On Your Knees!

[Amanda M]

Then why not just stop when you're struck and get down on your knees without ramming them into the ground? My knees aren't in the greatest shape but I can certainly get down onto them safely and stay there for short periods of time without too much discomfort. And the fact is that a lot of people playing this sport are not in great shape. They're overweight and not flexible at all. That puts a lot of stress on your joints just all on it's own.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

the impact isn't just the initial landing (though that doesnt help): it's also the rising, dodging, weaving or shifting.. this is still high impact stuff when you're dealing with sudden motion of an armoured adult on the patella. We may spend LESS time on our knees than say a plumber, tilesetter or electrician... but WHILE we're on our knees, we are orders of magnitude more abusive to them.

[Count Johnathan]

Yes fun the common goal and the tie that binds. I agree.

As far as knee injuries or damage is concerned I think the argument against knee fighting should not include injuring your knees though. I have seen many very serious knee injuries occur to fighters who were standing. I've seen a LOT of knee injuries. Falling, twisting, accepting charges, stepping into holes etc...Far to many to count. None of them were due to knee fighting that I can recall. Not saying it hasn't happened but I have not seen it in 20 years of activity on the field.

I can totally understand anyone with a pre existing condition having either no desire or even the ability to go to their knees but to say that this system would somehow reduce knee injuries is completely false. Sorry but it is.

This came up in my facebook discussion on the subject with my local fighters as well- (soon-to-be-Sir) Aiden made much the same argument as you.

I don't believe that the catastrophic failures fighters experience happen while kneeling. I believe that performing high-impact activities while applying tidrect and fiolent downward force to the bare patella, fluid-sack and ligament emplacements of the knee joint in a manner that they were not designed to absorb pressure degrades the integrity of the knee's supportive tissues and increases the chances of such damage taking place.

I'm actually going to be discussing the matter with some doctors and physiotherapists soon to get their opinions and either confirm or verify my suspicions and be able to provice a more factual argument.

Makes sense. I would not argue that it is in any way good for our knees to be down there but neither is clubbing each other with sticks. Clinical evidence is good , great in fact but again I say this is why it is already optional without loss of honor in our game.

I also hope you are aware that I have no love for knee fighting. I think it sucks but it's kind of supposed to. It is a harsh penalty for poor personal performance. Our system works great. A system of counted blows can also be great so no argument on that front especially over a system that maintains head and torso being one shot kills. It is the fact that you get very few chances to best your opponent that makes our game exciting and difficult for even the most seasoned veterans. One false move or a lucky unintentional swing of a rookies sword and it's over. I love that. Some of my greatest memories of fighting were my earliest days when my skills were lacking and I had no clue. I recall a duke running gleefully at me in my very first melee. In terror I ducked and covered and the swing of his sword at full run set him off balance, he stepped on a pebble that tripped him up and he said as he was falling "oh shit" me and others around promptly took advantage of his prone position to dispatch him. No counted blows no questions of calibration or anything. Just that one fleeting moment and the scenario was resolved by chance.

Sorry for rambling. I guess I just really like what we do.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

Makes sense. I would not argue that it is in any way good for our knees to be down there but neither is clubbing each other with sticks. Clinical evidence is good , great in fact but again I say this is why it is already optional without loss of honor in our game.

But optional is in the eye of the beholder- as I said, we're institutionalizing an injurious activity. As for clubbing eachother- yes, this is also intrinsic to our sport- without it, we would have no game at all- whereas the same is not true for knee-fighting.

I also hope you are aware that I have no love for knee fighting. I think it sucks but it's kind of supposed to. It is a harsh penalty for poor personal performance.

Except that it's only a hinderance to some, and a great advantage to others, as already discussed.

Our system works great.

which does not mean it could not work better

Sorry for rambling. I guess I just really like what we do.

Understandable. And so do I, friend.

[Sigifrith Hauknefr]

I'm actually going to be discussing the matter with some doctors and physiotherapists soon to get their opinions and either confirm or verify my suspicions and be able to provice a more factual argument.

Let us know if you find one that says "oh, those repeated head blows with a 4 lb. polearm are fine, but god forbid you kneel for 20 minutes* a week".

I am guessing here: 2 practices/tournaments a week - 20 bouts per practice. No more than 60 minutes ACTUALLY fighting, no more than 1/3rd of that actually legged.

I would be shocked if the average fighter - who probably doesn't even spar weekly - spends even 5 minutes/week on his knees over a whole year.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

Sigfrith: but if it's UNNECESARY to the sport, why accept even that much damage?

[Count Johnathan]

It is though which is kind of the point. Rugby and American football both use an odd shaped ball, involve tackling and scoring based on getting the ball to the other side yet they are completely different games. Both are great, both are loved but they are seperate. Rules make the game. This game is an old game and you want to play a different one, a new one based on an old model. That's cool but not the same. Does that make sense?

Those of us who have played this game under these rules for so long have done so because we like it. Love it! If we didn't we wouldn't do it. When anyone talks about changing it some of us are compelled to ask, why remodel Utopia?

Could it be better? I guess for some but that is a matter of opinion.

[Sigifrith Hauknefr]

Sigfrith: but if it's UNNECESARY to the sport, why accept even that much damage?

Are head shots truly necessary? Polearms certainly aren't.

Out in the West, I think you would find people to agree that ARM shots are not necessary (I don't mean "not acted out" I mean that they don't count at all).

Knee fighting is necessary to the sport that has knee fighting as a rule. The whole point of the proposed change is to CHANGE THE RULES OF THE SPORT. We are just debating how much of a different game it is.

Let me put this another way - you would want to get rid of knee fighting EVEN IF WAS THE MOST PERFECTLY SAFE THING IN THE WORLD.

Your "unsafe" argument, echos that of those who argue that CA is uncivilized, and even if you think it's civilized, it's unsafe.

There, now I have officially spoiled the thread!

[Count Johnathan]

Hey now CA totally blows and when it's used I have no option other than to not fight. that sucks. different issue. grumble grumble etc....

Thank you. I was waiting for that.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

"It is though which is kind of the point. Rugby and American football..."

I think of it more like NFL and CFL rules. Same game- the rules change only slightly but it's still recognizably gridiron football. (And the EMP is the XFL )

Those of us who have played this game under these rules for so long have done so because we like it. Love it!

Been in for 15 years. I get you.

If we didn't we wouldn't do it. When anyone talks about changing it some of us are compelled to ask, why remodel Utopia?

Because nothing is 100% perfect and complacency/stagnation are the luxury only of the dead (melodramatic language and not meant to be insulting- just that some of us insist, ever, on striving a little further)

Could it be better? I guess for some but that is a matter of opinion.

never was this in dispute. Hence, the testing.

I think, my lord, that we're arguing in circles because we are both so passionate in our convictions (which, i believe, speaks well for us both).

Am I trying to raise the question as often and as far afield as possible in the hopes that everyone will test this and see if they find it to their liking? (and yes, I freely admit that I hope they DO find it to their liking, but that's personal bias and I acknowledge that) Yup. Do I think that it's likely to sway everyone? Nope.

Should be fun to see what happens.

[Count Johnathan]

"...some of us insist, ever, on striving a little further..."

Strive harder, get better at blocking your legs. Eliminate knee fighting as a personal issue for you through self improvement. That is the point of a penalty. It should motivate you to improve yourself not to try to change the rule that you don't like by removing the penalty. That's what the rest of us do. Why can't you?

BTW I appreciate that you love the game enough to be involved in it so long.

Edit: Sorry but CFL is terrible IMO. Not the same game.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

Let me put this another way - you would want to get rid of knee fighting EVEN IF WAS THE MOST PERFECTLY SAFE THING IN THE WORLD.

Yes. Because it suffers from a number of other deficiencies in my eyes. Not because I'm an evil, knee-fight-hating nazi who irrationally despises this great tradition of our game and wishes to use it as a scapegoat for all the ills in the universe.

Sir Vitus, Myself and our supporters in this have given a fairly large laundry-list of issues that we perceive as arising from knee-fighting/acted wounds, and simply noted that none of the traditional explanations for why we do it are valid (wound simulation, etc.).

The only defense that anyone has given (which is valid) is "But I like it and I've always done it this way."

So the difference here is one of conservatism versus progressivism (NOT IN A POLITICAL SENSE- just as it pertains to our sentiments to the game)

Luckily it is the dynamic between these two forces that makes our Society great!

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

"...some of us insist, ever, on striving a little further..."

Strive harder, get better at blocking your legs. Eliminate knee fighting as a personal issue for you through self improvement. That is the point of a penalty. It should motivate you to improve yourself not to try to change the rule that you don't like by removing the penalty. That's what the rest of us do. Why can't you?

This post, at its core, depends on two fallacies.

The first, that Knee-fighting is a penalty. It is not. It CAN be, or it can be a boon. This argument is dead and has been beaten well.

Second fallacy: that I'm doing this because I don't block my legs well. Yes, I could be better, but I also get smoked in the head as often as not and I'm not trying to change head-shots.

[Count Johnathan]

So because some people have gotten good at fighting from their knees...

I don't even know how to finish that. Sorry the logic of your statement escapes me.

Do you not think that giving your leg up as an easy open target since it requires two blows to trade a head shot kind of makes the point of shooting at the legs ultimately useless? Why not just avoid all confusion and stop hitting below the belt. A very simple suggestion can change the entire dynamic of the sport therefore creating a different game entirely. Problem is we like this sport. It works. It always has. Even for you and Vitus because of the options you are allowed. I don't accept the "OMG poor me they never told me I had an option" argument either. Everyone fighting should be familiar with their options. More education is needed possibly but not a different game structure.

Knazi

[Vladimir]

This game is an old game...

No it isn't. It was only invented about 40 or so years ago.

[Count Johnathan]

Older than me. It's certainly older than any new version would be.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

Count Jonathan: we both sound like broken records.

"But it's not broken" "But I think it is" *click* "But it's not broken" "But I think it is"

Maybe we should lay the argument to rest for now, wait until the dust settles on the various experiments? The Testing the Vitus System thread can be a place for us to trade victories and horror stories in experimenting with the "new" ruleset. Those that don't want to try it, well, that's your option.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

points for debate as quoted from Viscount Sir Einar Vikingsson of Avacal

1) What we do when we fight is not an acurate recreation of how they fought back in the day. This rule was developed to be make things simple, promote ease of play and be as fair as we can be. What we do is more like a sport then a recreation of what they did. I personally ok with this:)

2) If an opponent is unable to take a knee after being struck due to injury or otherwise then he loses the fight, just like if you were in a tourney and didnt have an off arm harness after being struck you would lose the bout that way.... See more

3) I don't personally like the blow counting method, i think it will take away from the skills that you now currently have to have to be sucessful. For example it is entirely possible with the blow counting method to just ignore a shot to the legs while closing the distance with a two handed swordsmen and flailing like crazy for a head shot. I would only have to protectonly my head and body and in turn recieve what i would think to be a seriously unfair advantage over my opponent. Also i could in theory then use an arm to guard my head from an otherwise fatal blow with no consequences. With our current system i feel there is less room to rules lawyer during a fight and make things fair for everyone.

Just a few thoughts.

I know what my rebuittals to most of these points are, but would like to hear what the Chivalry have to say on the matter.

[Count Johnathan]

Sounds like others echo my own thoughts about it.

Frankly if you would improve your blocking to a point that you rarely if ever got struck in the leg then you would not have issue with fighting from your knees because you would never feel obligated to do so. Saying that this is not the main problem you have does not add up. That is upon you and nobody else.

The options you have are the options you have. That is the fact. It is not an eye of the beholder assesment. Your options are there so that point is moot.

I have enjoyed the mostly civil discussion about it but I cannot be made to think that there is a problem with what we do merely because you don't feel people can utilize the options that are very clearly available to them.

Good luck in your efforts!

[Vitus von Atzinger]

SCA combat certainly doesn't suck the way it is now.

I just ain't interested in it. I want to have fun.

Knee-fighting, hand-switching and all the crap that goes along with it is just a pain in the ass. If I want to know how I'm doing with sw/shield I just go fight pickups, where many of the True Monsters just call out their blows anyway.

I just ain't ruining my knees, sliding around like a hockey puck because I want to wear armour or kneeling before anyone but my lady or the King. Those guys who are free agents...they pay the price for not being chained with feudal links.

They shouldn't have to kneel or have somebody's crotch rammed in their grille, either.

Like Animal's view of scrotum=smashing, it's just unseemly.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

My responses to his excellency Einar on FB

"2) If an opponent is unable to take a knee after being struck due to injury or otherwise then he loses the fight..."

Which means that a guy without a bum knee will ALWAYS have an advantage over the guy without.. regardless of skill-at-arms, which should, IMO, be the final arbiter of victory on the field. ... See more

"3) ... For example it is entirely possible with the blow counting method to just ignore a shot to the legs while closing the distance ...and recieve a seriously unfair advantage ... "

But not any more unfair than the knee-fighting scenarios cited above. Knee-fighting already breaks the game DEEPLY in favour of S/S fighters. You’re closing on a great weapon? He should strike you as he voids and retreats to his range and strike you again. he still has to employ a great deal of skill, as do you if you want to keep the pressure on before he lands that fatal hip or shoulder blow, or the thrust, or the second limb-shot. I have FAR more options with a polearm on a standing opponent than I do against a kneeling one.

"Also i could in theory then use an arm to guard my head from an otherwise fatal blow with no consequences. With our current system i feel there is less room to rules lawyer during a fight and make things fair for everyone."

We have rules-lawyering no matter what. Deciding to move to a tourney-style “counted-blowâ€

[Count Johnathan]

"2) If an opponent is unable to take a knee after being struck due to injury or otherwise then he loses the fight..."

"...Which means that a guy without a bum knee will ALWAYS have an advantage over the guy without.. regardless of skill-at-arms, which should, IMO, be the final arbiter of victory on the field..."

I am sorry but general health is a factor in a physical contest. Skill is affected by the health of the participants. This is a hard game that does not favor the weak. It's not scrabble.

The second question did not interest me or require a reply.


"Also i could in theory then use an arm to guard my head from an otherwise fatal blow with no consequences. With our current system i feel there is less room to rules lawyer during a fight and make things fair for everyone."

"We have rules-lawyering no matter what. Deciding to move to a tourney-style “counted-blowâ€

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

it is absurd to suddenly assume that my arm protection is for no apparent reason far superior to that which I have on my head or torso. Where is the logic behind that?

That's not the assumption, because a counted blow system doesn't rely on the fallacy that the telling blow must defeat armour in order to be effective.
The telling blow needs must only be "stout". It does not have to "be sufficient to incapacitate yadayadayada"

WE CANNOT SANELY STRIKE EACHOTHER WITH SUFFICIENT FORCE TO DEFEAT ARMOUR WITH AN EDGED WEAPON USING RATTAN.

Ask the guys in AEMMA, who use a maximum 2mm edge to strike eachother three "decisive blows" in a 3-minute bout... their definition of a "decisive blow" is one that rocks the head, knocks the guy over or shifts the body... in other words, they hit every bit as hard as us, with real swords. And nobody has died.

So, the whole "defeating armour to incapacitate" aspect of the game is a fallacy.

As for having a new excuse... as Sir Vitus said, they don't need more than one excuse: They're a dishonourable piece of shit. The rules don;t matter. If he'll cheat, he'll cheat. It's an honour system, so the only impediment to their accepting a good blow is their own douchebaggery.

[Ingvarr]

We may spend LESS time on our knees than say a plumber, tilesetter or electrician... but WHILE we're on our knees, we are orders of magnitude more abusive to them.

I'm calling bullshit on this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhOr9R_6iTE#t=01m05s

My knees suck, hell, my general fitness sucks. For quite a while after my knee surgery, I took legs as kills. I started going to my knees and since I have, my knees are actually doing better. I've seen some people go to their knees in really stupid and potentially dangerous ways, but being on your knees isn't unsafe in itself. I've never seen anything done in knee fighting that couldn't be done just as effectively in a safe manner.

I still don't like my knees and I'm fine with this fighting system. I would very happily fight it at any time. Promoting this system because you don't like knee fighting, etc. is great and I would commend your efforts. Using the injury bit as your primary argument because you think it will work best is duplicitous. I will caution you though that pushing it too aggressively makes you look a bit like a fanatic and is at least as likely to push people away as draw them in.

I'm guessing from your other responses in this thread though that you will ignore anything I said that sounds like agreement, and twist the rest so it looks like I am against it so you can remain on the attack.

[Sigifrith Hauknefr]

The first, that Knee-fighting is a penalty. It is not. It CAN be, or it can be a boon.

Poppycock. If the skill level of the person on his knees is MUCH greater than the one standing, than perhaps it's not TOO much of a penalty. But no one actually gets BETTER on their knees. If they did, they would just start there.

Your defense might get better from your knees (less target to block) but your offense is worse, and your range control is nil.

It's neither here nor there regarding the proposal though.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

We may spend LESS time on our knees than say a plumber, tilesetter or electrician... but WHILE we're on our knees, we are orders of magnitude more abusive to them.

I'm calling bullshit on this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhOr9R_6iTE#t=01m05s

My knees suck, hell, my general fitness sucks. For quite a while after my knee surgery, I took legs as kills. I started going to my knees and since I have, my knees are actually doing better. I've seen some people go to their knees in really stupid and potentially dangerous ways, but being on your knees isn't unsafe in itself. I've never seen anything done in knee fighting that couldn't be done just as effectively in a safe manner.

I still don't like my knees and I'm fine with this fighting system. I would very happily fight it at any time. Promoting this system because you don't like knee fighting, etc. is great and I would commend your efforts. Using the injury bit as your primary argument because you think it will work best is duplicitous. I will caution you though that pushing it too aggressively makes you look a bit like a fanatic and is at least as likely to push people away as draw them in.

I'm guessing from your other responses in this thread though that you will ignore anything I said that sounds like agreement, and twist the rest so it looks like I am against it so you can remain on the attack.

My lord, as I already stated, I intend to speak to medical professionals to get their opinions on knee-fighting, since I have to admit a lack of education on the subject. I've admitted this freely.

I'm using potential for injury as my main argument not because I think it will work best, but because I think it is the most important (though by no means only) issue to address. Why assume that I'm trying to schill, rather than assume that I actually believe it to be harmful and assuming that I might actually give a damn?

Yes, I tend to get... heated... but I seem no less fanatical than someone saying "It's 40 years old, don't you dare try and change my game or I will beat you down in the lists" or anything similar... clearly, several of us here have strong opinions. It's likely that I chose a crusader persona for a reason, as it matches my temperament (this is intended to be light-hearted, though I realize it rings true).

I thank you for your well-wishing on our endeavour, and I'm sorry if I've given the impression that I just want to attack... what I really, honestly wanted was to hear logical arguments regarding what knee-fighting adds to th sport that were not born of traditionalist dogma. The arguments that I've heard, unfortunately, did not bear up under scrutiny without falling back on that dogma. In my opinion, that is.

This is probably why my wife hates arguing with me.

[Count Johnathan]

I'm OK with the aggressive defense of his proposed position and like you Ingvarr I too applaud the effort to make things "better".

I had intended to not post anymore but honestly I have really enjoyed the mostly civil discussion. Disagreement is OK. I think several points have been brought up however that could be negative factors in a large scale movement to this sort of standard that have obviously been ignored and dismissed simply because they are inconvenient truths that have been learned through past experience.

It is clear to me that there are many who are sitting back and nodding or shaking their heads on this one so I do hope that they will also enter into the debate. I had not thought of the fact that using a limb to block the head with no real penalty involved is in itself problematic. I am glad it was brought up as there are several viewpoints that have merit and bring forth honest and simple problems that will arise or have in the past when various methods were tried and failed because gigantic loopeholes were there to be exploited. We have minimized most from our game with the standard we have currently. I admit fully no system is perfect but the fact that our system evolved by sewing the gaps closed is a very good reason for not attempting to reinvent the wheel.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

I'm OK with the aggressive defense of his proposed position and like you Ingvarr I too applaud the effort to make things "better".

I had intended to not post anymore but honestly I have really enjoyed the mostly civil discussion. Disagreement is OK. I think several points have been brought up however that could be negative factors in a large scale movement to this sort of standard that have obviously been ignored and dismissed simply because they are inconvenient truths that have been learned through past experience.

It is clear to me that there are many who are sitting back and nodding or shaking their heads on this one so I do hope that they will also enter into the debate. I had not thought of the fact that using a limb to block the head with no real penalty involved is in itself problematic. I am glad it was brought up as there are several viewpoints that have merit and bring forth honest and simple problems that will arise or have in the past when various methods were tried and failed because gigantic loopeholes were there to be exploited. We have minimized most from our game with the standard we have currently. I admit fully no system is perfect but the fact that our system evolved by sewing the gaps closed is a very good reason for not attempting to reinvent the wheel.

Don't wanna reinvent the wheel: I wanna attach a motor to the axle!

[Count Johnathan]

"WE CANNOT SANELY STRIKE EACHOTHER WITH SUFFICIENT FORCE TO DEFEAT ARMOUR WITH AN EDGED WEAPON USING RATTAN."

I beg to differ. We have been for decades. What have you been doing?

"..."defeating armour to incapacitate" aspect of the game is a fallacy..."

No that is not correct. Many times over many years many people have had serious injuries occur that ended their ability to continue fighting (at least for the duration of the bout) because they were struck on very real and often far superior modern sport armour with a simple taped up rattan stick. I've shattered bone, knocked people out etc. fighting rattan. Most people who have played for more than a decade have and so we need not ask anyone because we already know. The steel guys don't hit as hard as we do in general and the honest ones admit it fully. They don't do it because it is unsafe for their opponents, their friends...

It's not a pissing contest of how hard we can strike it's just that rattan allows us to swing with such force and steel does not because the end result of such a blow using a steel weapon is severe injury and or death. It's the very reason we use rattan.

Edit to clarify - While the blows dealt in the steel game may land with similar force it is because they are using weapons with no flex or reduction of impact as we do. It is not because they are swinging as hard or as fast as we are. Not saying the blows they receive are light but they are often thrown with far less vigor. This is evident in videos and also through close personal observation of their sport. The AE or - steel guys used to practice at the same park on the same night here for many years. They did not like how hard we swung at each other and every time our guys went over to try their game they were cautioned that they needed to strike with less force because it was too dangerous. Sorry that is reality.

[RoaK]

(humor on) What idiot would not try to block a smoking great sword shot to the leg or arm?

If you're willing to take that blast like that just to win a fight enjoy the huge assed burse... (humor off)

[Count Johnathan]

What idiot would not try to block a smoking great sword shot to the leg or arm?

If you're willing to take that blast like that just to win a fight enjoy the huge assed burse...

Your phrase is a bit muddled but I think I understand your statement. Forgive me if my reply does not fit what you mean...

You can't tell me you have not seen asshats willing to accept severe punishment simply to get the win. If all you get from gaming the system is a bruise on your arm and no penalty or loss of honor to get the win you know some folks will take the bruise for a chance at some perceived "lasting" glory gained through the win rather than the method used to get there.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

"WE CANNOT SANELY STRIKE EACHOTHER WITH SUFFICIENT FORCE TO DEFEAT ARMOUR WITH AN EDGED WEAPON USING RATTAN."

I beg to differ. We have been for decades. What have you been doing?

"..."defeating armour to incapacitate" aspect of the game is a fallacy..."

No that is not correct. Many times over many years many people have had serious injuries occur that ended their ability to continue fighting (at least for the duration of the bout) because they were struck on very real and often far superior modern sport armour with a simple taped up rattan stick. I've shattered bone, knocked people out etc. fighting rattan. Most people who have played for more than a decade have and so we need not ask anyone because we already know. The steel guys don't hit as hard as we do in general and the honest ones admit it fully. They don't do it because it is unsafe for their opponents, their friends...

It's not a pissing contest of how hard we can strike it's just that rattan allows us to swing with such force and steel does not because the end result of such a blow using a steel weapon is severe injury and or death. It's the very reason we use rattan.

Milord, I'm a rebated steel combatant. So is my knight. So are two of my squire brothers. We regularly test cut. Ask my knight about the assholes in the Blankenshield armour who we affectinately call the "Ice Pirates" who took a SHARP onto the field at a tourney and PUT AN INCH-DEEP, THREE INCH WIDE CREASE his 13 gauge bascinet.. but did NOT incapacitate him.

This isn't about a pissing contest. When we break people, we're hitting "excessively", even in the Kingdom of Upper Goon (which I'm pretty sure I live in, by reputation anyways.. "Oh, you're from Avacal? dial it down a notch, K?"). The AEMMA hits as hard as we do. With steel. And they haven't killed or incapacitated anyone.

Nor have my squire brothers and I. Well, there was that one guy, but he had it coming.

[Francisco Lopez de Leon]

(humor on) What idiot would not try to block a smoking great sword shot to the leg or arm?

If you're willing to take that blast like that just to win a fight enjoy the huge assed burse... (humor off)

Yeah. What RoaK said. which, btw translates to "if you're stupid enough to stick your forearm (with its two thin-ass bones) up to "block" a zweihander or glaive swung by a 200 lb. man, then the scream you will make when the blow lands will make the gods laugh at your mortal folly."

[Count Johnathan]

Perhaps you need to hit harder. Maybe your problem is that you want the game to be light tag with no penalties.

Sorry I don't buy it. If I swing a steel sword at you as hard as I do with rattan you would go down hard. Technique is important. My technique is to kill you if I were using steel. The fact that I use rattan instead keeps my opponents from really dying.

I am truly sorry if you think that is false. I know otherwise. I live in one of those pesky A kingdoms though and we hit harder than in some other areas without calling it "excessive"

[RoaK]

correction to post added

Yeah and those asshats are asshats becouse they fool nobody...

People who do that will have minimum glory