The Armour Archive

My kit so far consists of padded leather vambraces, leather thigh with a lot of wrap around, kydex articulated knees, padded barrel torso. Still working out how I want to rig the steel elbow cops. All the leather may end up splinted, I want to give it a couple of hits to figure out if my body will say I need it.
Having not fought in it, I already feel safer than with the loaner stuff I had used before. The legs fit, I'm not duck taped into a brigandine harness and, well, everything else. Simply, it fits first and foremost. It's function is to disperse the force of a blow over a larger surface area so I don't get borked by Duke Palymar.

Does this mean I'll end up taking lighter than average as good? Maybe, but we're not meant to be fighting the the other person's armourer. So what if it takes a bit less to take me out, and I have to really blast someone to get on the border of good. I'm fighting them tough and strong as they might be. That doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Sigifrith Hauknefr wrote: What I don't like about this in the SCA context is that there is an athletic advantage to wearing less armor, and it's magnified by the fact that people who get hit less need less and less. Which is why I give knights a hard time about not wearing armor. All SCA time periods had armor and even if you want to hide bits due to anachronism - you should really be encumbering yourself to at least an average level. I am talking like 12 lbs of body armor or so, nothing ridiculous.

Amen!

The problem with wanting people to wear more authentic gear is that, simply put, this hobby is a game, not a reality. I've said several dozen times that as soon as somebody swings at me with a real sword, I'll put on real armor. Until then, there is nothing to be gained from doing so. Just like an armorer who buys a hydraulic hammer to bend metal with instead of insisting that it be done in a period fashion because he doesn't want his forearm to be useless in a decade, I'm not interested in wearing anything more than I have to because this ISN'T my career, my life DOESN'T depend on it, and I want to be able to enjoy doing it when I'm fifty.

A guy I was talking to at Gulf Wars told me that I had extended his fighting career by at least a decade with the Zoombang shirts because he was looking for a way to lighten his rig to keep his knees and hips in one piece. It's kind of hard to insist that people wear authentic gear to play a game when the alternative keeps them a) in the game that much longer and b) not destroy their physiques merely to satisfy somebody's asinine definition of Right.

Regards

Jonathan Blackbow

Robert of Canterbury wrote:

Sigifrith Hauknefr wrote: What I don't like about this in the SCA context is that there is an athletic advantage to wearing less armor, and it's magnified by the fact that people who get hit less need less and less. Which is why I give knights a hard time about not wearing armor. All SCA time periods had armor and even if you want to hide bits due to anachronism - you should really be encumbering yourself to at least an average level. I am talking like 12 lbs of body armor or so, nothing ridiculous.

Amen!

blackbow wrote:The problem with wanting people to wear more authentic gear is that, simply put, this hobby is a game, not a reality. I've said several dozen times that as soon as somebody swings at me with a real sword, I'll put on real armor. Until then, there is nothing to be gained from doing so. Just like an armorer who buys a hydraulic hammer to bend metal with instead of insisting that it be done in a period fashion because he doesn't want his forearm to be useless in a decade, I'm not interested in wearing anything more than I have to because this ISN'T my career, my life DOESN'T depend on it, and I want to be able to enjoy doing it when I'm fifty.

A guy I was talking to at Gulf Wars told me that I had extended his fighting career by at least a decade with the Zoombang shirts because he was looking for a way to lighten his rig to keep his knees and hips in one piece. It's kind of hard to insist that people wear authentic gear to play a game when the alternative keeps them a) in the game that much longer and b) not destroy their physiques merely to satisfy somebody's asinine definition of Right.

Regards

Jonathan Blackbow

This simply goes back to the discussion/argument of what it "is" that we are doing. Each individual has to decide that for themselves since the SCA is such a large umbrella. The argument is useless and senseless unless there is actual movement towards "requiring" different armour. As long as we cover such a broad band of history there is going to be a disparity. As long as some try to do a recreation instead of sport or the other way around there is going to be this dichotomy. Calling someone Asinine for there personal desires is a bit over the top however.

I think Robert has a great kit and does extremely well for the "limitations" that his kit gives him in an SCA context. I personally don't really like the 14th Century and have little interest in it. My interest lies earlier, essentially Fall of Rome through the 3rd Crusade. That doesn't mean I find him asinine for his likes and wants. Some prefer to wear "armour" others such as yourself prefer to play a sport. So be it. But lay off the name calling please. It is unbecoming.

regards
ThorvaldR

One might wonder why we bother trying to look medieval at all. It's just a facade in a modern sport, so what's the point?

The point is that we have as a common touchstone an effort to emulate the lives of people in history, with a focus on western Europe pre-1600. Those people, when they fought with wooden weapons or in tournaments in preparation for war, and certainly when they actually marched to war, wore armor.

Everyone in the SCA makes a choice about what aspects of history they want to practice and study. Some do more than others. But it is churlish to say that there is "nothing to be gained" by wearing armor when it so clearly falls within the purview of what the Society is about.

I know with my rigg, I push for an accurate period look for my persona. Which oddly enough is close to SCA standards for what you are "suppossedly" wearing. If I am not mistaken the SCA armour standard for what your suppossedly wearing is, a Chainmail Hauburk type shirt, long or short sleeve with a padded akiton/gambison jacket under and, leather protecting the forearms, elbows and knees. With a open faced nasel helmet and a chainmail coif under it.

This is to keep the SCA from turning into a money game, and to keep it from getting out of hand with force required for a killing blow. But I could be mistaken.

that standard applies to blow force, not appearance. also it does not state a helmet (which is like a cap) but a helm (which covers the entire head).

regards
logan

Said ibn-Ali wrote:I know with my rigg, I push for an accurate period look for my persona. Which oddly enough is close to SCA standards for what you are "suppossedly" wearing. If I am not mistaken the SCA armour standard for what your suppossedly wearing is, a Chainmail Hauburk type shirt, long or short sleeve with a padded akiton/gambison jacket under and, leather protecting the forearms, elbows and knees. With a open faced nasel helmet and a chainmail coif under it.

This is to keep the SCA from turning into a money game, and to keep it from getting out of hand with force required for a killing blow. But I could be mistaken.

dukelogan wrote:that standard applies to blow force, not appearance. also it does not state a helmet (which is like a cap) but a helm (which covers the entire head).

regards
logan

Which is what I was getting at with the armour standards. Which goes back to an topic brought up in the thread about getting hurt due to improper armouring.

And thank you for the correction on the helm/helmet. I know the difference but often dont bother to designate between the two because in most cases it is understood.

blackbow wrote:The problem with wanting people to wear more authentic gear is that, simply put, this hobby is a game, not a reality. I've said several dozen times that as soon as somebody swings at me with a real sword, I'll put on real armor. Until then, there is nothing to be gained from doing so. Just like an armorer who buys a hydraulic hammer to bend metal with instead of insisting that it be done in a period fashion because he doesn't want his forearm to be useless in a decade, I'm not interested in wearing anything more than I have to because this ISN'T my career, my life DOESN'T depend on it, and I want to be able to enjoy doing it when I'm fifty.

We do, however, play the game for varying purposes. For some, it's a combat sport. For others , it's an historical martial art. That difference alone would dictate significant differences in one's priorities for one's kit. If what you're doing on the heavy list field is attempting to learn about armored foot combat, then obviously that calls for reasonably authentic armor. SCA Heavy as a Western Martial Art has a whole bunch of significant compromises, many of which take it in a very "combat sport" direction...but it's still useful as a WMA, too.

It's a fact of life in this game that wearing modern sport armor underneath some voluminous period(ish) fabric garments provides an advantage in the combat sport aspect. People who take a more authentic route have to accept that competitive disadvantage.

A guy I was talking to at Gulf Wars told me that I had extended his fighting career by at least a decade with the Zoombang shirts because he was looking for a way to lighten his rig to keep his knees and hips in one piece. It's kind of hard to insist that people wear authentic gear to play a game when the alternative keeps them a) in the game that much longer and b) not destroy their physiques merely to satisfy somebody's asinine definition of Right.

I recently made a switch from early 16th Century full plate to First Crusade, and one of the reasons (out of several) was that my 50-something knees weren't dealing with the former rig very well. Even when I can afford to add a flat ring riveted haubergon, I'll still be looking at a fair bit less mass (and greater flexibility). And I suspect the maille will stay in the armor chest a fair bit of the time, with my modern sport armor worn underneath a leather jack replacing it. Not so much for competitive advantage; I don't care much about the combat sport element any more...been there, won that, got the embattled coronet (and political scars!). I just want to be able to keep doing this.

But a part of me regrets having to abandon the harness of my persona and switch, for "SCA roleplay" purposes, to what my great-great-etc. grandfather wore...or even less. My WMA intent in SCA fighting has transferred mostly to rapier/C&T (and frankly, to outside-the-SCA groups that I feel do those things better). I stikk don't want to abandon authenticity entirely in my SCA Heavy fighting, especially since I'm not concerned with winning tournaments any more. But like the guy you met at GW, I'll compromise the authenticity if that's what it takes to let me stay on the field, dreaming the dreams of a shiny new knight with his eyes on a crown.

Dafydd wrote: I recently made a switch from early 16th Century full plate to First Crusade, and one of the reasons (out of several) was that my 50-something knees weren't dealing with the former rig very well. Even when I can afford to add a flat ring riveted haubergon, I'll still be looking at a fair bit less mass (and greater flexibility). And I suspect the maille will stay in the armor chest a fair bit of the time, with my modern sport armor worn underneath a leather jack replacing it. Not so much for competitive advantage; I don't care much about the combat sport element any more...been there, won that, got the embattled coronet (and political scars!). I just want to be able to keep doing this.

But a part of me regrets having to abandon the harness of my persona and switch, for "SCA roleplay" purposes, to what my great-great-etc. grandfather wore...or even less. My WMA intent in SCA fighting has transferred mostly to rapier/C&T (and frankly, to outside-the-SCA groups that I feel do those things better). I stikk don't want to abandon authenticity entirely in my SCA Heavy fighting, especially since I'm not concerned with winning tournaments any more. But like the guy you met at GW, I'll compromise the authenticity if that's what it takes to let me stay on the field, dreaming the dreams of a shiny new knight with his eyes on a crown.

Even though I have never considered the rought of Knighthood, mainly because I do not consider myself ready for it yet. (after 16 years I am still not where I want to be, mentally, emotionally, and skill level wise, before I take on that endevour.) I feel I should look the part.

The persona choice was something I mulled over for about a year. Looking through tons of books, pages on the internet and various persons in the SCA for information. This is why I decided on 900-1300 Moorish persona. I could keep my garb nice, and comfortable yet flashy enough for me. And yet my armour could be protective yet I can conceal modern protection under it without looking like a frankinstien with a drape over my shoulders.

Which is one of my BIGGEST pet peeves. Hockey shoulder pads under a huge tunic, with hockey pants on under some baggy pants. I dont mind if you are NEW NEW, but if you have been playing for more than a year, GET BETTER GEAR! Sorry for the rant, but if I could get better looking gear, while unemployed for 3 years, I am sure someone with an income could come up with better than hockey pads. Which in most cases cost more than just making some leather armour or plastic armour and covering it nicely.

But I digress I have gone WAY off topic here.

dukelogan wrote:that standard applies to blow force, not appearance. also it does not state a helmet (which is like a cap) but a helm (which covers the entire head).

regards
logan

We have been over this before. There is no such thing as a Norman helm (by your definition) prior to about 1970s SCA. The rules were set up based on one of the founders "helms" which did not cover down past his ears.

Now don't ask why the force level is the same above and below the ears, but that is the call on the "appearance" of the armour standard.

Oswyn_de_Wulferton wrote: Now don't ask why the force level is the same above and below the ears, but that is the call on the "appearance" of the armour standard.

I have asked the same question. I would like to see it changed to "considered to be wearing a Basinet style open faced Helm" which would make more sense.

I'd prefer our force standards change to 14th century knight with COP, mail, splinted arms and legs, and a Great Helm. But the force required would be enough to give a knight of the time pause rather than kill him. I took my warhammer and threw shots at mild steel knees that Dave Rylak gave me and after ten shots I'd made six little tiny dents in the knee. Four shots just slid off and went off course. This is for an unmoving target that I can crank up to a safe level (too fast and that warhammer could whip around and hit me IMO) and with a warhammer which is an "armour piercing" weapon.

Setting a 14th century calibration standard of "give the knight reason to pause" would take away our "death" bits that I object to, as well as allow for a stronger face shot.

Now I call upon the Archive to prove me wrong yet again! Have fun!

-Aaron

I actually AM one of the combat sport guys. But it's a sport without weight classes or skill divisions. In "real" sports, everyone must always wear the SAME equipment more or less. There are very slight variations for extra padding etc. in baseball and football.

But Knights should look like Knights, and not like civilians (even if their soft kit is authentic). I was trying to argue from the point that it's unseemly to take an advantage over someone less skilled than you.

Thorvaldr: I'm not calling anybody's definition asinine until they try to force it down somebody else's throat. Then it's asinine. Maybe I should have said that their attempts to browbeat anybody into their way of thinking were asinine rather than the opinion itself.

Blackbow

Thorvaldr Skegglauss wrote:

blackbow wrote:The problem with wanting people to wear more authentic gear is that, simply put, this hobby is a game, not a reality. I've said several dozen times that as soon as somebody swings at me with a real sword, I'll put on real armor. Until then, there is nothing to be gained from doing so. Just like an armorer who buys a hydraulic hammer to bend metal with instead of insisting that it be done in a period fashion because he doesn't want his forearm to be useless in a decade, I'm not interested in wearing anything more than I have to because this ISN'T my career, my life DOESN'T depend on it, and I want to be able to enjoy doing it when I'm fifty.

A guy I was talking to at Gulf Wars told me that I had extended his fighting career by at least a decade with the Zoombang shirts because he was looking for a way to lighten his rig to keep his knees and hips in one piece. It's kind of hard to insist that people wear authentic gear to play a game when the alternative keeps them a) in the game that much longer and b) not destroy their physiques merely to satisfy somebody's asinine definition of Right.

Regards

Jonathan Blackbow

This simply goes back to the discussion/argument of what it "is" that we are doing. Each individual has to decide that for themselves since the SCA is such a large umbrella. The argument is useless and senseless unless there is actual movement towards "requiring" different armour. As long as we cover such a broad band of history there is going to be a disparity. As long as some try to do a recreation instead of sport or the other way around there is going to be this dichotomy. Calling someone Asinine for there personal desires is a bit over the top however.

I think Robert has a great kit and does extremely well for the "limitations" that his kit gives him in an SCA context. I personally don't really like the 14th Century and have little interest in it. My interest lies earlier, essentially Fall of Rome through the 3rd Crusade. That doesn't mean I find him asinine for his likes and wants. Some prefer to wear "armour" others such as yourself prefer to play a sport. So be it. But lay off the name calling please. It is unbecoming.

regards
ThorvaldR

Aaron wrote:I'd prefer our force standards change to 14th century knight with COP, mail, splinted arms and legs, and a Great Helm. But the force required would be enough to give a knight of the time pause rather than kill him. I took my warhammer and threw shots at mild steel knees that Dave Rylak gave me and after ten shots I'd made six little tiny dents in the knee. Four shots just slid off and went off course. This is for an unmoving target that I can crank up to a safe level (too fast and that warhammer could whip around and hit me IMO) and with a warhammer which is an "armour piercing" weapon.

Setting a 14th century calibration standard of "give the knight reason to pause" would take away our "death" bits that I object to, as well as allow for a stronger face shot.

This would also eliminate the discontinuity that arises when the armor that at least some of us wear (as well as the "standard harness" of the rules) would actually stop cold the level of blows we're expected to count. In many ways, we gauge blows as if we are unarmored or nearly so, but are in fact wearing armor (well...some of us are). A standard like you propose would allow the general level of force to remain the same and thus allow for a reasonable level of safety, but do away with the silliness of theoretically "killing" someone that would shrug off most any blow from the weapons being simulated. It also makes room for the more historical "counted blows" style of fighting, the "Vitus System," etc.

The "stronger face shots" thing isn't relevant out west, where the kingdoms don't call for lighter blows to the face. I still, after more than thirty years of doing this, scratch my head at that "back east" convention.

Dafydd wrote:It also makes room for the more historical "counted blows" style of fighting, the "Vitus System," etc.

Are these even permitted anymore? The rule provision that allowed for them was removed from the Marshal's handbook a while back. EDIT TO ADD: Sorry, I forgot the Blow Acknowledgement rule was being used as the justification for allowing counted blow combats.

Dafydd wrote:The "stronger face shots" thing isn't relevant out west, where the kingdoms don't call for lighter blows to the face. I still, after more than thirty years of doing this, scratch my head at that "back east" convention.

Earl Dafydd,

The chance that the SCA fighting community would follow this guidance is the same chance that that the three adivsors at my thesis defense on 24APR12 will form a human pyramid during my presentation while singing "Blinded Me with Science" and "Radioactive" in barbershop quartet (they would simulate the forth singer) and give me a PhD rather than a second MS.

-Aaron

Counted blows are not allowed? How did that happen? WHY did it happen?

Aaron wrote:Counted blows are not allowed? How did that happen? WHY did it happen?

Not what I said. I asked if they were still permitted. That's all.

Aaron wrote:Earl Dafydd,

The chance that the SCA fighting community would follow this guidance is the same chance that that the three adivsors at my thesis defense on 24APR12 will form a human pyramid during my presentation while singing "Blinded Me with Science" and "Radioactive" in barbershop quartet (they would simulate the forth singer) and give me a PhD rather than a second MS.

-Aaron

While I'm sad that this is the case, I want to thank you for that priceless mental image.

Of course, if it returns to haunt my dreams, you and me are gonna have words.

jester wrote:

Dafydd wrote:It also makes room for the more historical "counted blows" style of fighting, the "Vitus System," etc.

Are these even permitted anymore? The rule provision that allowed for them was removed from the Marshal's handbook a while back.

Well...we're having a similar tournament (or tournaments - the rapier tourney's like this, too) at Hocktide in southern An Tir next month. Six rounds, different weapons every round, more-or-less Vitus System rules. C'mon out!

Dafydd wrote: While I'm sad that this is the case, I want to thank you for that priceless mental image.

You have to go to UC-Boulder to get that kind of treatment.

Dafydd wrote:

Aaron wrote:Earl Dafydd,

The chance that the SCA fighting community would follow this guidance is the same chance that that the three adivsors at my thesis defense on 24APR12 will form a human pyramid during my presentation while singing "Blinded Me with Science" and "Radioactive" in barbershop quartet (they would simulate the forth singer) and give me a PhD rather than a second MS.

-Aaron

While I'm sad that this is the case, I want to thank you for that priceless mental image.

Of course, if it returns to haunt my dreams, you and me are gonna have words.

Tuesday the 24th might be scarier than you can dream. But I know I've got one of the three professors sold already. And it's a defense. I just have defend, not win. And I've got my Armani jacket from the Goodwill, etc...

-Aaron

I Will again support Kilkenny in his original statement that it's inherent problem is simply that people are involved. The more people you have the more complex it becomes. Too many people want to point at this aspect or that aspect and say well that's what we are SUPPOSED to be doing etc rather than just letting it be what it is. The one common factor for EVERY SCA heavy fighter is that we LOVE to beat the tar out of each other with sticks. We love it. All of us. At its core we all share this common bond. We enjoy the competition and the brutality of it as well as the beauty and grace that it can be when we see the very best of the best clash in epic combat. What I don't understand is why we don't just all accept that and play it the way each of us wants to play it. I don't care what armor you want to wear or how hard you want to get hit. That doesn't change a single thing about the world I step into when I strap on my gear and go out to play medievalish whackemup with my friends.

The SCA is what you make it. You don't have to play politics, try to get knighted, do any kind of art, serve anyone etc. Just have a good time. Find your niche and enjoy it. My main problem is that people want to change it all the damned time! Why? Leave it alone! If you don't like what the SCA does... go do something else!

Aaron wrote:Counted blows are not allowed? How did that happen? WHY did it happen?

If I recall correctly, counting blows thrown is not permitted. But, counting blows received is.

Fighting to "submission" is not permitted, but counting to 1000 blows received is. And if someone happens to yield before that number is reached....so be it.

I didn't invent the rules. I just try to stay within them.