm 5'10" 185lbs and when I get cranked up I can break armour with rattan. What happens when the 300lbs super Duke cranks it up? I don't care if you like the rules or not if you play the game you have to follow them. People complain about some people who hit hard. People I've fought a thousand times. If you take the blow lighter they won't hit you that hard. They don't start out trying to break your arm but if they have to for you to take the blow you're cheating.
-
Murdock
- Something Different
- Posts: 17705
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 2:01 am
- Location: Milwaukee, Wi U S of freakin A
- Contact:
James we have rhinos now. You will have cheaters either way.
"I think folks who feel SCA fighting isn't authentic would enjoy the fighting more if they look at it as sport between nobles."
I wish the SCA looked at it that way. If they did we could stop acting out wounds! Viewing combat in this manner counted blows makes even more sense.
"I think folks who feel SCA fighting isn't authentic would enjoy the fighting more if they look at it as sport between nobles."
I wish the SCA looked at it that way. If they did we could stop acting out wounds! Viewing combat in this manner counted blows makes even more sense.
-
The Lost Scott
- Archive Member
- Posts: 1199
- Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: FL, USA
I can't belive I didn't post this earlier but there is a group that was at the med faire (a ren faire near Oklahoma city) that uses a composite material for there swords I think it was about 3/8" thick and had enough flex so it wouldn't need a trusty and it was silver in color looked much better and felt better than our rattan, I wish I had a chance to talk to them more and find out about it. I think something like this would improve our fighting a lot.
LS
LS
-
James Schardt
- Archive Member
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Hopkisville, KY
Murdock,
Yes, we already have rhinos, but a mechanism (peer pressure, no pun intended
) exists within the society to limit the problem. We would be removing much of this limit by taking the pressure away. Maybe I've just become too cynical to trust most people to do the right thing when nobody is looking. I should qualify this as a problem that would be seen several years after such a change was implemented. I have faith that those currently training fighters would still be able to instill enough of a sense of honor in new fighter to stave it off for a while.
------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody burns a village.
Yes, we already have rhinos, but a mechanism (peer pressure, no pun intended
) exists within the society to limit the problem. We would be removing much of this limit by taking the pressure away. Maybe I've just become too cynical to trust most people to do the right thing when nobody is looking. I should qualify this as a problem that would be seen several years after such a change was implemented. I have faith that those currently training fighters would still be able to instill enough of a sense of honor in new fighter to stave it off for a while.------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody burns a village.
-
Asbjorn Johansen
- Archive Member
- Posts: 1699
- Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Aldan PA
James,
Once again I must disagree with you. We do not have rules enforcement through custom or tradition, we have rules enforcement by self. Individuals choose whether to take a shot or not. The vast majority of fighters choose to fight very honorably, a few do not. Regardless of how many times they are spoken too, some continue to cast their honor aside. I’ve been to many tournaments, and I’ve yet to see someone refuse to fight another because they were ignoring blows. I’ve heard that it has been done, but the number of cases seems to be so few that they are the exceptions that prove the rule. The individual chooses to keep their honor.
But, in tournament these choices are all out in the open right whereas on the battlefield they can hide, right? Everyone knows who’s doing it so they bear the brunt of the choice? Not always. Someone who is dishonorable can do it without being noticed the first or the second or even the third time. Purposefully target a wrist or an ankle and you can significantly increase your chances of winning a bout (Sorry M’lord I just slipped as I threw the shot). Rub your sword in a little dirt and then make your first shot towards their eyes. Stomp a toe. There are lots of dirty tricks, many ways to abuse the rules you agree to obey. It may look like an accident, but there is no way to tell for sure. Folks who choose not to take shots are the most visible dishonorable fighters, but not the only sort. That said, someone who does this for long enough generally will end up with a bad reputation, it takes a little longer, but word does get around.
Take you example of someone who choices not to carry over their blows from encounter to encounter. Most folks practice melee against fighters they know. Soon someone will notice the guy they hit twice doesn’t fall down to the third shot he gets from some else (or am I the only person who watches the melee after I have yielded?). What if they are tricky enough to only do it at big wars? Then I would hope the folks on his side notice he just received his 5th face thrust for the battle and are as disturbed as they would be if someone from the other side did it.
But lets say someone is that subtle, that they can do all the tricks and not be seen, never get caught, they still must live with themselves. That is the great strength of SCA combat, you determine when you will yield, not your opponent, not a judge. Every combat is a test of your honor, character, and ideals. And on most days, most of the fighters win that test, whether or not a single opponent yields before them.
If someone feels the need for victory so bad that they must lessen their honor, so be it. I will not have my joy held hostage by fools.
Asbjorn
Once again I must disagree with you. We do not have rules enforcement through custom or tradition, we have rules enforcement by self. Individuals choose whether to take a shot or not. The vast majority of fighters choose to fight very honorably, a few do not. Regardless of how many times they are spoken too, some continue to cast their honor aside. I’ve been to many tournaments, and I’ve yet to see someone refuse to fight another because they were ignoring blows. I’ve heard that it has been done, but the number of cases seems to be so few that they are the exceptions that prove the rule. The individual chooses to keep their honor.
But, in tournament these choices are all out in the open right whereas on the battlefield they can hide, right? Everyone knows who’s doing it so they bear the brunt of the choice? Not always. Someone who is dishonorable can do it without being noticed the first or the second or even the third time. Purposefully target a wrist or an ankle and you can significantly increase your chances of winning a bout (Sorry M’lord I just slipped as I threw the shot). Rub your sword in a little dirt and then make your first shot towards their eyes. Stomp a toe. There are lots of dirty tricks, many ways to abuse the rules you agree to obey. It may look like an accident, but there is no way to tell for sure. Folks who choose not to take shots are the most visible dishonorable fighters, but not the only sort. That said, someone who does this for long enough generally will end up with a bad reputation, it takes a little longer, but word does get around.
Take you example of someone who choices not to carry over their blows from encounter to encounter. Most folks practice melee against fighters they know. Soon someone will notice the guy they hit twice doesn’t fall down to the third shot he gets from some else (or am I the only person who watches the melee after I have yielded?). What if they are tricky enough to only do it at big wars? Then I would hope the folks on his side notice he just received his 5th face thrust for the battle and are as disturbed as they would be if someone from the other side did it.
But lets say someone is that subtle, that they can do all the tricks and not be seen, never get caught, they still must live with themselves. That is the great strength of SCA combat, you determine when you will yield, not your opponent, not a judge. Every combat is a test of your honor, character, and ideals. And on most days, most of the fighters win that test, whether or not a single opponent yields before them.
If someone feels the need for victory so bad that they must lessen their honor, so be it. I will not have my joy held hostage by fools.
Asbjorn
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by James Schardt:
<B>Murdock,
I have faith that those currently training fighters would still be able to instill enough of a sense of honor in new fighter to stave it off for a while.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am a new fighter and I didn't have my sense of honor taught to me by the fighters training me. I came to the SCA with it. Alot of the fighters who trained and are training me have less honor than I do. Luckly I don't fight for King or Prince yet so I don't really care if someone is cheating. I know I'm having more fun than they are and to me this is all a game. I've been taught things like "when you're locked up in close hit them in the face with your basket hilt to get away" Honor? HONOR? I wouldn't do it. NEVER. We do things on the honor system. My honor says, if I know someone is cheating, to call them on it. I I don't know for sure just drop it and keep having fun.
<B>Murdock,
I have faith that those currently training fighters would still be able to instill enough of a sense of honor in new fighter to stave it off for a while.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am a new fighter and I didn't have my sense of honor taught to me by the fighters training me. I came to the SCA with it. Alot of the fighters who trained and are training me have less honor than I do. Luckly I don't fight for King or Prince yet so I don't really care if someone is cheating. I know I'm having more fun than they are and to me this is all a game. I've been taught things like "when you're locked up in close hit them in the face with your basket hilt to get away" Honor? HONOR? I wouldn't do it. NEVER. We do things on the honor system. My honor says, if I know someone is cheating, to call them on it. I I don't know for sure just drop it and keep having fun.