The Armour Archive

A philosophical question for the board...
Seeing two current threads regarding SCA combat safety (Safety, meh and No PVC Bows), where do y'all see the balance between what SCA combat does and what is unacceptable?

I see several points on which this balances:
Desire to prevent injury (what level of injury should be accepted/acceptable as "hey, it's a rough sport. Expect that to happen to you" vs "whoa, a lot of people are going to the sidelines....")
Desire to prevent lawsuits which would kill the activity
Accessibility to all levels of participant
Realism vs playability
Chicken Little Syndrome (is X really a risk, or do some folks see it as "scary")

For example, I personally feel that some of the Society level rules for rapier/c&t are outmoded and overprotective holdovers from when we played with epees and foils. No skin showing, not even small holes? Really? Gonna scratch my leg to death?

Are failure of PVC bows really a bigger risk of occurrence for injury than, say, a helm strap failing?

HW thrusting conventions and rules... 2" spears vs 3"? Progressive padding vs. unpadded "courtesy tips"? Full force vs tap to the grill?

In short, are we over protective, not protective enough, or just right? And why?

The rapier armour rules seem silly till you take a broken sword to the chest and it convienently thuds against several layers of fabric and stops.

At least, I was happy about them when it happened to me.

In the many, many years I've been doing this, I've either witnessed, suffered,or in a few cases caused, most of the types of injury SCA combat has to offer. The overwhelming majority of injuries are, IMNSHO, "no fault" - they didn't occur because either fighter is bad or because the rules aren't safe enough, but because we are swinging frikken' sticks at eachother and sometimes shit happens. I'm pretty much comfortable with our current rule set, except that I've personally witnessed enough broken forearms that I'd like to see vambraces added to the minimum armour standards. There are a few items in the rules I think are unnecessarily uptight (e.g. people having to "declare" thrusting tips), and I have a personal pet peeve or two, but none of them seem like enough of an inconvenience to really worry about.

I'm conflicted here. I'm relatively young in the sport (and in general) and I'm going to through the armoring up portion of my fighting, which combinded with a desire to play in BOTN one day means I'm going with a very heavy kit. Personally, I'd love to see more and more heavily armored fighters along with harder hits and somewhat loosened restrictions, especially for things like armored wrestling and steel fighting.
On the other hand, it's already hard enough to get new fighters to come out and play. I wouldn't want to have to get them into a heavy duty kit before they can play.

My preference in this situation is for the rules to remain more or less like they are, but add in venues for folks who want more intense combat. Add wrestling with rondel daggers, where the only target areas are groin, armpit, neck (if you flip the aventail up) and eye slot. Add in heavy contact steel fighting. Let those who want to be a little risky be a little risky. If the regular people *cough*carebears*cough* don't like it, they can play by the original rules, it won't bother us. (I am of course, a sneering elitist, so feel free to ignore the slights I hand out.)

I question the thrusty tips. Do we really need so much 'progressive compression' (squish)?
I mean...we wail on each other with skinny bats. Would something with some *small* amount of 'give' better suit what we do?
The armor is there for a reason, and we are each responsible for covering our own butts (literally and figuratively)

Iain mac Gillean wrote:I question the thrusty tips. Do we really need so much 'progressive compression' (squish)?
I mean...we wail on each other with skinny bats. Would something with some *small* amount of 'give' better suit what we do?
The armor is there for a reason, and we are each responsible for covering our own butts (literally and figuratively)

Until we start enforcing metal gorgets, solid torso protection and no blue foam in helmets, I think yes. Had a friend get his alum brigandine gorget get completely bent by a spear and a weld on a bargrill broken (friend is in fact not a rhinohide) and had another friend get concussed (minor) by a spear to her helm. All at one gulf wars. Admittedly, many of those spear tips were likely bottoming out, in light of the threads on here about them.

Broadway wrote:The rapier armour rules seem silly till you take a broken sword to the chest and it convienently thuds against several layers of fabric and stops.

At least, I was happy about them when it happened to me.

Torso is one thing. Bouncing someone's armor because the cuff of his shirt comes out of the cuff of the glove and shows bare skin is something else.

Iain mac Gillean wrote:I question the thrusty tips. Do we really need so much 'progressive compression' (squish)?
I mean...we wail on each other with skinny bats. Would something with some *small* amount of 'give' better suit what we do?
The armor is there for a reason, and we are each responsible for covering our own butts (literally and figuratively)

We are also responsible for what we are striking with in a manner according to the rules. No need to be concussing people with spear thrusts.

The lawsuit threat is overblown. I've seen worse injuries in pee wee football games than I've ever seen in SCA combat. I had to see doctors for injuries twice in my 4 years playing football in high school, and only once for fighting 20 years in the SCA. That was from a tree branch scratching my eye.

I submit this- Our risk and injury rates are exceptionally low. This encourages more timid folks to take the field, but discourages people who are looking for a rougher sport. I've seen great athletes driven off for hitting too hard.

Thank you for the input. I see the perspective, and definitely respect it (especially after catching a few hefty pike shots).
However, not to argue, but to augment my own perspective, a great number of pike/spear shots often seem to pop your head back pretty hard, anyway. I am not certain that squishy tips are doing any good there.

I'm good with the rule as it stands, please, make no mistake. I just wonder about the true necessity of them as currently required.

Iain mac Gillean wrote:Thank you for the input. I see the perspective, and definitely respect it (especially after catching a few hefty pike shots).
However, not to argue, but to augment my own perspective, a great number of pike/spear shots often seem to pop your head back pretty hard, anyway. I am not certain that squishy tips are doing any good there.

But, is that because people think it's safe to blast in shots because they are padded? Perhaps they would be more apt to use less force and more control if they were not relying on the safety equipment to suck up the force.

That's a good question, and I wonder if that's the case? In your use of the term 'safety equipment', do you mean thrusting tips, or the worn armor of the combatants, or both?
Given both perspectives, it seems like education is the best course to take.

Alex Baird wrote:

Iain mac Gillean wrote:Thank you for the input. I see the perspective, and definitely respect it (especially after catching a few hefty pike shots).
However, not to argue, but to augment my own perspective, a great number of pike/spear shots often seem to pop your head back pretty hard, anyway. I am not certain that squishy tips are doing any good there.

But, is that because people think it's safe to blast in shots because they are padded? Perhaps they would be more apt to use less force and more control if they were not relying on the safety equipment to suck up the force.

We must travel in different circles....

Gaston de Clermont wrote: I submit this- Our risk and injury rates are exceptionally low. This encourages more timid folks to take the field, but discourages people who are looking for a rougher sport. I've seen great athletes driven off for hitting too hard.

Also seen some people with game smashed into pain and walking away.

So, is that necessarily a bad thing? A lower common denominator, with people of all skill levels in the mix, or a game pegged to the level of great athletes? I don't see a Pennsic size field battle being fought at BotN levels of force and armor... not enough people are going to fight at that level, or have a desire to; gotta go to work on Mondays. Not to mention the cost of the kit.

The more cost prohibitive you make this sport the less ppl will play it.

Caius705 wrote:

Alex Baird wrote: But, is that because people think it's safe to blast in shots because they are padded? Perhaps they would be more apt to use less force and more control if they were not relying on the safety equipment to suck up the force.

We must travel in different circles....

Didn't say I was right... It's an open question, devil advocate style.

Take fencing, for an example. When the more accurate rapier simulators started appearing, there were those who swore that, because they were stiffer than epees and foils, we would see huge increases in people getting gacked. Doom damage and despair! Instead, people adapted to the right calibration, and now they are the de-facto standard SCA rapier weapon.

For the most part I think SCA armor rules are good for what the SCA is ( I do agree with Balian up thread that unprotected forearms are a bit silly). What I would like to see is folks in the position of marshal relaxing a bit. We are adults and it is our jobs to armor until we feel safe, not your job to dictate to me how to be safe. What drives me nuts is when marshal's look for reasons to bounce folks off the field (sticking two fingers under the chin of a helm and bouncing somebody cause their fingers can touch jaw for example).

Another example would be on the fists of fury foam spear head thread in the classifieds (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=162735). The rules say 2 inches of resilient foam, why on earth would these be not legal? Why on earth are people so uptight about this kind of thing? It is probably better then most of the home made spear tips out there yet we have people demanding a review by the SEM before they would consider using it...just nuts.

Broadway wrote:The rapier armour rules seem silly till you take a broken sword to the chest and it convienently thuds against several layers of fabric and stops.

At least, I was happy about them when it happened to me.

Was it an epee blade, a schlager, or a modern historically-styled blade that broke and did that?

A stiff schlager that broke off into a 45 degree point. Most of the guys I fight with these days use more historically styled blades.

Are you trying to say that there are some blades that simply won't break? Is that where you're going with the line of questioning? I admit, there are some blades I cannot fathom ever breaking, but that particular schlager was one of them. You never know when there will be a manufacturing flaw, or the sort.

SCA safety rules are good. They allow fat old men, chicks and cripples to play.

Nissan Maxima wrote:SCA safety rules are good. They allow fat old men, chicks and cripples to play.

True. Stabbing healthy fit people gets boring after a while. It's good to mix it up.

If "Good Athletes" are driven away becuase they hit harder than local convention, then IMO they -

1) Need to practice until they get some control.
2) Don't CARE about local convention - then their leaving is a good thing.
3) Are fast, strong - but lack the discipline to be real athletes.

People who want to add grappling, wrestling, locks, etc to their armored combat expereicne have venues for it. The SCA just isn't one of those venues.

Diglach Mac Cein wrote:If "Good Athletes" are driven away becuase they hit harder than local convention, then IMO they -

1) Need to practice until they get some control.
2) Don't CARE about local convention - then their leaving is a good thing.
3) Are fast, strong - but lack the discipline to be real athletes.

People who want to add grappling, wrestling, locks, etc to their armored combat expereicne have venues for it. The SCA just isn't one of those venues.

We could start trying to add venues inside of the SCA for some of the more advanced stuff, no?

Nope. No need to.

You want to fight BoTN, go to a BoTN event. You want WMA, go to one of their events. You come to an SCA event, fight SCA rules.

You don't see a lot of BJJ at a Golden Gloves match.

Diglach Mac Cein wrote:Nope. No need to.

You want to fight BoTN, go to a BoTN event. You want WMA, go to one of their events. You come to an SCA event, fight SCA rules.

You don't see a lot of BJJ at a Golden Gloves match.

Yup. Occasional demos at SCA events to let people see what else is in the marketplace of violence is as far as I would go.

Why should the SCA allow an activity that violates our rules?

We do it now. The combat of the thirty and its variants have engagment rules that are outside the pale and differing target conventions. There are charity tournaments that have grappling far in excess of ACL rules.

Diglach Mac Cein wrote:Why should the SCA allow an activity that violates our rules?

Rapier fencing violated our rules but demonstrations were still permitted.

My impression is the BotN/ACL is not wanting to be part of the SCA, just to show folks what it is they do.

Diglach Mac Cein wrote:Why should the SCA allow an activity that violates our rules?

Because it can be tons of fun for those who like fighting like that.

Nissan Maxima wrote:We do it now. The combat of the thirty and its variants have engagment rules that are outside the pale and differing target conventions. There are charity tournaments that have grappling far in excess of ACL rules.

I knew about the 14th century stuff (I still laugh when I see the video of one of your guys flattening me this past gulf wars) but which charity tourneys? I haven't heard about these, but I'd certainly be interested.

Tuchux charity tourney. Full body targeting and grappling. (random weapons draw) lots of fun.

Nissan Maxima wrote:Tuchux charity tourney. Full body targeting and grappling. (random weapons draw) lots of fun.

I take it that this a pennsic only thing?

That and every Tuchuk event.

Well, another thing has been added to my list of fights to make.

You're right about the Tuchux tourney.

Screw it. Go crazy.

There's a long-standing process of doing such things with prior approval. Sometimes it leads to something new included within the SCA (Fencing, Cut-n-Thrust, Equestrian - to name a few), sometimes not. I don't see the ACL style fighting being done within the SCA umbrella, but I think there will be a fair amount of cross-over. And I don't see as much of the 'My Kung-fu is better than yours' attitude these days between the SCA and the various LH and LARP groups either. Which is a good thing.