The Armour Archive

shinyhalo wrote:It's a sad failure because of the numbers. How do you go from "nearly every kid in the world playing this type of game" to: Example: a fighter practice with 3-6 fighters showing up in a region with a population of 180,000 (and 3 huge military bases full of the most likely demographic)?

First off, thank you for actually having an answer. People make these arguments all the time and rarely do they have any suggestions for improvement to back up the "the SCA is screwed up statement".

For your first argument, kids do many things as children that are less socially acceptable as adults. Playing with swords falls into this category. Someone has to want to do this badly enough to overcome social pressure from outside the SCA to not do it.

shinyhalo wrote:What would I change?
1. Get rid of all subjective/opinion based advancements/rewards/recognition/titles and replace them with clear cut "work done = reward" versions. Let SCA members do the work of submitting ideas for "this work = this reward." This won't eliminate veterans helping out of kindness, but it would add specific rewards that they could count on and that is a better motivator. It would also give more meaning to titles/honors etc. I've heard some rough words from newbs about royalty/knights and I think it stems from them not knowing exactly what those persons have done for others (if anything).

This is an interesting suggestion, you basically want the SCA to become like Scouting, with merit badges to denote particular achievements.

First, why is this necessary? If people need some progression system to achieve a "rank" it won't make it any easier. Look at the number of boy scouts that achieve Eagle scout, when I last looked at the number in 1995/6 it was about 2% historically. That is a simple system with objective guidelines and goals. But does an objective system like that really reflect "work done = reward".

Second, the SCA is primarily an adult organization. Adults should not need such a system to motivate themselves to excel or to help others. A person should fight because they like fighting, not because they need to log 10 hours of helmet time to advance from the rank of peasant to yeoman. One of my squire brothers used to study martial arts at a relatively serious dojo, (i.e. not a belt factory). He remained a white belt for many years, when he was asked by the instructor why he never tested for the next rank, his response was "why is it necessary? How many of the black belts can I defeat in a fight?" He was there simply for the joy of fighting. Look at a fighter like Nissan, he has taken a role in this game that basically excludes him and those that follow him from awards, but they still gather great enjoyment because of the reasons they do it.

shinyhalo wrote:
2. Focus the highest rewards/titles on people who help increase participation. ie. armor/weapon helpers, and to a much lesser degree, clothing helpers. I'd rename Crown List to Champion's List because really it's just martial prowess. The title and decision making power of King should go to someone who makes armor/weapons. On the other hand, it's nice to have a fighting king so for Crown List (held at the same time as Champion's List): 5 vs 5 bouts only. Leader + 4 men at arms that he/she outfitted with armor and weapons. This way, anyone who has the skill and motivation to outfit themselves + 4 others can win it. I'd suggest a "help make 2 armor sets and keep one set" policy. This also keeps equipment quality up since lousy gear = no win or injury. There are people who do this now, mostly out of generosity, but they aren't currently given the highest recognition/power and they should be.

Everyone needs clothing, but only fighters need armour and weapons, so why should the "clothing helpers" be regarded to a lesser degree than the "armor/weapon helpers"

Sweet, 5vs5 bouts for crown, and I get to pick and outfit my own Team! Do I have to actually make the armour and weapons or simply outfit my team? I have more disposable income than most, so can I just buy gear for my 4 fighters? Is there a salary cap? Since I'm the quarterback and the team owner, do I get to vote in both the fighter union meetings and in the owners meetings? What happens if there is a strike?

It would not help keep equipment quality up, some people win Crowns (and other tournaments) in crappy gear that is not protective. I could easily outfit my fighters with crappy gear. Gear quality does not grant prowess.

shinyhalo wrote:3. I'd rename areas. I don't know exactly how, but I'd give the decision to whoever won the Crown List. Maybe keep the second part of the name but allow changing the first part. So if a mongol won they could change it to Khanate of Trimaris. It doesn't cost anything, but it's cool, personalized, and rewards the people who increase participation. It also motivates the losers to maximize their odds (read enter two+ teams) to reclaim it back to Kingdom of Trimaris.

I'm barely going to address this because I think it is silly.

1. There would be a cost, many of our documents and contract utilize the Kingdom names as the official name of the corporate branch. We would either be reprinting all those documents every 6 months, or never actually using the "new name" because all the documents and websites, etc still say Kingdom of "X".

2. It doesn't reward people that increase participation, it could just as easily reward me and my buddies for forming a dream team and winning the Crown.

shinyhalo wrote:4. While I'm at it, I'd create an official SCA forum where you need an active member number to register and post/vote. Then I'd let members vote on issues and change the .org into a true democracy instead of a representative-whatever it is now.

While I disagree with this, I think it is a very good suggestion and could work very well if implemented correctly. I might be mistaken, but I don't think the SCA ever claimed to be democratically run, so the fact that it isn't run as a democracy doesn't really bother me. I also can't think of many corporations (profit or not) that are run as democracies.

shinyhalo wrote:5. There are people who would help make armor/weapons, but have niether the time to be king nor skill to win a 5 vs 5. I'd reward them with the second highest "honors/titles." For quality assurance (since these don't have to fight) I'd say they have to bring the armored newbs to a war to get the reward. A newb with lousy gear won't get very excited about going to a war in it. These people would get to stand behind the king at court or something and get some visible item to wear making it obvious to anyone what exactly they have done for the SCA. It's also hard for newbs to be cruel to someone you know has helped others. Example: bronze shield+sword badge for bringing 4 armored peeps, silver for 8, gold for 16.

I'm going partially rely on the "people should do the right things for the right reasons" argument for this one.

I will also say, its harder than just providing people gear to get them to stay. I've given away armour, picked up people and driven them to events and practices. Some stay, some don't. Some of the ones that were most enthusiastic disappeared very quickly, some that didn't seem really interested have stuck with it for years. Maybe I'm just a bad judge of who will stay. Either way, I think in many regions people already bend over backwards to help new fighters get started. We need better methods for training people and making them feel like part of a group, not some reward system for recruiters/outfitters.

shinyhalo wrote:6. I'd probably install a harsh punishment for bad mouthing combat archery. I know heavy fighting is transformative and melee is coveted like the one ring, but for a lot of people it is physically impossible and they shouldn't be denied whatever lesser transformative combat they can do. At the same time I would always try to "hard code" scenarios to always allow heavies a route to flank around and beat the CAs if they are fast enough.

So you would punish people for expressing their opinions? I can see punishing someone for slandering someone or for cheating or any other number of things, but I really can't agree with an organizational punishment for bad mouthing combat archery or any other free speech type activity.

"Man, cooks really suck, they keep making all this food that I want to eat, but I'm on a diet"
"Quiet man, the SCA gestapo might have heard you badmouth the cooks, they could be here any minute to take away your birthday"

shinyhalo wrote:
I realize now I have left out knights, but you get the gist of it. Exact work done = exact reward (instead of elevation by peers politics). Highest honors and decision powers given to those who increase numbers via armor/weapons.

Exact work done would not equal exact reward in the system you propose. Even in such an "objective system" there is still room for gaming the rules for advancement.

Also, gaining awards in the SCA is already very simple (but not necessarily easy). Also, your system only seems to address fighting and there is more to the SCA than fighting.

Dauyd wrote:

DukeAlaric (George S.) wrote:Dauyd,

What stick is currently up your ass?

Honestly?

I have a serious pet peeve with people (not meaning just you, but I've seen it repeatedly) that have their interpretation of what the rules say, and insist that they are right- even when everybody else tells them differently. I've even seen people that enforce rules that are not there- because they feel it "should" be that way. It drives me crazy when I see it.
.

the thing I think your not seeing is those people you get pissy with are often the same ones who make those proposed rules into law. thier interpretation is often the widely held view since they sign it into law.
changing calibration to a non existant state of " I pushed wind toward your general direction" for the benifit of a few or to support theory isnt what Ive seen played..

Id suggest getting out a bit more....

Cuan wrote: in Atlantia I have been warmly welcomed - even when I got carried away and clubbed a guy with the croquet mallet I was parrying with in my left hand. That gentleman - and the marshals - were very understanding.

The fact that I didn't get flattened by the shot did wonders for my disposition. Lots of stuff becomes funny once it's established no one was hurt.

-- The Other Half of the Croquet Mallet Story

Chris G. wrote:

shinyhalo wrote:It's a sad failure because of the numbers. How do you go from "nearly every kid in the world playing this type of game" to: Example: a fighter practice with 3-6 fighters showing up in a region with a population of 180,000 (and 3 huge military bases full of the most likely demographic)?

First off, thank you for actually having an answer. People make these arguments all the time and rarely do they have any suggestions for improvement to back up the "the SCA is screwed up statement".

For your first argument, kids do many things as children that are less socially acceptable as adults. Playing with swords falls into this category. Someone has to want to do this badly enough to overcome social pressure from outside the SCA to not do it.

From my experience, many more people would like to play, but they can't get past the "good looking + functional armor" hurdle. I have NEVER encountered anyone claiming they would like to play, but they are too scared of what other people would think.

shinyhalo wrote:What would I change?
1. Get rid of all subjective/opinion based advancements/rewards/recognition/titles and replace them with clear cut "work done = reward" versions. Let SCA members do the work of submitting ideas for "this work = this reward." This won't eliminate veterans helping out of kindness, but it would add specific rewards that they could count on and that is a better motivator. It would also give more meaning to titles/honors etc. I've heard some rough words from newbs about royalty/knights and I think it stems from them not knowing exactly what those persons have done for others (if anything).

This is an interesting suggestion, you basically want the SCA to become like Scouting, with merit badges to denote particular achievements. First, why is this necessary? If people need some progression system to achieve a "rank" it won't make it any easier. Look at the number of boy scouts that achieve Eagle scout, when I last looked at the number in 1995/6 it was about 2% historically. That is a simple system with objective guidelines and goals. But does an objective system like that really reflect "work done = reward".

Yes, like the scouts. Yes, it's obviously necessary due to the low numbers participating (for armor/weapon helpers). It's also necessary for crafters. Medieval crafts/brewing are great ways to let your body recover while still playing so they should be encouraged. I think it should be hard to get the upper tier. For armor/weapons it's hard because you have to help put together a bunch of kits THEN win a 5 vs 5. For crafters you should have to help put together a bunch of premium garb or put together a crew of awesome brewers that people rave about for the upper tier. Specifically, it's "work that increases participation = reward" since newbs are more likely to play if their gear rocks and they get to watch how it's done.

Second, the SCA is primarily an adult organization. Adults should not need such a system to motivate themselves to excel or to help others. A person should fight because they like fighting, not because they need to log 10 hours of helmet time to advance from the rank of peasant to yeoman. One of my squire brothers used to study martial arts at a relatively serious dojo, (i.e. not a belt factory). He remained a white belt for many years, when he was asked by the instructor why he never tested for the next rank, his response was "why is it necessary? How many of the black belts can I defeat in a fight?" He was there simply for the joy of fighting. Look at a fighter like Nissan, he has taken a role in this game that basically excludes him and those that follow him from awards, but they still gather great enjoyment because of the reasons they do it.

I wouldn't reward "helmet time" because that's playing not "work that increases participation by others."
I wouldn't punish Nissan.

shinyhalo wrote:2. Focus the highest rewards/titles on people who help increase participation. ie. armor/weapon helpers, and to a much lesser degree, clothing helpers. I'd rename Crown List to Champion's List because really it's just martial prowess. The title and decision making power of King should go to someone who makes armor/weapons. On the other hand, it's nice to have a fighting king so for Crown List (held at the same time as Champion's List): 5 vs 5 bouts only. Leader + 4 men at arms that he/she outfitted with armor and weapons. This way, anyone who has the skill and motivation to outfit themselves + 4 others can win it. I'd suggest a "help make 2 armor sets and keep one set" policy. This also keeps equipment quality up since lousy gear = no win or injury. There are people who do this now, mostly out of generosity, but they aren't currently given the highest recognition/power and they should be.

Everyone needs clothing, but only fighters need armour and weapons, so why should the "clothing helpers" be regarded to a lesser degree than the "armor/weapon helpers"

There really can be only one "King" who gets the final say. I don't want a garb maker getting to decide what to name the kingdom because we are kind of playing "war" not "merchant war."

Sweet, 5vs5 bouts for crown, and I get to pick and outfit my own Team! Do I have to actually make the armour and weapons or simply outfit my team? I have more disposable income than most, so can I just buy gear for my 4 fighters? Is there a salary cap? Since I'm the quarterback and the team owner, do I get to vote in both the fighter union meetings and in the owners meetings? What happens if there is a strike?

I'd say just get 4 peeps to publicly claim they are your men-at-arms/squires and that you played a major role in getting them outfitted. Buy it or make it. People who are already set up could just group up though. Primarily this allows newbs to get this idea: "I can get 5 newbs together, outfit them, and whoop those SCA dudes and rename the kingdom." It's an appealing bragging right and costs nothing.

It would not help keep equipment quality up, some people win Crowns (and other tournaments) in crappy gear that is not protective. I could easily outfit my fighters with crappy gear. Gear quality does not grant prowess.

Then you haven't tried newb gear in a long time. I promise you it's hard to win a fight when your wrist can't bend or when you can't turn your head more than 5 degrees. And...nobody will ever be able to get through enough practice fighting without an injury if the gear is bad. I know what you mean about Crown List fighters going in with very little armor, but they are veterans who have gotten in their practice.

shinyhalo wrote:3. I'd rename areas. I don't know exactly how, but I'd give the decision to whoever won the Crown List. Maybe keep the second part of the name but allow changing the first part. So if a mongol won they could change it to Khanate of Trimaris. It doesn't cost anything, but it's cool, personalized, and rewards the people who increase participation. It also motivates the losers to maximize their odds (read enter two+ teams) to reclaim it back to Kingdom of Trimaris.

1. There would be a cost, many of our documents and contract utilize the Kingdom names as the official name of the corporate branch. We would either be reprinting all those documents every 6 months, or never actually using the "new name" because all the documents and websites, etc still say Kingdom of "X".

2. It doesn't reward people that increase participation, it could just as easily reward me and my buddies for forming a dream team and winning the Crown.

Then keep the original name on these legal documents and just change it on the website and in game play. It's not that hard. They are pretend names after all.
Dream teams are great, just let upstart newbs or disgruntled outcasts who get a team together take a whack at you for the crown. The key is a rule set that gives newbs a "path to kingship" and dangles a carrot worth getting.

shinyhalo wrote:4. While I'm at it, I'd create an official SCA forum where you need an active member number to register and post/vote. Then I'd let members vote on issues and change the .org into a true democracy instead of a representative-whatever it is now.

While I disagree with this, I think it is a very good suggestion and could work very well if implemented correctly. I might be mistaken, but I don't think the SCA ever claimed to be democratically run, so the fact that it isn't run as a democracy doesn't really bother me. I also can't think of many corporations (profit or not) that are run as democracies.

shinyhalo wrote:5. There are people who would help make armor/weapons, but have niether the time to be king nor skill to win a 5 vs 5. I'd reward them with the second highest "honors/titles." For quality assurance (since these don't have to fight) I'd say they have to bring the armored newbs to a war to get the reward. A newb with lousy gear won't get very excited about going to a war in it. These people would get to stand behind the king at court or something and get some visible item to wear making it obvious to anyone what exactly they have done for the SCA. It's also hard for newbs to be cruel to someone you know has helped others. Example: bronze shield+sword badge for bringing 4 armored peeps, silver for 8, gold for 16.

I'm going partially rely on the "people should do the right things for the right reasons" argument for this one.
I will also say, its harder than just providing people gear to get them to stay. I've given away armour, picked up people and driven them to events and practices. Some stay, some don't. Some of the ones that were most enthusiastic disappeared very quickly, some that didn't seem really interested have stuck with it for years. Maybe I'm just a bad judge of who will stay. Either way, I think in many regions people already bend over backwards to help new fighters get started. We need better methods for training people and making them feel like part of a group, not some reward system for recruiters/outfitters.

This is a good point and critical to address. I have seen tragedy result from "helpers" going about it the wrong way. You want to give a "hand up" not a "handout." You let their actions show you who will stay. Here is the sequence of events:
1. Get someone to a practice.
2. Let them borrow dream gear (in terms of functionality not looks). The loaner gear I have seen is unacceptable.
3. If they like the game tell them they can either buy gear or make a deal with a helper. Direct them to the various willing "helpers" who are either doing it "for the right reasons" OR doing it to put together a whoop ass team and take the crown that belongs to them. The helper says "I'll help, but you have to pay for materials. You'll make one helm and duplicates of some other pieces. You keep one set and donate the duplicates to our group. If you appreciate my help then fight for me for at least one year." This goes a long way towards weeding out people without enough interest.
4. Helper makes helm first after getting cash. I've looked at McMaster and judge the stainless steel to make a spangen to be no more than $100. That's still a great price for a stainless helm. Quality will vary depending on the helper, but if it's awful the newb will be less likely to play and the helper gets no reward if the newb doesn't show up.
5. Rest of gear made one piece at a time at armor nights...materials paid for, but really this needs to be a "cheap materials yet good looks and good function kit."

shinyhalo wrote:6. I'd probably install a harsh punishment for bad mouthing combat archery. I know heavy fighting is transformative and melee is coveted like the one ring, but for a lot of people it is physically impossible and they shouldn't be denied whatever lesser transformative combat they can do. At the same time I would always try to "hard code" scenarios to always allow heavies a route to flank around and beat the CAs if they are fast enough.

So you would punish people for expressing their opinions? I can see punishing someone for slandering someone or for cheating or any other number of things, but I really can't agree with an organizational punishment for bad mouthing combat archery or any other free speech type activity.

"Man, cooks really suck, they keep making all this food that I want to eat, but I'm on a diet"
"Quiet man, the SCA gestapo might have heard you badmouth the cooks, they could be here any minute to take away your birthday"

Heh, ok that is a bit censor of me. Maybe just some formal reminders to encourage all participants and make them feel wanted.

shinyhalo wrote:
I realize now I have left out knights, but you get the gist of it. Exact work done = exact reward (instead of elevation by peers politics). Highest honors and decision powers given to those who increase numbers via armor/weapons.

Exact work done would not equal exact reward in the system you propose. Even in such an "objective system" there is still room for gaming the rules for advancement.

I think SCA members are smart enough to put together an advancement system that would be fair and meaningful. In combination with the chivalrous virtues that you seem to think are enough there should be little cheating.

Also, gaining awards in the SCA is already very simple (but not necessarily easy). Also, your system only seems to address fighting and there is more to the SCA than fighting.

I've seen people work for years and get frustrated. I think I mentioned garb and brewing. I agree that things besides combat are very important for the game.

Shiny we don't need to try to make the SCA something that it isn't. That's kind of my point about being frustrated with some people who join and participate but they really want the SCA to be different to suit what they think it should be. Hell some people think that I am of this opinion too but I'm not really. Either participate because you enjoy it for what it is ...or don't.

To those of us who have earned our stripes in the system that we already use, the merit badge system seems to be for people who aren't able to impress others with their abilities. How many times should one fail to make the grade before they get a pass just for trying?

So Shiny, you want to turn the SCA into World Of Warcraft, complete with "chatroom monitors"?

Do I have to "grind" (making armour) to the level cap (peer) or can I get there by questing (tournies and wars)?



Sorry, but I don't like any of your ideas. I like the SCA the way it is. Improvements and polish is one thing, but you're proposing a whole different game.

does this strike anyone else as the soviet version of the sca?

eidelon wrote:does this strike anyone else as the soviet version of the sca?

No, it strikes me as World of SCAcraft.

never having played world or warcrack i would not know

shinyhalo wrote:
Yes, like the scouts. Yes, it's obviously necessary due to the low numbers participating (for armor/weapon helpers). It's also necessary for crafters. Medieval crafts/brewing are great ways to let your body recover while still playing so they should be encouraged. I think it should be hard to get the upper tier. For armor/weapons it's hard because you have to help put together a bunch of kits THEN win a 5 vs 5. For crafters you should have to help put together a bunch of premium garb or put together a crew of awesome brewers that people rave about for the upper tier. Specifically, it's "work that increases participation = reward" since newbs are more likely to play if their gear rocks and they get to watch how it's done.

1) I think most new people find it degrading to be referred to as "newbs". We actually lost members in my college group because one girl couldn't stop referring to people we were trying to recruit as newbs/newbies/etc.

2) "crafters" makes it sound like an MMO, which is what your whole system seems based on. Basically an achievements/trophy system to encourage people to increase participation. For me, it would only work if you could make a system that would automatically chime when I unlocked a new trophy, that pavlovian chime is addictive.

3) How about having nice gear be the reward for putting together your nice gear, cause thats how it works in the real world. I have failed to see how simply having nice gear keeps people active or interested.

4) Putting together 5 kits is a cake walk compared to actively training for a high level tournament.

5) There are many people that brew or make things that don't fight, they don't need it as a "thing to do" while their bodies recover, it is the "thing they do". It is what they study and what brings them enjoyment.

Chris G. wrote:
Second, the SCA is primarily an adult organization. Adults should not need such a system to motivate themselves to excel or to help others. A person should fight because they like fighting, not because they need to log 10 hours of helmet time to advance from the rank of peasant to yeoman. One of my squire brothers used to study martial arts at a relatively serious dojo, (i.e. not a belt factory). He remained a white belt for many years, when he was asked by the instructor why he never tested for the next rank, his response was "why is it necessary? How many of the black belts can I defeat in a fight?" He was there simply for the joy of fighting. Look at a fighter like Nissan, he has taken a role in this game that basically excludes him and those that follow him from awards, but they still gather great enjoyment because of the reasons they do it.

shinyhalo wrote:I wouldn't reward "helmet time" because that's playing not "work that increases participation by others."
I wouldn't punish Nissan.

I think the only thing you could do to punish Nissan is ban him from fighting. I've gathered his only use for the SCA awards structure is to mark targets of interest.

My point was adults shouldn't need the constant stream of rewards to stay motivated to do what they enjoy. If they do, they probably don't actually enjoy it.

shinyhalo wrote:2. Focus the highest rewards/titles on people who help increase participation. ie. armor/weapon helpers, and to a much lesser degree, clothing helpers. I'd rename Crown List to Champion's List because really it's just martial prowess. The title and decision making power of King should go to someone who makes armor/weapons. On the other hand, it's nice to have a fighting king so for Crown List (held at the same time as Champion's List): 5 vs 5 bouts only. Leader + 4 men at arms that he/she outfitted with armor and weapons. This way, anyone who has the skill and motivation to outfit themselves + 4 others can win it. I'd suggest a "help make 2 armor sets and keep one set" policy. This also keeps equipment quality up since lousy gear = no win or injury. There are people who do this now, mostly out of generosity, but they aren't currently given the highest recognition/power and they should be.

Chris G. wrote:Everyone needs clothing, but only fighters need armour and weapons, so why should the "clothing helpers" be regarded to a lesser degree than the "armor/weapon helpers"

shinyhalo wrote:There really can be only one "King" who gets the final say. I don't want a garb maker getting to decide what to name the kingdom because we are kind of playing "war" not "merchant war."

This is a debate that has been hashed before, are we doing war or grand melee etc.

Sweet, 5vs5 bouts for crown, and I get to pick and outfit my own Team! Do I have to actually make the armour and weapons or simply outfit my team? I have more disposable income than most, so can I just buy gear for my 4 fighters? Is there a salary cap? Since I'm the quarterback and the team owner, do I get to vote in both the fighter union meetings and in the owners meetings? What happens if there is a strike?

shinyhalo wrote:I'd say just get 4 peeps to publicly claim they are your men-at-arms/squires and that you played a major role in getting them outfitted. Buy it or make it. People who are already set up could just group up though. Primarily this allows newbs to get this idea: "I can get 5 newbs together, outfit them, and whoop those SCA dudes and rename the kingdom." It's an appealing bragging right and costs nothing.

Sorry, I'm just not interested in tossing out 30-40 year traditions just to allow someone the bragging rights of renaming my kingdom. If they are referring to us as "those SCA dudes" they apparently aren't part of the SCA, and have no business being involved with the SCA.

It would not help keep equipment quality up, some people win Crowns (and other tournaments) in crappy gear that is not protective. I could easily outfit my fighters with crappy gear. Gear quality does not grant prowess.

shinyhalo wrote:Then you haven't tried newb gear in a long time. I promise you it's hard to win a fight when your wrist can't bend or when you can't turn your head more than 5 degrees. And...nobody will ever be able to get through enough practice fighting without an injury if the gear is bad. I know what you mean about Crown List fighters going in with very little armor, but they are veterans who have gotten in their practice.

So you're saying those veterans have been rewarded with skill for the efforts they put into practice.

I'll agree, most loaner gear sucks. It sucks for two reasons, one we try to make it one size fits most and two it is generally not well maintained. About 5 years ago, I quit donating gear to loaner gear. Now I keep my own stock of stuff to outfit people, rather than watch it get moldy in somebodies garage.

shinyhalo wrote:3. I'd rename areas. I don't know exactly how, but I'd give the decision to whoever won the Crown List. Maybe keep the second part of the name but allow changing the first part. So if a mongol won they could change it to Khanate of Trimaris. It doesn't cost anything, but it's cool, personalized, and rewards the people who increase participation. It also motivates the losers to maximize their odds (read enter two+ teams) to reclaim it back to Kingdom of Trimaris.

Chris G. wrote:1. There would be a cost, many of our documents and contract utilize the Kingdom names as the official name of the corporate branch. We would either be reprinting all those documents every 6 months, or never actually using the "new name" because all the documents and websites, etc still say Kingdom of "X".

2. It doesn't reward people that increase participation, it could just as easily reward me and my buddies for forming a dream team and winning the Crown.

shinyhalo wrote:Then keep the original name on these legal documents and just change it on the website and in game play. It's not that hard. They are pretend names after all.
Dream teams are great, just let upstart newbs or disgruntled outcasts who get a team together take a whack at you for the crown. The key is a rule set that gives newbs a "path to kingship" and dangles a carrot worth getting.

There is already a rule set that give new people a path to kingship. It is called getting good at fighting and winning crown tournament, and most agree its already a carrot worth getting.

Also, its hard enough to keep information current on all the Kingdom webpages, changing the name just adds more work for no gain.

shinyhalo wrote:5. There are people who would help make armor/weapons, but have niether the time to be king nor skill to win a 5 vs 5. I'd reward them with the second highest "honors/titles." For quality assurance (since these don't have to fight) I'd say they have to bring the armored newbs to a war to get the reward. A newb with lousy gear won't get very excited about going to a war in it. These people would get to stand behind the king at court or something and get some visible item to wear making it obvious to anyone what exactly they have done for the SCA. It's also hard for newbs to be cruel to someone you know has helped others. Example: bronze shield+sword badge for bringing 4 armored peeps, silver for 8, gold for 16.

Chris G. wrote:I'm going partially rely on the "people should do the right things for the right reasons" argument for this one.
I will also say, its harder than just providing people gear to get them to stay. I've given away armour, picked up people and driven them to events and practices. Some stay, some don't. Some of the ones that were most enthusiastic disappeared very quickly, some that didn't seem really interested have stuck with it for years. Maybe I'm just a bad judge of who will stay. Either way, I think in many regions people already bend over backwards to help new fighters get started. We need better methods for training people and making them feel like part of a group, not some reward system for recruiters/outfitters.

shinyhalo wrote:This is a good point and critical to address. I have seen tragedy result from "helpers" going about it the wrong way. You want to give a "hand up" not a "handout." You let their actions show you who will stay. Here is the sequence of events:
1. Get someone to a practice.
2. Let them borrow dream gear (in terms of functionality not looks). The loaner gear I have seen is unacceptable.
3. If they like the game tell them they can either buy gear or make a deal with a helper. Direct them to the various willing "helpers" who are either doing it "for the right reasons" OR doing it to put together a whoop ass team and take the crown that belongs to them. The helper says "I'll help, but you have to pay for materials. You'll make one helm and duplicates of some other pieces. You keep one set and donate the duplicates to our group. If you appreciate my help then fight for me for at least one year." This goes a long way towards weeding out people without enough interest.
4. Helper makes helm first after getting cash. I've looked at McMaster and judge the stainless steel to make a spangen to be no more than $100. That's still a great price for a stainless helm. Quality will vary depending on the helper, but if it's awful the newb will be less likely to play and the helper gets no reward if the newb doesn't show up.
5. Rest of gear made one piece at a time at armor nights...materials paid for, but really this needs to be a "cheap materials yet good looks and good function kit."

shinyhalo wrote:
I realize now I have left out knights, but you get the gist of it. Exact work done = exact reward (instead of elevation by peers politics). Highest honors and decision powers given to those who increase numbers via armor/weapons.

Chris G. wrote:Exact work done would not equal exact reward in the system you propose. Even in such an "objective system" there is still room for gaming the rules for advancement.

shinyhalo wrote:I think SCA members are smart enough to put together an advancement system that would be fair and meaningful. In combination with the chivalrous virtues that you seem to think are enough there should be little cheating.

There is no such thing as a fair system and I think a merit badge type system makes what we do less meaningful. The effort we expend for the same outcome is not the same, if I make gear for a bunch of people and you bought gear for a bunch of people, I've expended more time and energy inside the SCA than you have (excluding the time you spent outside the SCA to make the money), but the outcome is the same. That to me is not a fair system, but the world is not fair, and never will be. Making another system or ruleset and proclaiming it is fair is really just being dishonest to yourself.

Chris G. wrote:Also, gaining awards in the SCA is already very simple (but not necessarily easy). Also, your system only seems to address fighting and there is more to the SCA than fighting.

shinyhalo wrote:I've seen people work for years and get frustrated. I think I mentioned garb and brewing. I agree that things besides combat are very important for the game.

Did they actually work, or did they simply go through the motions and think they were working? The SCA awards are simple, be awesome at stuff and generally be a likable person. If you do both of those, you will be rewarded with high skills and friends. If someone gives you an award for it, thats nice too, but if you were only doing it for the award, you will probably find it to be an empty victory.

How long have you been involved with the SCA? Do you go to many events?

Samuel wrote:

Dauyd wrote:

DukeAlaric (George S.) wrote:Dauyd,

What stick is currently up your ass?

Honestly?

I have a serious pet peeve with people (not meaning just you, but I've seen it repeatedly) that have their interpretation of what the rules say, and insist that they are right- even when everybody else tells them differently. I've even seen people that enforce rules that are not there- because they feel it "should" be that way. It drives me crazy when I see it.
.

the thing I think your not seeing is those people you get pissy with are often the same ones who make those proposed rules into law. thier interpretation is often the widely held view since they sign it into law.
changing calibration to a non existant state of " I pushed wind toward your general direction" for the benifit of a few or to support theory isnt what Ive seen played..

Id suggest getting out a bit more....

Regarding the first- no, they aren't.

Regarding the second, you are right. The standard you mention IS nonexistent. Because you made it up. Now, the standard I mention IS the norm in many, if not most areas- and I gave the history and documentation to prove it.

Regarding the last, I suggest you stay in more. Perhaps with a reading comprehension manual.

Dauyd, read your posts, then look at who you are talking to in that manner. Samuel is correct. You are kind of ticking off some folks who do have the ability to affect change and law with the swing of a stick. Like it or not.

I suffer the same affliction of over aggressive and often rude posting so I get it but you might just want to chill out a bit. You aren't helping your cause. Whatever that is....

shinyhalo wrote:From my experience, many more people would like to play, but they can't get past the "good looking + functional armor" hurdle. I have NEVER encountered anyone claiming they would like to play, but they are too scared of what other people would think.

If that was the reason, would they tell you? You're just one of the people that would laugh at them.

How about this, if all of your ideas are so great, start your own group and see how it works out.

OR get good enough to win Crown every six months, change kingdom law until it suits you and enough people get used to the idea that they object when someone tries to change it back.

Shiny, I'm a newbie in the SCA, and I joined because it is what it is, not so I could enact WoW in real life. I don't see how doing any of your suggestions would help. As a preface, if your new way of doing things was enacted, I would bail, along with a TON of folks in the society. It's not the game they signed up for, and it's not the game I'm signing up for. Now...

First, take a look at what you suggested regarding loaner gear. Having spare gear in sizes that would fit most folks is financially unreasonable for any group. Even if you can get a helmet for $100, that's one size. The human head varies greatly from person to person. Circumference, shape, etc. Let's say you have five helmets(which isn't nearly enough to cover most people). That's, AT BEST, $500. Just for helmets, helmets that won't even fit most people like you want them to. Who is going to pay for those helmets? Money's tight right now, and I know it's a PITA for most people to be able to afford one helmet, let alone 5 that will spend most of the time collecting dust.

Second, I would hate nothing more than to see the current awards system be replaced with the BSa merit system. I was in JROTC in High School, and my Senior year I was the S-1, so I was in charge of making sure folks got their little ribbons. 99% of the time, the people didn't care about anything but the ribbon. Once they got their little ribbon, they totally forgot about what the I was also in Boy Scouts, and the same thing occurred there(I was at fault for doing just this in both cases). In the SCA, from what I've seen, this is not the case. When a person earns an award, they keep at whatever it is that got them the award in the first place. Why? Because they aren't doing it for the damn award. The award in this game is a symbol that the person is doing something that benefits the society, and is recognition of just that. Sure politics play into it, but in my experience politics play into merit systems just as much. Also keep in mind there's no historical basis for merit-based awards.

Third, what is this you're on about a "melee" to decide crown? That's just silly from where I sit. Crown is a recognition of an individual being the best fighter in the kingdom. There's enough variables in it as it stands to make it fun. Making it a five-man tourney would exclude more people from being able to enter, not include. It's hard enough to get to a skill level where you can compete in a crown tourney. Now take that situation, and add that you now need to find four other bodies to go with you, who are going to be good enough to compete, but don't want to be king themselves. You also need to train as a group. I don't know what your schedule is like, but mine is hell enough just finding time to do pell work, exercise, and get to fighter practice. I can't imagine not only doing that, but also managing a group of me and four other guys.

Just fyi, you quoted yourself, disagreed with yourself, and then argued a point that YOU made(regarding forums, democracy, et. al.). That should be a little embarrassing for you, just saying

Fourth, you say a new person wouldn't get exited to go to a war(SCA) in lousy gear....I don't see it that way. I'm extremely new, and I want to be part of a war, whether it's in ducal grade armor or whatever my shoestring budget could afford to make me legal and safe.


Next, rhere are peerages in the society to reward folks who aren't necessarily hot with a stick, but are of great value and importance to the society. Pelicans and Laurels. My understanding is that they are on equal footing with Knights. Then you go on about some type of merit badge again(see my above comments).

Finally, you go on about some type of armoring clan thingy. There are some areas where there aren't any armorers available to teach folks. Also keep in mind that even if there is one locally, their time isn't free. They're skilled craftsmen, who deserve to be paid not only for the materials, but also their skill and labor . Go ahead and try to find an armorer who's willing to donate 10 hours a week so that a bunch of WOW converts can try out the SCA. You're asking for entirely too much. Let's go ahead and say that new members have to pay for the armorer's labor as well. Now, they're buying armor, like the system is already doing. All of it is just wasted time and breath.

Ten points to the newbie (Andrew) for a wonderfully clear cut deconstruction of Shiny's foolery.

Andrew Sterner wrote:Fourth, you say a new person wouldn't get exited to go to a war(SCA) in lousy gear....I don't see it that way. I'm extremely new, and I want to be part of a war, whether it's in ducal grade armor or whatever my shoestring budget could afford to make me legal and safe.

Andrew is the kind of person the SCA needs. He wants to do what we do and is willing to start however he can to do it.

I didn't join the SCA for awards. I joined because I am interested in the focus of the Society, and have met many interesting people.

If we move to some bizarre awards based system of acheivement, people will do the bare minimum required to get whatever awards they want. People will get awards for the awards sake.

Chris G. wrote:

shinyhalo wrote:4. While I'm at it, I'd create an official SCA forum where you need an active member number to register and post/vote. Then I'd let members vote on issues and change the .org into a true democracy instead of a representative-whatever it is now.

While I disagree with this, I think it is a very good suggestion and could work very well if implemented correctly. I might be mistaken, but I don't think the SCA ever claimed to be democratically run, so the fact that it isn't run as a democracy doesn't really bother me. I also can't think of many corporations (profit or not) that are run as democracies.

Yet they exist. In California, such a corporation is called a membership corporation. The SCA takes great pains to let everyone know that its 'members' are not members in the California sense. In a membership corporation, the members directly vote for the board, if not every issue. Its been a while since I read over those laws, but I'm pretty sure I remember that members are also the stockholders in those corporations.

I joined the SCA to do historical re-enactment and study historical swordplay.

I find it funny now to see folks argue about awards, and fighting, and peerage, and all that stuff. Unless of course, that is what one finds fun about the SCA.

Shiny,

I think you may enjoy Adrian empire more as their system is closer to what you propose.

I used to be a member as well. They are great people playing by a different rule set but still enjoyable all the same. Might want to give them a look over.

FWIW I didn't leave for the reasons of how they play the game, I left for the same reason I left the SCA. Its just not my thing. Nothing wrong with either org though.

Well, I think we've covered the main points so there is no need to repeat them.
If you are satisfied with how many people play SCA then keep it up.
If you want more people playing then I suggest implementing one or more of my ideas.
Peace (but I really mean WAR)

Chris G. wrote: How long have you been involved with the SCA? Do you go to many events?

Hmm about 3 years. For the first 2 years I went to an event every month and a local group every week. During this last year I picked up a non-sca family so I've been spending time with them and working more to improve their quality of life so I haven't played sca much. But, I have been working on my armor which is very difficult for me. I have tried buying armor, going to local armor nights, but all I have is about six sets of awful-mediocre functioning armor. I feel like I'm getting close to good-functioning armor, but it's been 3 years so I consider my story an epic-fail. And yet, it's not the worst fail I've seen. The worst are the people who just gave up, don't get to play and probably never will.

Currently, I think that two things have to happen in order to have a good chance at getting a good-functioning kit.
1. You have to be a young hotstick (I'm 40, athletic, but past my prime)
2. Your local group has to have someone who can make a complete set of good-functioning armor. I'll answer the inevitable question of what that means to me:
a. Unrestricted range of motion (especially for the spine, neck, wrist, elbow)
b. Hard shell (sorry but a lot of leather I have seen fails to be a hard shell) coverage with padding for Head, clavicles, shoulders, outer biceps, elbows, forearms, hands, kidneys, hips, thighs, knees, sadly shins, and for Wars add chest and belly since you get speared.
c. Heat and humidity resistant. It gets hot here in Florida. That limits what kind of armor will be good-functioning. So trying to force southern states to play cold-weather europe traditions is bullshit

Prince Cuan, thank you for giving credit to the rapier fighters of Atlantia. (Also thanks to Duke Phelan for doing the same for Atenveldt.) You make solid points about rapier fighters needing to listen to the concerns of people with bad experiences with rapier. Unfortunately, we fencers can fix things only up to the kingdom level. The most wonderful Atlantian fencer can't do anything about rapier goobs in parts of the Midrealm or Caid (except get blamed for them). If armored fighters are having problems with fencers, the armored fighters need to contact the senior rapier marshals for that kingdom.

Ewen, you mentioned bad experiences with rapier. Where and when? Your location is given as Ponte Alto in northern Atlantia.

@Shiny, you know there is this terrifying new invention called shopping. It allows people to purchase armour. Far out, I know. Not everyone can make armor, nor do you have to be a young hotstick to get armor (that point makes absolutely no sense to me). All you need is time, dedication and effort. If you can make it, awesome. If you can't do what the rest of us do, scrimp, save and wait, and get the kit you want.

Leo Medii wrote:I joined the SCA to do historical re-enactment and study historical swordplay.

Ooops. Sorry about that.

To get a good functioning kit, you just need to not buy junk, and certainly not buy what the "average" fighter is using, because they don't know good armor, let alone what works well.

Buy lamellar (aluminum will work well) and leather to trim edge and strap it with. Sew it up with paracord. Trim it with leather to make it fit well, and cover your collar bone, shoulder, etc as needed.

Buy a set of field hockey shin guards to go under your boots, pants, or whatever.

Get a set of simple aluminum legs like #825 here http://bokalosarmoury.com/legs.htm

Wear pants over the legs and shin guards.

Get a simple gorget in stainless your choice from a bunch of places as to style and fit.

get a set of elbows like these here: http://www.sportstop.com/Mens-Lacrosse- ... bow-Guards choose for fit and style

Wear a nice long sleeved shirt over everything.

get a set of simple vambraces or slash guards like these: http://search.sportstop.com/#view=grid& ... ction=desc

get the norman stainless helmet here: http://www.ironmongerarmory.com/index.php?p=helms

And you are in business. That is a quality protective suit that you can win a Crown in, and still look pretty decent if you make the shirt and pants look nice, and add some winnegas (sp?).

g-

Tibbie Croser wrote:Prince Cuan, thank you for giving credit to the rapier fighters of Atlantia. (Also thanks to Duke Phelan for doing the same for Atenveldt.) You make solid points about rapier fighters needing to listen to the concerns of people with bad experiences with rapier. Unfortunately, we fencers can fix things only up to the kingdom level. The most wonderful Atlantian fencer can't do anything about rapier goobs in parts of the Midrealm or Caid (except get blamed for them). If armored fighters are having problems with fencers, the armored fighters need to contact the senior rapier marshals for that kingdom.

Ewen, you mentioned bad experiences with rapier. Where and when? Your location is given as Ponte Alto in northern Atlantia.

The issues I had were not in Caid. In fact, I couldn't have reigned without the support of the Caidan fencing community. They were wonderful. They had fun and went out of their way to support the Crown.

Also, pretty much all of the fencers from the Mid who I have met with are great too. There is just a group of fencers in the central Indiana region who, for whatever reason, don't get along with heavies.

g-

Tibbie Croser wrote:Ewen, you mentioned bad experiences with rapier. Where and when? Your location is given as Ponte Alto in northern Atlantia.

It was in Aethelmearc. From what I saw of the rapier culture there turned me off of fencing completely.

I can't speak for Atlantia's rapier community, it sounds much more positive, but I have no experience.

Tibbie Croser wrote:Ewen, you mentioned bad experiences with rapier. Where and when? Your location is given as Ponte Alto in northern Atlantia.

It was in Aethelmearc. From what I saw of the rapier culture there turned me off of fencing completely.

I can't speak for Atlantia's rapier community, it sounds much more positive, but I have no experience.

Damn, no edit. The Time frame was about 5 years ago or so. Now my schlager sits and gathers dust.

Count Johnathan wrote:

Leo Medii wrote:I joined the SCA to do historical re-enactment and study historical swordplay.

Ooops. Sorry about that.

There are people that study this in the SCA, and they also play the game you do. Just becasue one does the other does not mean they are mutually exclusive.

A joke dude.

Oh I know it was.
But it's also a prevailing attitude of "the SCA doesn't actually study history"
People within the SCA do.
If he chooses to align himself with those people in the SCA who do, well then, the SCA for him does study history.

Like any other umbrella organization the "Nature" of what it is changes depending on who you spend the most ammount of time with.

shinyhalo wrote:Well, I think we've covered the main points so there is no need to repeat them.
If you are satisfied with how many people play SCA then keep it up.
If you want more people playing then I suggest implementing one or more of my ideas.
Peace (but I really mean WAR)

Shinyhalo,

Perhaps we're NOT satisfied with the number of people; I'm not. Numbers, however, are NOT my number one concern. Your suggestions would certainly increase numbers, but they do nothing to address the concern hinted at by many here.

I'll sound like an asshat, but I want the right kind of people, and I'd rather have 1 of them a year than 100 of the wrong kind.

What's the right kind? The ones who join the SCA for what we already do.
What's the wrong kind? The ones who need to be bribed to show up by changes we'll make to accomidate them.

Examples... I've had students wander into our university located practice and get really excited by what they see. Some stick around and become like us, just younger and full of energy. Others give it a try and drift off for any number of reasons. Some try to change the group to be somethign else. I don't want that last group, or half of the middle group.

I don't want another kid to show up to my rapier practice and lecture us about latin american machete fighting styles and why we don't need to wear gorgets. I don't want jedi, jack sparrows, or american civil war reenactors. Mind you, we could get HUGE numbers if we just turned into a POTC club and welcomed each new jack sparrow with a bottle of rum, and we could get huge numbers if we expanded the cutoff from 1600 to 1946 and welcomed hundreds of WWII russian army reenactors... at least some of them wore steel armor! but we don't need them, and tehy don't need us... there are groups out there for them.

I frankly also don't want or care much about people who give up. I know, I'm a real asshat, but I've spent enough time on people who wouldn't put up any effort of their own. Making armor is HARD. Learning a martial art is HARD. Justing getting in physical shape enough to do eith of those, or dance or do anyhting else we do for more than 2 minutes straight is HARD. Its can't be handed to anyone and still be worth anything... heck, its bad enough that we offer all this for FREE... at least paying monthly membership at a karate dojo is usually enough to ensure some effort. We're operating in a model that deliberately doesn't use any of the most successful motivational techniques because we want people that WANT to be here.

So the people who tried making armor and gave up... well, they've put a few hours into an art that takes DECADES to learn. If they don't stick with it, they didn't love it. On the other hand, I'm surrounded by people who stuck with it because they love it. I'll keep my current company.

Now, YOU are sticking with it, and that's great. You are someone I'm happy to have around, even if you're not happy yet with your own progress. Keep it up cause you belong here. Aspire and WORK to be great among us rather than widening the crowd to lower tha average.

Cedric the Tall wrote:@Shiny, you know there is this terrifying new invention called shopping. It allows people to purchase armour. Far out, I know. Not everyone can make armor, nor do you have to be a young hotstick to get armor (that point makes absolutely no sense to me). All you need is time, dedication and effort. If you can make it, awesome. If you can't do what the rest of us do, scrimp, save and wait, and get the kit you want.

And therein lies the rub.. one one hand, the recruiting arm is still portraying this as some game that is utterly DIY, totally acceptable for the starving college student trying to decide between food and an event in their spending, that you can do it with two tea towels and a couple of clothes pins.. when the reality is FAR from truth.

Yeah, you can wear ass ugly non-fitting plastic and helms 2 sizes too big for you, cast off sports gear and hockey gloves.. but they will likely hold you back as much as help you.

This is NOT a hobby for people without disposable income. It just isn't, and we've spent years pretending it still is.. when it hasn't been for a decade or more.