use of thrusting tips.

[Seaan O'Hagan]

If the weapon would have had one in "real life", then I put it on my weapon.

No idea the % of shots I throw with it. If you leave a spot for a thrust open, I'll throw the shot, same as any other.



.

+1

[DukeAvery]

A basic thrust can be taught in a matter of days. Effective sword techniques require years. I generally use a single handed thrusting tip when my opponent is using one or against heavily static defenses.

http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/his ... andos2.htm

Anyone - from this story, why was it "... a great pity he was slain, and that, if he could have been taken prisoner..."?

Regards

Avery

[Steve S.]

For game reasons that should be obvious but for some reason aren't, thrusting tips should be mandatory whether you use them or not. IF we are all using swords, we should either all have thrusting tips or disallow them entirely. If leaving off a thrusting tip affects the performance f the sword, then that is the reason why they should be mandatory. Imagine a medieval knight saying: I wanted better performance from my sword, so I cut off the point.

To some people's minds, we are not fighting with real swords, but rather batons or cudgels. This is the way my mind leans.

Steve

[Leo Medii]

For game reasons that should be obvious but for some reason aren't, thrusting tips should be mandatory whether you use them or not. IF we are all using swords, we should either all have thrusting tips or disallow them entirely. If leaving off a thrusting tip affects the performance f the sword, then that is the reason why they should be mandatory. Imagine a medieval knight saying: I wanted better performance from my sword, so I cut off the point.

To some people's minds, we are not fighting with real swords, but rather batons or cudgels. This is the way my mind leans.

Steve

I used to think this way. That was until I made several "cudgel/baton" swords, which were promptly bounced by the KEM in my kingdom for not having a clearly defined blade. When I told him they were not blades, but tourney batons and I was told that "we don't fight with those".

Funny that.

[Steve S.]

So mark an edge on them and call them good!

Steve

[owen matthew]

A basic thrust can be taught in a matter of days. Effective sword techniques require years. I generally use a single handed thrusting tip when my opponent is using one or against heavily static defenses.

http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/his ... andos2.htm

Anyone - from this story, why was it "... a great pity he was slain, and that, if he could have been taken prisoner..."?

Regards

Avery

Your Grace,

As I understand the story he was important because his influence, either on the field of battle or off of it (especially as a prisoner), was so respected that he may have established peace to, or eased the tensions between England and France.

I may have missed the point of your question, but I gave it a shot.

Egil

[DukeAvery]

Greetings Egil

Any story is open to different interpretation, but I would submit Sir John has gone to some trouble to set up a deed of arms. It is unlikely Sir John forgot to lower his visor but intended to fight without it, and is described as slipping in such a way that one may argue that the thrust to the face was not the intended target - James de St. Martin was aiming (with great force) to defeat the armor of Sir John's breast, not his face. I've seen that happen plenty of times at Pennsic before face thrusting was legalized and the "breadbasket" was a favored target.

Thus, it may be said that not all blows are equally chivalric, and that it was common and expected in deeds of arms to fight according to specific conventions. I suspect that such conventions were at times highly ornate, and at others mostly ignored. Sir John's opponents don't appear to have fully read the script as Sir John clearly hadn't finished his monologue before beginning the festivities by drubbing the English squire.

Regards

Avery

[Steve S.]

I have mixed feelings about thrusting tips. I like having the option to thrust, but I don't like having a shock absorber on the end of my sword to soak up the energy from tip shots.

Steve

[Diglach Mac Cein]

Step in 3" - tip shot become solid.


.

[Blackoak]

Yup, you shouldn't be hitting with just the tip anyway.

Uric

[Magnus Ulfgarsson]

I took mine off over a year ago, then put it on again maybe 10 months ago for 1 practice before taking it off once more.

I was just over using it, I put it on again this week and it feels good.

One of my primary reasons for wanting one was to thrust shields to table them, but just the threat alone is certainly a nice addition.

[Aaron]

IMO we need to get rid of the foam in the weapons and just go with some thick leather on the tips. But from those who argue the thrust wasn't effective, I suddenly get "Are you trying to kill me for real???" whenever I suggest that we just go straight rattan and leather.

Just enough leather on the tip to keep splinters out of the eye and that's it. The thrust works, and anything we pad gives an unnatural advantage to those who don't require padding.

The good news is that it's an informal acknowledgement that weapons that are required to be padded would have won the day easily.

I don’t think the rule is safety related at all. I think this is to grade the playing field to the sword-and-shield. And yes, I would go for leather on the ends of the spears as well. It would make them very effective as their counterparts were, and people who are unarmoured would get a bruise the size of a quarter. Right now we have swords that make bruises the size of a small fish, so this shouldn’t be an issue.

[Steve S.]

I tend to agree with you, Aaron, at least for swords.

I'm not sure I want a spear with such a small surface area for contact, though. It's not the hardness that concerns me, it's the small contact area.

Steve

[Zafir al-Th'ib]

Yup, you shouldn't be hitting with just the tip anyway.

Uric

This is nonsense (taken as an absolute). For a moulinet, the tip is exactly where you should be hitting, unless you wish to actually give up power. Certainly a side-effect of my decision to remove my thrusting tip for a year is that my moulinets hit much harder.

[Leo Medii]

IMO we need to get rid of the foam in the weapons and just go with some thick leather on the tips. But from those who argue the thrust wasn't effective, I suddenly get "Are you trying to kill me for real???" whenever I suggest that we just go straight rattan and leather.

Just enough leather on the tip to keep splinters out of the eye and that's it. The thrust works, and anything we pad gives an unnatural advantage to those who don't require padding.

The good news is that it's an informal acknowledgement that weapons that are required to be padded would have won the day easily.

I don’t think the rule is safety related at all. I think this is to grade the playing field to the sword-and-shield. And yes, I would go for leather on the ends of the spears as well. It would make them very effective as their counterparts were, and people who are unarmoured would get a bruise the size of a quarter. Right now we have swords that make bruises the size of a small fish, so this shouldn’t be an issue.

You're such a rebel. Do not pass go, do not collect 200$!

[Aaron]

I tend to agree with you, Aaron, at least for swords.

I'm not sure I want a spear with such a small surface area for contact, though. It's not the hardness that concerns me, it's the small contact area.

Steve

Currently we've got Q-tips. The spear dominated Europe for almost 2000 years. We make it much less effective than it should be.

Thor had a hammer.

Odin had a spear. So did Zeus. The real power was the spear.



-Aaron

[Aaron]

You're such a rebel. Do not pass go, do not collect 200$!

Thank you! Yeah, I'm a rebel nerd.

[Leo Medii]

All a spear is is an arrow on a stick.

[Aaron]

Ah! Now we are in combat archery! Take the thrusting tips off of the arrows too, as long as they don't fit through a grill?

This thread will now run 18 pages...and I'm running away!

[Dietrich von Stroheim]

Actually I agree with Aaron. I would be fine with removing thrusting tips from single-handed swords, perhaps using a leather disc at the tip as suggested.

I'm not so sure about spears, however. Although I don't care much for having to have a small boffer on the end of my spear, removing the thrusting tip entirely would be a bit extreme. I already hit a tad on the hard side and I don't think my playmates would like it if there was no padding at all.

Now, the low-profile spear tips, I am all in favor of. It improves the appearance greatly, lets you make the weapon LOOK like a spear, and isn't particularly injurious. Early in April a meridian knight hit me in the solar plexus with a nice solid shot from his experimental 2 inch spear tip, no armor there and I was like, "Oof. Well-struck m'lord" And off I go to rezz and return the favor!

And tip cuts? Usually if I hit with the tip it's because my opponent took a step backwards to void the shot. Most of my blows land a few inches down on the blade, with the exception of thumb lead shots, which do tend to strike with the tip or close to it.

[InsaneIrish]

Yup, you shouldn't be hitting with just the tip anyway.

Uric

This is nonsense (taken as an absolute). For a moulinet, the tip is exactly where you should be hitting, unless you wish to actually give up power. Certainly a side-effect of my decision to remove my thrusting tip for a year is that my moulinets hit much harder.

I disagree with your disagreement. There is a difference between hitting with the tip end of the sword and hitting with the "tip". It is only a difference of a couple inches, but it is a difference. The Moulinet suffers from being a 'range' shot to begin with, the way it is thrown lends itself to landing as a draw or slice instead of 'good' blow.

If you are landing the shot as a draw or slice, your problem is not the thrusting tip, it is how you are ending the shot. Sinking it just a couple more inches deeper can make it land. thrusty or no.


I have a thrusty, it is a lo profile inline thrusty. I barely even know it is there when I throw shots.

[Amanda M]

I've had my bell rung pretty good with q tip spears, I can't imagine taking the padding off entirely. I'd love to see a lower profile tip on them but I think people might need to take a little oomph out of their shots, which some people are reluctant to do as it is. It seems to me that a lot of the time when people talk about excessive shots in war time it's usually because some dumbass with a 9' spear was out there trying to take heads, literally.

[Aaron]

I'm not so sure about spears, however. Although I don't care much for having to have a small boffer on the end of my spear, removing the thrusting tip entirely would be a bit extreme. I already hit a tad on the hard side and I don't think my playmates would like it if there was no padding at all.

I think there would be fewer injuries if we removed the padding. Instead of being knocked back or having your head rocked back, it would land with a crack and let you know you got hit.

And it would allow for a lot more one-landed thrusts and realistic spearwork. The sword-and-shield guy looks at the single spearman and says, "Meat!" right now. If the spearman had leather on the end (1.25 diameter for legality), then the sword-and-shield guy goes "Fecal matter! he needs an opening of just over an inch to get me???"

[Heath B fraychef]

now see i hate the q-tip style spears and always have.
they dont look anythink like a spear and the huge head makes acuracy dificult.
i also dont see the difference between the 2 inch spear tips for rattan vs fibergalss.
yes i know rattan has more flex, but the diameter of the head really has no bearing on the give.
if anything go ahead and require the head to have more progressive linear give and dont worry about the diameter.

[Milan H]

The problem with spears isn't the weapons half as much as it is the person holding it. Some guys ONLY pick up a spear for one or two wars a year. Then they go out and clobber the hell out of people with it because they don't know what they are doing.

With some good spearmen I know, I would happily go at it with LPTT on a spear. Others.... you would need to duct tape pillows to the end.

Cheers,

[InsaneIrish]

I think there would be fewer injuries if we removed the padding. Instead of being knocked back or having your head rocked back, it would land with a crack and let you know you got hit.

With 100% force transfer instead of the ratioed transfer you get now. No, we need padding on the ends of spears. Maybe not the "Qtip" amount we currently have, but we need padding. An unpadded spear "may" work in a perfect situation, but how many times have you run into the end of an incoming spear only to be plastered unintentionally. Now, think about what would have happened if there had been NO padding at all.

And it would allow for a lot more one-landed thrusts and realistic spearwork. The sword-and-shield guy looks at the single spearman and says, "Meat!" right now. If the spearman had leather on the end (1.25 diameter for legality), then the sword-and-shield guy goes "Fecal matter! he needs an opening of just over an inch to get me???"

No, the reason shieldmen can dominate spearmen 1 on 1 has little to do with the width of the spear head. It is the fact that the shield is indestructable and the spearman can not do things like spear at calves and feet nor sweep legs et al. The smaller spear head comes into play in a static line with a row of buttoned up shields. Where a 1.5" spear tip can get through a gap a 3" spear tip can not.

[Alex Baird]

To my mind, swords have points. One can choose not to use the point, but the presence of a thrusting tip changes the fight to a more realistic one. One fights differently when the threat is there than if it is arbitrarily removed. Personally, I probably throw thrusts in S & S less than 5% of the time, but will present the threat quite often. Sword and buckler, maybe 20%, and glaive, closer to 40% of my shots are thrusts. In rapier, 95% or so . . .

To fight with no thrusting allowed introduces another artificiality, like no targeting below the top of the knee, no grappling and indestructible shields. It allows one to take risks and use attacks that would be much more risky if these vulnerabilities were there.

I am also down with Aaron's suggestion of just a courtesy pad on at least single handed swords. I don't think it would take too long for people to recalibrate, and it would make thrusts cleaner. Poking someone with a cushion that doesn't "bottom out" give weird feedback.

[Vladimir]

I agree, we need to have some padding on those spears. I would be ok with the experimental 2" tip.

Last year I had several shots hit me in the face hard enough to force me off the field until the world stopped spinning and came back into focus.

They all came from the same part of the field in the same battle. I assume it was the same guy each time. But damn, he hit hard.

[Scott]

I have fought (as part of an experimental program) with and against a 'no-profile' thrusting tip. Mine just has a couple of pieces of nylon webbing over the tip for splinters.

Some of these combats were 'relaxed rules', with a substantial amount of 'incidental contact'.

Guess what? No one got killed! We all survived! These were nice & solid, west-coast thrusts to the face, neck, body, etc.

One thing about the no-profile tips is that they tend to glance more than the foam tips. I think that the padded tips 'grip' more when they hit at an angle than the non-padded tips. The effect is that other than perfectly perpendicular shots, the no-profile tips seemed (to me, at least) to hit *lighter* since by sliding on the target, not all of the energy was transferred into the target.

So, in my mind, no-profile tips on single handed swords can be used perfectly safely. Of course, used improperly, anything can be un-safe.

- Scott

[Aaron]

I would be interested if that works with the spears too. If we remove the padding, do they hit lighter?

-Aaron

[Dietrich von Stroheim]

I would be interested if that works with the spears too. If we remove the padding, do they hit lighter?

-Aaron

I'm usually the last to suggest that this game is dangerous (at least as compared to other combat sports), but if we start hitting with no tips on the end of our nine foot spears--especially using the lunging thrust I favor where I let go the left hand and extend the right arm out--I think it would increase the damage output a LOT.

A good spear thrust packs a lot of power, and driving that home onto an inch and a half surface with no padding...yes, more shots will skip off, but the ones that land solid? Oww.

If we are required to have at least low-profile tips on our spears, that'll let us build good-looking spear heads. If you don't need any tip at all, you'll see tons of people with just straight nine-foot poles, no heads, like those wacky unpadded polearm/bo stick thingies.

I don't find the current 3 inch tips impair spear performance--it is still a lethally-effective weapons form for melee--it is the APPEARANCE of our spears that I would see improved.

With the availability of wood-grain spears (shameless plug for http://ebonwoulfe.com/Armory.htm), we can vastly improve the appearance of our melees. Now combining that with low-profile tips shaped like spearheads, and we'll have come a long way from the bright red shafts with boffers tapes to the ends.

[Count Johnathan]

For game reasons that should be obvious but for some reason aren't, thrusting tips should be mandatory whether you use them or not. IF we are all using swords, we should either all have thrusting tips or disallow them entirely. If leaving off a thrusting tip affects the performance f the sword, then that is the reason why they should be mandatory. Imagine a medieval knight saying: I wanted better performance from my sword, so I cut off the point.

To some people's minds, we are not fighting with real swords, but rather batons or cudgels. This is the way my mind leans.

Steve

I used to think this way. That was until I made several "cudgel/baton" swords, which were promptly bounced by the KEM in my kingdom for not having a clearly defined blade. When I told him they were not blades, but tourney batons and I was told that "we don't fight with those".

Funny that.

Hmmm well that is lame. I agree. I don't see the need to try to determine if my opponents blow was "flat" or not and I have always felt that requiring a taped edge to display the "blade" of the weapon was kind of stupid. I'm down with the tourney baton concept because in reality that's what they are. Sigh. Oh well.

[owen matthew]

Greetings Egil

Any story is open to different interpretation, but I would submit Sir John has gone to some trouble to set up a deed of arms. It is unlikely Sir John forgot to lower his visor but intended to fight without it, and is described as slipping in such a way that one may argue that the thrust to the face was not the intended target - James de St. Martin was aiming (with great force) to defeat the armor of Sir John's breast, not his face. I've seen that happen plenty of times at Pennsic before face thrusting was legalized and the "breadbasket" was a favored target.

Thus, it may be said that not all blows are equally chivalric, and that it was common and expected in deeds of arms to fight according to specific conventions. I suspect that such conventions were at times highly ornate, and at others mostly ignored. Sir John's opponents don't appear to have fully read the script as Sir John clearly hadn't finished his monologue before beginning the festivities by drubbing the English squire.

Regards

Avery

Your Grace, that makes sence. I read several of the other attached stories, and it was related several times that a thrust to anywhere but the torso was so greatly frowned upon that it ended contests when it happened. Extrapolating those ideals to carry onto the field of battle is not a difficult thing to do. I think you are right, and I just did not see it that way the first time through. Thank you for the link! Egil

[owen matthew]

I think there would be fewer injuries if we removed the padding. Instead of being knocked back or having your head rocked back, it would land with a crack and let you know you got hit.

With 100% force transfer instead of the ratioed transfer you get now. No, we need padding on the ends of spears. Maybe not the "Qtip" amount we currently have, but we need padding. An unpadded spear "may" work in a perfect situation, but how many times have you run into the end of an incoming spear only to be plastered unintentionally. Now, think about what would have happened if there had been NO padding at all.

And it would allow for a lot more one-landed thrusts and realistic spearwork. The sword-and-shield guy looks at the single spearman and says, "Meat!" right now. If the spearman had leather on the end (1.25 diameter for legality), then the sword-and-shield guy goes "Fecal matter! he needs an opening of just over an inch to get me???"

No, the reason shieldmen can dominate spearmen 1 on 1 has little to do with the width of the spear head. It is the fact that the shield is indestructable and the spearman can not do things like spear at calves and feet nor sweep legs et al. The smaller spear head comes into play in a static line with a row of buttoned up shields. Where a 1.5" spear tip can get through a gap a 3" spear tip can not.

I think Irish has it all here as far as I can see.

[Zafir al-Th'ib]

Yup, you shouldn't be hitting with just the tip anyway.

Uric

This is nonsense (taken as an absolute). For a moulinet, the tip is exactly where you should be hitting, unless you wish to actually give up power. Certainly a side-effect of my decision to remove my thrusting tip for a year is that my moulinets hit much harder.

I disagree with your disagreement. There is a difference between hitting with the tip end of the sword and hitting with the "tip". It is only a difference of a couple inches, but it is a difference. The Moulinet suffers from being a 'range' shot to begin with, the way it is thrown lends itself to landing as a draw or slice instead of 'good' blow.

If you are landing the shot as a draw or slice, your problem is not the thrusting tip, it is how you are ending the shot.

I disagree with your disagreeing with my... oh, you know.

I have few enough virtues as a fighter, I assure you, but having a good 'poppy' moulinet is one of them. It is my favorite shot. In a properly torqued moulinet, the force is concentrated at the very tip of the sword (it is traveling fastest); thus, the hardest a person can land that blow is via landing the very tip on target. This also allows you to hit very small openings in an opponent's defense.

The advantage may be minimal, but I assure you, not having a padded end on the sword improves a properly-thrown moulinet. It provides it a bit more power, and allows you to squeeze shots into very small holes, if you are one who aims at spots and not at areas.

Despite the above, I would never argue that removing a thrusting tip provides a competitive advantage. It does not. The disadvantage merely has this small ancillary benefit.