[SCA] Poll: Sport or authentic kit?

[Milan H]

Period kit != sacrificing sport effectiveness.


Cheers,

Straight up bullshit.



I sure as hell wouldn't wear mail if I wanted to be more sport effective, yet somehow I manage to fight like a knight. Its called training and dedication.

Uric

Umm... Perhaps you should actually read what I said before shooting off like that... permit me translate

Period kit NOT EQUAL TO sacrificing sport effectiveness....

I wear near 60 pounds of armor and a full face helmet. I do not believe it hurts me because of exactly what you said. Training and dedication, plus its well fit. Anyone who argues that you have to wear modern armor to be effective, or who complain that their period armor holds them back are making up bitch ass excuses.

[Blackoak]

I get you. Maybe you should have said that instead of the symbol !=. The = sign pretty much seemed like you had to sacrifice one for the other, which you do not. I don't speak code, only English. :^)

@ Jose: Yes, they are Windrose fittings and they balance the sword great. I use a home made (blue foam) low profile thrusty. I have not had any issue with it or with people calling it.

Uric

[Effingham]

I get you. Maybe you should have said that instead of the symbol !=. The = sign pretty much seemed like you had to sacrifice one for the other, which you do not. I don't speak code, only English. :^)

You shoulda looked that one up, then.

= equals "equals"

!= equals "does not equal"

I used to write =/= until I found that out.

[Greenshield]

I find the art of the English language works much better and is understood by more people than code talk IMHO. Code = Lazy in my book.

G+

[Zafir al-Th'ib]

I find the art of the English language works much better and is understood by more people than code talk IMHO. Code = Lazy in my book.

G+

[Blackoak]

Let's get back on topic, since Milan and I agree with each other and I just didn't recognize his abbreviation.

There are many example of people who wear period kits AND are very effective fighters. Is it harder to do? I would say yes, but anything worth doing is worth doing right.

It is not about winning, it is about looking good when you win.

Uric

[Jose Cabrera de Castilla]

So, Blackoak, it sounded like you were saying that you thought that if you were less accurate in your kit, say ditching the chain and wearing a kidney belt so you still meet society minimums, that you might get a combat effectiveness boost out of it? Perhaps you would be that much faster or have a slight edge of endurance.

This was the dichotomy that I was trying to illustrate. I have heard from a couple fighters in particular in my area that are on the other side of that coin. Amongst a group of chiv I was once privy to a comment akin to "don't ever trade in your plastic legs. Steel is heavier and will only slow you down and make it harder for you in combat." That comment stuck with me. Incidentally, I am working on getting steel cuisses and cased greaves. I would personally rather fight in the full deal and maybe not win as many as I could if I were lighter and quicker. But I don't consider myself destined to win Crown anyway.

[Blackoak]

It would not be as hard if I didn't wear chain, but I accept that hardship, because I believe in the concept of armoured combat. I wear the SCA minimums under my mail, but our rules assume mail for blow calling with it, so it is what I choose to wear.

I have never said that it is not HARDER, I spoke out against the belief that it can't be done. Of course it is easier to fight without armour. Then again, I am not hard core about how authentic the material. Or the time period. Now if you are choosing a late period with a LOT of plate, you had better make sure if it is mild to have it well fitted. Wear it how they did, authentically.

I don't have issue with aluminum. Hell, I wear flat-ring, welded stainless. I think an easier argument is that it can be done with an authentic looking kit. I guess I am more about the appearance than the true authenticity of the material or weight, but wear friggin armour.

Uric

[Zafir al-Th'ib]

So, Blackoak, it sounded like you were saying that you thought that if you were less accurate in your kit, say ditching the chain and wearing a kidney belt so you still meet society minimums, that you might get a combat effectiveness boost out of it? Perhaps you would be that much faster or have a slight edge of endurance.

You are running up against a couple of things here.

1. There is a strong minority of SCA fighters who read statements such as 'Authentic armour is not as performance-friendly as sport armour' as a type of whining, not a simple statement of fact. See also: large shields vs. small shields.

2. A number of people here rightly believe that, due to heavy mild steel and inferior construction, modern SCA plate armour often fails in ways that the real thing may not have, and that the performance hit accompanying well-made armour is overstated.

That said, there's a reason that Duke Sir Logan (and I have all the respect in the world for him) fights in SCA-minimum "armour" from the waist up. No matter how well the armour, spring steel or no, you cannot wear plate armour (much less maille) and equal the performance of a man who is essentially fighting naked. Of course this is true. So yes, there is a dichotomy - just be aware that well-made authentic armour can be far less restrictive than you'd guess.

[Dafydd]

I have heard from a couple fighters in particular in my area that are on the other side of that coin. Amongst a group of chiv I was once privy to a comment akin to "don't ever trade in your plastic legs. Steel is heavier and will only slow you down and make it harder for you in combat." That comment stuck with me.

Definitely illustrates the dichotomy in approaches to SCA combat, doesn't it? Personally, I have no problem with the sportfighting approach, if that's what people want to do. It's really only an advantage at the higher levels of tournament combat. And if I get beaten my a "pajama warrior," I can always take consolation in the fact that if the weapons were real, he'd be dead and I'd not only be alive, I'd probably be unscathed.

The only problem I have about all this (and it may be unique to our kingdom, although I rather doubt it) is that if a fighter doesn't conform to the "plastic and PJs" sportfighting approach, they are seen by some as being less than serious about working towards knighthood. That's just so wrong in so many ways...

[Greenshield]

Or you could go the other way. Early period kits that involve no metal armor other than the helm, such as viking, Irish or even later such as a 13th cent man at arms who only wore a gambeson and a kettle hat (could have my dates off here).

These persona's can have very period kit with hidden SCA bits and still be very light and could easily offer the same amount of mobility as your average plastic 'sport' fighter.

The only difference I see here is the interest to put the time and energy into looking the part and not just focusing on the fighting. Personally I believe if you but a top notch 'sport' fighter into authentic kit that fit them properly they would do just as well. Might take them a fight or two to get used to the new kit but I do not believe the armor makes the fighter.

My personal definition of a 'sport' fighter is one who isn't interested in the period look but simply the minimum 'camouflage' necessary to compete in an SCA event. There are those who wear less due to age or medical issues (ie. bad knees, back etc) but I don't think that is part of this particular topic.

Just my 2 pence

G+

[Aaron]

The Vikings had lamellar and mail I think.

The Romans had plate and mail.

The Greeks even had plate for portions of their bodies.

Etc...

Early period doesn't have to mean nudist. If you are a peasant levy, I understand. But the "early period" excuse is just as valid as the "late period" or "14th century" excuse. All the timeperiods had plate and mail, and those who couldn't afford plate and mail.

And hidden armour is very common historically. That plate and mail rusted easily.

One could make a very good looking suit inexpensively IMO.

[Graedwyn]

Vikings and other early periods
had plate and mail,
but they were often rare, depending
on the culture.
To depict a typical warrior,
rather than a chieftain,
no apparent armour is often the
correct route to go.

-Graedwyn

[Qwertypolk]

One could make a very good looking suit inexpensively IMO.

My 'light' suit will be:

Greathelm: About £10 of steel
Elbows: Traded for. About £10 of steel
Knees: About £5 of steel
Maille: Received as birthday present, but was £120
Gorget: £10 of materials, max
Padding: I'm using my arming jacket, as it's reasonably padded which was £220, custom fitted. A cheap, but still good one, £50

Optional:
My coat of plates, a crap one, but about £100. I could make another for about £40 of materials
Aliettes: £3 of materials

£205, £248 if you want the optional extras.
IMO, when it's finished my light kit will easily match the looks and performance of most people's nice kits. At £250, you can't go far wrong, my cap-a-pie arm harnesses are costing over double that alone.

Also IMO, you could make a very nice kit for half of that again.

[Aaron]

Most of the paintings I've seen show mail. I think it was standard rather than rare.

-Aaron

[Syrfinn]

I try to have my kit look reasonably well for what I am trying to portray.

Currently, I am leaning more towards 265AD, due to I can use my scutum and it still be correct, where my 450AD personna, would really of not had it, and well i miss it. :p

But my kit, isnt light at all. I actually took out most of the big bits last week and weighed them individually.

Granted, everything I have is designed to be effective in our sport, so i have gone with light equivalants for various things. As in, instead of steel lamellar, I have aluminum. Luckily, Rome had 4 and 5mm chain at this time, so my 5mm chain shirt, is actually good for me, and is still light, when combined with my lamellar.

Helm - 13 pds
Shield - 13 pds
Lamellar - 13 pds
Chain shirt - 8 pds

Didnt weigh sword, or my plastic legs that I wear under my pants, or my greaves and elbows and gorget. But a rough guesstimate of between 10 and 15 pounds probably wouldnt be far off.

So looking at my kit, not including clothing, at between 57 and 62 pounds.

[Graedwyn]

Most of the paintings I've seen show mail. I think it was standard rather than rare.

-Aaron

Paintings done by whom?

-Graedwyn

[Aaron]

In Osprey books and National Geographic by modern artists... I'll go crawl into a hole and cover myself with sackcloth and ashes... I just tried to justify horned helmets by that logic.

I think I saw some drawings, but you are right...I can prove nothing.

Never mind, carry on.

[Aaron]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Harol ... pestry.png

Bayeux Tapestry close?

-Aaron

[Graedwyn]

Aaron-
The Bayeux tapestry mostly shows
the elite warriors of the 11th century.
Norman(and allied) knights on horseback
and the English kings guard- the Huscarls
in mail.
As dearly as I love the BT, and use it as my primary
research source, it was a propaganda piece made
to make the Norman nobility feel good about themselves
and their adventure.
But the tapestry also shows common soldiers,
who would have made up the bulk of the actual armies
wearing nothing more than their street clothes.

-Graedwyn

[Konrad]

There are many example of people who wear period kits AND are very effective fighters. Is it harder to do? I would say yes, but anything worth doing is worth doing right.

It is not about winning, it is about looking good when you win.

Uric

Very true. There seems to be some kind of perception that you can't wear sport armour and maintain a period appearance. There's absolutely no reason why sport and history have to be mutally exclusive from each other.

[dukelogan]

just logan, or sir logan, or duke logan, but please anything that isnt title stacking is much preferred. sorry, title stacking is just so silly......

actually the reason i dont wear anything on my body for the most part is because i rarely get hit. when i do get hit it is usually to the helm. as my skill increased my armour needs decreased. simple as that. if i wanted to wear armour i assure you that i would put together a custom fitted kit, properly attached, that would flow and bind me as little as possible.

if someone cant fight well because of their armour i say "get some better armour".

regards
logan

So, Blackoak, it sounded like you were saying that you thought that if you were less accurate in your kit, say ditching the chain and wearing a kidney belt so you still meet society minimums, that you might get a combat effectiveness boost out of it? Perhaps you would be that much faster or have a slight edge of endurance.

You are running up against a couple of things here.

1. There is a strong minority of SCA fighters who read statements such as 'Authentic armour is not as performance-friendly as sport armour' as a type of whining, not a simple statement of fact. See also: large shields vs. small shields.

2. A number of people here rightly believe that, due to heavy mild steel and inferior construction, modern SCA plate armour often fails in ways that the real thing may not have, and that the performance hit accompanying well-made armour is overstated.

That said, there's a reason that Duke Sir Logan (and I have all the respect in the world for him) fights in SCA-minimum "armour" from the waist up. No matter how well the armour, spring steel or no, you cannot wear plate armour (much less maille) and equal the performance of a man who is essentially fighting naked. Of course this is true. So yes, there is a dichotomy - just be aware that well-made authentic armour can be far less restrictive than you'd guess.

[Zafir al-Th'ib]

just logan, or sir logan, or duke logan, but please anything that isnt title stacking is much preferred. sorry, title stacking is just so silly......

That was the short one! The long one incorporates the title Obersturmführer and a lot of unmanly weeping...

actually the reason i dont wear anything on my body for the most part is because i rarely get hit. when i do get hit it is usually to the helm.

Well, yeah, exactly. You have a utilitarian - a sport - approach to your torso armour. You don't get hit there, so adding armour wouldn't, in your mind, do anything for you. That's all I was saying.